The refugee crisis and the moral imperative

Posted in Action / Politics / Current on Friday, April 8, 2016 by Joel Höglund

During the last decade we have been witness to the largest immigration wave into Europe in modern times, perhaps ever.  Stemming mainly from the Middle East and Northern Africa, about 1.3 million asylum seekers, along with an unknown number of unregistered immigrants came here during 2015 alone. The mainstream narrative emphasizes that these immigrants are fleeing for their lives, leaving the conflict in Syria behind them. As a rich continent, and perhaps more important, as fellow human beings, there is no alternative for Europe but at the very least grant them residency and in most cases also citizenship in our nations. All attempts to even discuss the consequences and facts of the situation are preemptively shot down and banned from all major media outlets. It is understandable of course. Who but the most selfish and deplorable person could be of a different opinion?

Of course, we know this tactic since old. It is likely the mainstream media's favorite one, and it is always used when they find their own rational arguments lacking.

Here at Aryan Wisdom though, we kinda have a thing for rational thought though. It might not constitute the winning arguments in a discussion, but as a tool for an honest man to form his own conclusions and opinions it is unbeatable. So let's start with looking at the facts!

Some notable facts on the "refugee crisis"

According to official EU Asylum statistics, while Syria is the main country of origin, a majority (70%) are actually from other countries.

Further we must state that these people coming to Europe are not really fleeing anything once they arrive in a safe country, such as Turkey, which a majority travels through on their way to Europe. For the sake of discussion let us accept the idea that once a refugee is in safety, but still travels on  he is no longer a refugee but a migrant. Now what would possess one to travel further on a dangerous, expensive and difficult journey not only into Europe, but often through many other safe countries to finally reach the popular choices of Germany or Sweden, which are the countries where the most migrants have been granted asylum? Well it could perhaps have something to do with the generous welfare systems in these countries and often higher chance of receiving residence permit.

Knowing this, the deaths on the Mediterranean, awful as they are, are not due to refugees fleeing for their lives. They are migrants who wants the economic benefit of the European welfare state. In practice, it is not a deal of "Europe or death", but rather "Europe or bust".

Although there truly are real refugees, the absolute majority of them do not have the means to pay illegal smugglers to take them into Europe, but are still in Syria or neighboring countries. These are people that are truly suffering and could use our help. But as the migrant influx has put such an economic burden on recipient nations, foreign aid has actually been withdrawn in order to get the budgets in balance. And this is not only some kind of thought experiment, but real political decisions. Last year the Swedish government  cut 20% of it's foreign aid in order to pay for the asylum seekers entering the country. In an article on Fria Tider (in Swedish), associate professor Jan Tullberg explains that the estimated cost of an average asylum process in Sweden was 166 000 Swedish kronor in 2012 (c:a 20 000 US dollars) and this does not take into account all the other costs if asylum is actually granted. In the same article, he reports that the average cost for UNHCR of providing a refugee with food and shelter over a whole year is on average 1 000 kronor. Although a very simple calculation example, for every immigrant seeking asylum in Sweden, 166 refugees in camps could be provided with the basic necessities, or even better have their living standard essentially doubled.

I have no doubt that most of the immigration proponents truly believes in their hearts that they are doing good, but the fact is that their actions are hurting hundreds more refugees than they are helping. None of this should reasonably be news to any person taking part of the debate, but of course these facts and conclusions would never be broadcast in the mainstream media. Even so, that is no excuse today. If one claims the right to vote, one also has a responsibility to make an informed decision. The alternative media today has such a strong presence on the internet and is available to any and all to get informed and analyze the facts by themselves.

Then again, is it simply a problem of ignorance? As we discussed in our previous article on persuasion, rational arguments can be persuasive, but not nearly as effective as one might think. Most people would likely not be particularly influenced by the above facts, because they did not reach their current opinions through reason. They run purely on emotion. They look at us and say: To hell with the facts, these immigrants, they are humans! What are you going to do, send them back? How can you ever be so cold?

A moral argument often put forward is the beautifully simple Golden Rule:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Now, that is actually often a useful thought experiment. If you yourself was in their shoes wouldn't you too want to be welcomed into a functioning and safe country?

Of course! But this kind of goes both ways too right? If I were a refugee, would I demand of someone else to take in millions like me, knowing the negative consequences that it brings with it, some of which are presented above. They are effectively asking us to let their children take the place of our own. Sure, few immigrants literally demand this, but regardless that is what is happening.

Well let me tell you clearly: I would never ask of anyone else to do that for me, thus I will not do that for anyone else either.

We in the alt-right do have empathy for these refugees, but we also understand that our own racial interests must come first. Flooding our countries with non-whites does not help anyone, and in the long-term would most likely spell catastrophe for the whole world if we do not succeed to stop it.

Last updated on Thursday, July 14, 2016