bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 35,795
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
I know.Derec wasn't born in the US. He's an immigrant.I wonder which part of the USA Derec was born in?
I know.Derec wasn't born in the US. He's an immigrant.I wonder which part of the USA Derec was born in?
A “whataboutism” that misses the point. There is passing judgment with facts and without insulting terminology and there is passing judgment without the facts with insulting terminology. I hope that explains it for you.That does not stop you passing judgement, particularly upon Israelis, even though you are not on the same continent.Its what the omniscient use when passes moral judgment even when they are not even on the same continent.I see, is “fakefugee” another allegedly clever neologism of right-wing loons, like “lawfare?”
DOH!I know.Derec wasn't born in the US. He's an immigrant.I wonder which part of the USA Derec was born in?
This post isn’t about an attack. You made it about the refugee status. It’s right there in the title.It's expressing the fact that many of the "refugees" that flooded into Europe (and that are flooding into US from Latin America) are economic migrants, not legitimate refugees.I see, is “fakefugee” another allegedly clever neologism of right-wing loons, like “lawfare?”
Do you have an opinion on this attack though?
More or less. ("Legitimate refugee" implies the government isn't threatening him with death or imprisonment because it has good reason to think he did something civilized countries consider a serious crime.)A "legitimate refugee" is a person who needs our help, because the government in his own country is directly threatening him (or his family) with death or imprisonment by the use of force.Even if that were true, and you have offered no supporting evidence, so what? What does that have to do with your opening post?It's expressing the fact that many of the "refugees" that flooded into Europe (and that are flooding into US from Latin America) are economic migrants, not legitimate refugees.
More or less. ("Economic migrant" implies the government isn't personally targeting him, but is inflicting the absence of basic needs on the public at large.)This is, obviously, completely different from an "economic migrant", which is a person who needs our help, because the government in his own country has policies that threaten him (or his family) with death or misery by the absence of basic needs.
Apparently, if you're a German taxpayer, you deserve to be considered a mere-means-to-an-end: a beast of burden put on this planet for the purpose of seeing to it that all the people of the world who are ends-in-themselves (i.e., not German taxpayers) get what they deserve. Who the bejesus told you that how Germany treats foreigners ought to be determined by what they deserve?!?Apparently, if someone might shoot or jail you, you deserve help, but if someone plans to starve you or drive you into grinding poverty, tough luck.
Once you understand that bilby's observations were morality-based not legalese, you see your response is moot.More or less. ("Legitimate refugee" implies the government isn't threatening him with death or imprisonment because it has good reason to think he did something civilized countries consider a serious crime.)A "legitimate refugee" is a person who needs our help, because the government in his own country is directly threatening him (or his family) with death or imprisonment by the use of force.Even if that were true, and you have offered no supporting evidence, so what? What does that have to do with your opening post?It's expressing the fact that many of the "refugees" that flooded into Europe (and that are flooding into US from Latin America) are economic migrants, not legitimate refugees.
More or less. ("Economic migrant" implies the government isn't personally targeting him, but is inflicting the absence of basic needs on the public at large.)This is, obviously, completely different from an "economic migrant", which is a person who needs our help, because the government in his own country has policies that threaten him (or his family) with death or misery by the absence of basic needs.
Apparently, if you're a German taxpayer, you deserve to be considered a mere-means-to-an-end: a beast of burden put on this planet for the purpose of seeing to it that all the people of the world who are ends-in-themselves (i.e., not German taxpayers) get what they deserve. Who the bejesus told you that how Germany treats foreigners ought to be determined by what they deserve?!?Apparently, if someone might shoot or jail you, you deserve help, but if someone plans to starve you or drive you into grinding poverty, tough luck.
Governments do not distinguish between legitimate refugees and economic migrants because the former are more deserving. They distinguish between them because they signed international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of legitimate refugees, and didn't sign international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of economic migrants.
In what way are "these people know to the police" that indicates they should be deported?Machete-armed man with Palestinian flag wounds 31 in Germany with arson, ramming attacks
Jersualem Post said:A 41-year-old Syrian national wounded 31 people, including two children who were left in critical condition, in arson attacks on Saturday in the German city of Essen, according to police and media reports from Sunday morning.
At around 5:10 p.m. on Saturday, the man set fire to a residential building on Altenessener Strasse, at the corner of Pielsticker Strasse, according to Bild. He later drove a few streets over, where he set fire to a second residence.
[...]
Sources told Bild that they arrested the man, who had burns on his hands, a few meters from the store. Tagesschau reported that he was known to the police before the incident.
A lot of these people are "known to the police" but don't get deported.
Nobody told me this. It's a direct inference from the principle that you ought to be nice to other people, a principle which I hold to be axiomatic.Who the bejesus told you that how Germany treats foreigners ought to be determined by what they deserve?!?
My response was morality-based; I take it you didn't recognize the reference to Kantian ethics. If you're interested, see Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.Once you understand that bilby's observations were morality-based not legalese, you see your response is moot.Apparently, if you're a German taxpayer, you deserve to be considered a mere-means-to-an-end: a beast of burden put on this planet for the purpose of seeing to it that all the people of the world who are ends-in-themselves (i.e., not German taxpayers) get what they deserve. Who the bejesus told you that how Germany treats foreigners ought to be determined by what they deserve?!?...
Apparently, if someone might shoot or jail you, you deserve help, but if someone plans to starve you or drive you into grinding poverty, tough luck.
