UK prime minister Theresa May will address the UN General Assembly on Tuesday. She seeks UN Action to Control Mass Migration Flows.
In contrast, I propose a 10-point “common sense” solution, not UN action.
Let’s start with May’s proposal.
Theresa May will use her first appearance as British prime minister at a United Nations General Assembly meeting starting Monday to urge fellow leaders to do more to control mass migration, which she’ll argue hurts both refugees and the countries they enter.
May will say the migrants should be encouraged to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach.
Meanwhile the EU’s open internal borders have allowed large population flows, with many Eastern Europeans traveling to richer countries in search of a better life. It was partly resentment at this that led Britain to vote to leave the EU in June. May will call for a better distinction between these two groups.
“This is an urgent matter — more people are displaced than at any point in modern history and it is vital that we provide ongoing support for those people most in need of protection,” May said in a statement released by her office. “While we must continue our efforts to end conflict, stop persecution and the abuse of human rights, I believe we also need a new, more effective global approach to manage migration.”
Simple Question
What the hell can the UN do?
The answer of course is nothing. And asking a political body that cannot possibly do anything useful to solve a problem is like hoping a wish-granting magic genie will pop out of the bottle.
Some readers may be thinking “stop criticizing and offer a solution”. Fair enough.
Mish Ten Point Refugee Plan
- Don’t start wars. This especially applies to the US.
- Don’t nation build. This especially applies to the US.
- Don’t interfere in the internal politics of other nations. Universal
- Don’t welcome refugees with open arms. This especially applies to the EU
- Don’t pay bribes to halt refugee flows. This especially applies to the EU.
- Don’t demand other countries accept refugees they do not want. This especially applies to the EU.
- Don’t criticize other countries for controlling their borders. This especially applies to the EU.
- Do recognize the difference between economic refugees and political refugees. Universal
- Do be willing to accept Australian-style solutions of forcibly stopping refugees from entering a country. Universal
- Do Recognize a nation’s first priority must be the safety and welfare of its own citizens. Universal
If point 6 had been followed, Brexit would never have happened.
Instead of seeking UN action, how about a little common sense?
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Excellent pointed solutions to avoid a recurrence of these immigration disruptions to our western world, Mish. I agree with all 10.
Let me add one:
11. Demand that wealthy Muslim nations that have provoked and supported conflicts throughout the ME put the welcome mat out for their fellow Muslim brothers and sisters in need of humanitarian assistance since that’s the way Allah would want it – and not just offload those Muslims into the western world where the 2 cultures mix like water and oil.
But I am a fair person. Since the US was a big player in disrupting the lives of those in Libya, Syria, etc… we should build safe zones for the innocent Muslims living amid the turmoil in their homelands so that they and their families can live without the fear of being uprooted or killed. And we should ensure that all supply lines remain open to those people so that they have adequate amounts of food, water and other necessities for human survival. As semi-civilized Americans we owe that to them. We helped break it. We need to help fix it.
“We helped break it.”
Who is this “we” of which you speak?
If we are to believe that America still is a democracy, then WE must accept responsibility for its actions. If we are citizens of our country and not simply subjects, our country is acting on our behalf.
Why should I accept responsibility for the stupidity of other voters?
Perfectly said, mad. You answered the man’s question for me. Thank you.
The large majority of Americans stand on the sidelines and say nothing or even support it when our country engages in wrongdoing. Other than the actual culprits, they are most responsible for the bad outcomes but few point the finger back at themselves when the chickens come home to roost.
People were often quick to criticize the Germans for being silent during their dark period. It’s uncomfortable to talk about when the shoe is on the other foot.
“If we are to believe that America still is a democracy, then WE must accept responsibility for its actions”
We (congress) didn’t vote to declare war on Syria. The decision was made above their pay grade.
Congress don’t even read the basic detail of what they do vote for.
Ron J. – the problem is the American voters reelect about 95% of the idiot incumbents who get us into these messes.
At some point the people have to take some responsibility for who we put into office. That one’s on us.
If no one takes any responsibility nothing will change.