Governments do not distinguish between legitimate refugees and economic migrants because the former are more deserving. They distinguish between them because they signed international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of legitimate refugees, and didn't sign international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of economic migrants.
I guess the reliance on treaties obscured the moral basis.My response was morality-based; I take it you didn't recognize the reference to Kantian ethics. If you're interested, see Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.Once you understand that bilby's observations were morality-based not legalese, you see your response is moot.Apparently, if you're a German taxpayer, you deserve to be considered a mere-means-to-an-end: a beast of burden put on this planet for the purpose of seeing to it that all the people of the world who are ends-in-themselves (i.e., not German taxpayers) get what they deserve. Who the bejesus told you that how Germany treats foreigners ought to be determined by what they deserve?!?...
Apparently, if someone might shoot or jail you, you deserve help, but if someone plans to starve you or drive you into grinding poverty, tough luck.
Governments do not distinguish between legitimate refugees and economic migrants because the former are more deserving. They distinguish between them because they signed international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of legitimate refugees, and didn't sign international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of economic migrants.
I guess it did. Maybe it will be less obscure if I rephrase. Through the democratic process, the German people collectively volunteered to charitably come to the aid of legitimate refugees; they did not collectively volunteer to charitably come to the aid of economic migrants. Bilby's comment appears to be derived from the moral premise that the German people's collective charitable giving ought to be determined by his judgments of deservingness rather than by their charitable sentiments. Is that sufficiently unlegalese for your taste?I guess the reliance on treaties obscured the moral basis.My response was morality-based; I take it you didn't recognize the reference to Kantian ethics. If you're interested, see Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.Once you understand that bilby's observations were morality-based not legalese, you see your response is moot.Apparently, if you're a German taxpayer, you deserve to be considered a mere-means-to-an-end: a beast of burden put on this planet for the purpose of seeing to it that all the people of the world who are ends-in-themselves (i.e., not German taxpayers) get what they deserve. Who the bejesus told you that how Germany treats foreigners ought to be determined by what they deserve?!?...
Apparently, if someone might shoot or jail you, you deserve help, but if someone plans to starve you or drive you into grinding poverty, tough luck.
Governments do not distinguish between legitimate refugees and economic migrants because the former are more deserving. They distinguish between them because they signed international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of legitimate refugees, and didn't sign international treaties requiring them to come to the aid of economic migrants.
Israelis or the Israeli military / Israeli Government policies?That does not stop you passing judgement, particularly upon Israelis, even though you are not on the same continent.Its what the omniscient use when passes moral judgment even when they are not even on the same continent.I see, is “fakefugee” another allegedly clever neologism of right-wing loons, like “lawfare?”
An immigrant joining in on the wave of anti-immigrant bigotry. Commit a crime in Europe and you are an anonymous criminal, but if you were born in the Middle East, you become a "fakeugee".Awful person does an awful thing. Clearly, the next logical step is to do something awful like go after everyone else who shares a trait with them.
No crime needed in Springfield to be condemned...Commit a crime in the US and you are generally an anonymous criminal, unless you speak Spanish (or in Springfield, Ohio... French)
Correct. My bad.No crime needed in Springfield to be condemned...Commit a crime in the US and you are generally an anonymous criminal, unless you speak Spanish (or in Springfield, Ohio... French)
Well, kinda.Through the democratic process, the German people collectively volunteered to charitably come to the aid of legitimate refugees
I.e., the German people collectively volunteered to delegate that sort of decision to those particular elected representatives. That's what "Through the democratic process" means, in every country that doesn't make social choices by sending slaves through the marketplace carrying wet-paint ropes to herd the citizens into the public assembly amphitheater.Well, kinda.Through the democratic process, the German people collectively volunteered to charitably come to the aid of legitimate refugees
A tiny number of civil servants long ago were involved in a gabfest with other nations' civil services,...so they came up with this plan .... So the elected representatives, without consulting the electorate, signed. Forever comitting the country to the deal.
So yes, but actually, no.
Democracy plays very little part in politics in most countries; ...
So "volunteered" is rather a strong word. "Failed to violently object to some obscure negotiations far away" is more accurate.
No doubt. And since that decision had jack squat to do with which migrants were how deserving, and since the current German taxpayers are bearing the cost of their long-ago-predecessors' representatives' preference not because they give a damn whether Konrad Adenauer is seen as kind but because that's the deal they woke up to find their country forever committed to, and not some alternative-history deal to take in all deserving migrants, your "Apparently, if someone might shoot or jail you, you deserve help, but if someone plans to starve you or drive you into grinding poverty, tough luck." slur, against the people who distinguish between economic migrants and legitimate refugees, was a misrepresentation of them.Still, regardless of who made the decision, or how representative they were of the German people, the motivation for deciding to help refugees was that the decision makers prefered to be seen as kind rather than callous; And the motivation for excluding economic migrants from the kind vs callous consideration was that economic migration was not at the time an important nor an urgent issue.
I had to read that a couple times...No doubt. And since that decision had jack squat to do with which migrants were how deserving, and since the current German taxpayers are bearing the cost of their long-ago-predecessors' representatives' preference not because they give a damn whether Konrad Adenauer is seen as kind but because that's the deal they woke up to find their country forever committed to, and not some alternative-history deal to take in all deserving migrants, your "Apparently, if someone might shoot or jail you, you deserve help, but if someone plans to starve you or drive you into grinding poverty, tough luck." slur, against the people who distinguish between economic migrants and legitimate refugees, was a misrepresentation of them.