But especially 1, 2 and 3.
http://canadafreepress.com/article/coming-your-way-from-the-un-obama-king-of-the-world?utm_source=CFP+Mailout&utm_campaign=9411fb9ca6-CFP+Daily+Mailout&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8f503f036-9411fb9ca6-297716945&mc_cid=9411fb9ca6&mc_eid=f34c700b05
How about making a “Charter City” like erstwhile Hong Kong for refugees. Paul Romer has been trying for a long time but has been lobbying for land in developing countries rather than from say Australia, Canada or the Brits who still have many islands that can be leased to develop a charter city
Who will bell the cat?
Seeking UN action is another way to pass the buck… like I told UN to do it and they did not. This is what government and bureaucrats are adept at. No dirt on me. I have passed the dirty linen.
I can get behind Mish’s points 1 though 3. The others, though, are wishful thinking. It’s all well and good to say countries should “just say no” to refugees but the political reality is that no politician can withstand sustained media criticism of doing nothing while thousands are dying horribly elsewhere. Not western countries at any rate.
Even Australia is about to see an end to it’s harsh anti-refugee policies. The combination of bad publicity and civil rights violation court cases surrounding the refugee detention centers is slowly leading towards a looser policy that allows many more refugees through the door.
Countries with governments that can better control the media and bleeding heart do-gooders may be able to avoid the political blowback that Australia is facing (like Russia and Hungary, for example), but developed western nations are doomed.
This just leaves a host of bad choices to the governments of western nations.
About the only way to truly stop refugee problems is to make sure there are never any terrible wars or grinding poverty anywhere.
As soon as someone figures out how to do that please let me know.
So essentialy your “solution” is for western countries, civilization and people to keel over and die? Only way to prevent drownings as seen on the Mediterranean is to do as Australians – not to give in to people smugglers. Leftist and socialist media pansies whine about this only because they think people are stupid and incapable of figuring out what the real consequenses of uncontrolled mass immigration has for their own future security and wellbeing. Note the media also unequivocally supports Hillary – and yet she is clearly losing.
I am not proposing any solution at all. I am merely stating that a closed border approach to refugees is politically impossible in a western country. Like I said, the writing is on the wall that Australia will be forced to reverse it’s policies due to the refugee civil rights cases making their way through the courts and the terrible publicity being heaped on the government by “whistleblowers” telling of sad cases and suicides in the refugee detention centers.
The liberal government of Australia was re-elected with the slimmest of margins in July (just one seat majority) and that criticism of the refugee policies was at least a partial contributor to the decline in their support.
I don’t know what the solution to the refugee problem is, but Australia is proving that the blowback from tough refugee policies is too much for any western government to sustain.
Profoundly good point. Since big business benefits from migration and drives government agendas, I don’t see a political means for implementing any of Mish’s well-considered proposals. It’s not as if the MSM is going to run stories about the reduction in the standard of living citizens will have to accept by letting in the starving hordes.
Well, it’s reported 62 people now own as much wealth as half the world’s population. That privileged number has been consistently falling at an alarming rate. It’s the proverbial elephant.
The issue that needs to be addressed is the system that allows these obscene levels of inequality. Tackling rapacity, privilege and corruption, which are endemic in finance and spreading to all spheres, will go a very long way towards solving many problems created by those things.
Of course the conundrum is that positions of power and regulation are already captured.
The only means of preventing bad outcomes is to ensure that there are always consequences for every choice and action we make.
It is unreasonable to think that we can be instrumental in turning nations into hell holes and not have it blow back on us. The real question we should consider is if our leaders are just this stupid as to be oblivious to these consequences, OR if these consequences we the goal of their actions.
I DO NOT believe in accidents. I believe this is a combination of those who through their simplistic vision of the world are oblivious to the effects of their policies, AND those who seek this outcome and are successfully USING these useful idiots.
Your deep though is both insightful and refreshing, mad.
What you say should be a product of common sense. It amazes me that so many I come across are so oblivious to me.
Some good soul summed it up in a saying that is quite universal:
“What goes around comes around”.
Similar sayings go back to Old Testament biblical writings.
But we humans tend not to think about those things that we don’t want to think about.
The problem is that the people who often have to suffer the consequences of bad decisions aren’t the ones who caused them. George W Bush is relaxing on his ranch while current leaders have to deal with ISIS. Worse, the majority of the problems caused by the foreign wars the US has started are in other countries. Greece and Hungary are on the front-lines dealing with refugee flows that they had no part in creating.
Unfortunately, there is no easy way to solve this misallocation of incentives.
On a very smaller level, in my many years in the software industry I have been frustrated by the fact that there are perverse incentives for engineers that often lead to shoddy coding practices.
Software industry promotions are very much tied to putting notches in your belt for shipping features that become popular and are widely adopted. The fact that your code is a heaping pile of dung that is a nightmare to patch and maintain is beside the point. Those maintenance issues don’t show up for years and will be someone else’s problem. The engineers who built the original software will be promoted and long gone into some other division (or even a different company) by the time the consequences of the poorly designed code come home to roost.
In a “functional” democracy, those who create the consequences would be held to account. This lack of accountability IS the corruption that we suffer. George Bush’s decisions were the result of those before him that through their idiocy made other bad choices. This goes back decades and regardless of political party, all of them are of the same mindset…that their mandate is to ACT, and they do not perceive minimal intervention as an action, only a lack of action which none of them will ever do.
Even Obama, the supposed prince of peace, of communication and normalization, has acted, if only from behind. Those many subjects who have been acted on from behind are now irate and looking for even greater revenge. Obama walked away from Iraq, which is NOT nonintervention, but simply denial. Every action and non action has consequence, and those charged with that responsibility should be held to account, but as each choice, each decision has as its foundation the shitty choices of their predecessors, it makes stupidity even easier.
It is obvious to me that we need real change, and while that will be difficult if not impossible to come by, Trump is our only choice. Again a likely shitty choice built upon a mountain of crap, but Hillary would only put a bow on it. We must reject the thinking of the past and look for real alternatives, even distasteful ones.
Look at Germany today. Those who are protesting their wholesale cultural demolition are labeled as Nazis…an offense that can land you in jail. Germany’s endless list of bad choices has left Germans with a really crappy choice…do nothing and perish, or stand up and be attacked by their own elected leaders. I know Germans who state it just that plainly.
We Americans are called racists if we push back against open borders, or if we suggest that minorities paths to prosperity comes through work and not an EBT card.
WE are racists to suggest that before we indict ALL police as racist and murders, we MIGHT take a look at black on black crime first, if our intent is to actually be the most effective at saving lives.
We are in this box, and right now, at this moment, Trump is our only best hope. It is sad and unfortunate. I understand that so many liberals has such great hope that their humanitarian, bleeding heart Utopian policies would win in the end, and many still do even in recognition of the level of destruction thus far….but it has failed….as it has always failed. Until you can make a human something other than human, we will have to accept our limits, realize that there is an ugly point that represents the “as good as it gets” , and going any further will lead to disaster.
“May will say the migrants should be encouraged to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach.”
Here she goes with the first misleading sentence. There was never any right to choose the country where to apply for an asylum. According to the EU laws, the person entering the EU area must have:
1. A visa
2. Citizenship of any EU country
3. Apply for an asylum from the FIRST country he enters the EU area
If the EU laws would have been upheld from the start, any of this would not have happened. It was the political will to create chaos.
all laws are discretionary. Ask Obama or any cop on the street.
“May will say the migrants should be encouraged to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach.”
She is aiming that directly at France. France has a crisis, with many thousands in ghettos hoping to “swim” to England. France is desperately hoping the UK will take them, but May wisely doesn’t want their problems.
Mish is the only one making sense here. There are 7 billion people, most living on $10 a day or less. Do you want them all coming to the few western nations that are still habitable? If not, then they need to get their own birth rates and economies under control.
Build that border fence, fast.
Even though conflict contributed to the situation the overall driver is over population. These countries were just looking for a match for them to explode and like a metastasized disease they are like little bomblets where ever they migrate to making the whole world a hell hole. An example, when Napoleon went to Egypt it had 2 million people and France 26 million. Since then France has basically doubled in size and Egypt’s population has basically increased 45 times. See the problem. It is a plague of people spreading across the earth consuming every thing in its path.
Yes, to that list I would add don’t let bankers print food inflation. The poor can’t afford it. Bank printers ruthlessly took food out of the mouths of Middle Easterners, where subsistence farming is mostly impossible. Some hungry groups marched on the oil fields, in an effort to trade oil for food. Others fled the region. Outsiders intervened in the chaos to promote their own agendas, as did indigenous radical groups.
A common sense plan.
And you will be vilified by the left in America, Europe and Australia as a racist.
And by CEOs who need hard workers to do the work Americans won’t do. And by Libertarians who believe we all should have the liberty to live wherever we want.
There is no work that Americans won’t do…if they are hungry enough. I don’t know what you do for a living but if they can find a foreigner to do YOUR job, will it be another job that Americans now refuse to do?
Americans have been lead down this garden path through profligate debt and money printing that has allowed the unemployed to be subsidized into believing they are too good to work.
I agree with all your points. They need to be publicly endorse.
But, but, what about the children???
Quote:
What the hell can the UN do?
The answer of course is nothing.
End of quote
You are wrong here. The UN routinely passes tons of legal garbage (e.g. Charters, Agreements, rules and what not). Leftist lawyers and judges in may places (but especially in the EU) use this garbage to push leftist agenda down into throats of unwilling citizens.
The US economy is almost entirely dependent on manufactured conflict and eternal war. Where no required ‘enemies’ exist they are created.
That’s why the theft and colonial settlement of Palestine and eventually the wider ME by the tribe who must never be mentioned is such a boon to the US MIC.
Decent initial stab at a plan….
…and why it, and similar logic, will promptly be ignored.
Next!
The “elites” must be exterminated.
Viva la revolución! — It’s coming bitches.
Evidently WE are the ones who have allowed our “elites” to do this. They have been successful in convincing many of us to believe that is WE who are the problem, WE who resist our ultimate evolution into this selfless collective who only cares and sacrifices for others.
Culturally indoctrinated suicide….to make a better world.
Utopia at last!
If I have food, shelter and an iPhone with a data plan, should I be worried?
Points 1 to 3 are too late. The mess is already made. And the USA will never stop being the world’s policeman and protecting its interests.
If points 1 to are 3 were followed then other points are not required.
First, there needs to be a solution to deal with wars otherwise the effects of mass migration will not cease.
I wold add 11) Countries should re-evaluate their welfare programs so that welfare benefits are not bait for illegal immigrants.
Off topic: PBS Intelligence squared debates streaming on Netflix has a debate of the proposition “Central banks can print prosperity”.
I’d like to have seen Mish on the panel.
“Common sense” is very uncommon.
I think May is brilliant here. She knows the UN is useless, and she doesn’t want refugees. It’s a way to make one’s self sound like they are appeasing the left by appealing to the UN, knowing full well the UN will do absolutely nothing but come up with asinine ideas that neither the right nor the left will support..
I would add another point; do not pop out babies if you have no clue how to feed them. Not all migrants are fleeing war or conflict.
You say ‘cri-sis ‘. We say ‘pro-cess’.
Your comment that “Brexit would never have happened” -maybe so, maybe not.
A more important point is that I wouldn’t leave the European Commission on their own to run a lead-free train set for more than a couple of hours. That’s not going to end well, and Brexit came in the nick of time.
Nation states should not be the analytical unit. The individual should be. We can morally freely violate the sovereignty of other nations that violate human rights. Defense of others is moral, wherever the victims happen to be. Practically, it’s almost always futile, and counter-productive to interfere in the internal affairs of foreign countries – but not always. For example, Saddam forfeited national sovereignty by mass murdering. So it was a moral, for the U.S. to invade. Still, it was a horrendous policy for us to do so (also unconstitutional for want of a declaration of war).
Similarly, safety and welfare for the citizens are not the nation’s highest priority, but the products of the highest priority, freedom and liberty. Liberty first; safety and welfare follow. So, there is no safety or welfare in restricting trade across boundaries. There is no safety and welfare in forcing Apple to say open sesame. There is no safety and welfare in massive new defense spending. There is no safety or welfare in stopping terrorism by killing the relatives or neighbors of terrorists. There is no safety or welfare in interning residents without particularized suspicion. There is no safety or welfare in torturing or kidnapping or indefinitely imprisoning persons suspected of terrorism. There is so no safety or welfare in carrying dissenting protestors out on stretchers. These are a choice few of Trump’s ideas of how to attain safety and welfare.
Far worse than HRC’s, and hers are far less than ideal.