George Soros is back and this time talking about his favorite political topic – “refugees”. The famous investor notes that the EU was nearing collapse before the crisis broke and now has threatened and divided the continent. However, instead of understanding why there is a backlash to the equivalent of America taking in four million (mostly Wahhabi or with related beliefs) fighting age men from places like Syria – and unlike America, Germany is not a country of immigrants its a country of emigrants (as demonstrated by the fact that a huge percentage of the US population are of German origin)- Soros is blaming “xenophobic and nationalists” for exploiting the situation. But Soros persists in believing in this globalist dream of everyone being exactly the same which is the CAUSE of Europe turning to those who want to stop the flood of migrants and in some cases the strengthening of parties which are actually fascist unlike AFD which is just a nationalist conservative party which does not want millions of Syrians poring in each year. Anyway…. Soros offers a solution and suggests ONLY taking in 300,000 migrants a year – despite the fact that many of these migrants have not assimilated in France over the past 50 years. Readers can find a summary below – all we can say is that by aggressively pushing this policy Soros will enable actual anti Semites like Jobbik to seize the day away from those merely want to stop the flood like Orban and AFD – so policy could cause the exact thing soros wants to prevent. Kinda like how America got rid of “bad” dictators like Saddam, Mubarak, and Qaddafi and got Al Qaida, and the Muslim Brotherhood cult instead. Additionally, if taking in ONLY 300,000 migrants a year and spending 100s of billions of Euros is the solution one can only wonder if the failure would actually be worse…
Saving Refugees To Save Europe by George Soros, Project Syndicate
NEW YORK – The refugee crisis in Europe was already pushing the European Union toward disintegration when, on June 23, it helped drive the British to vote to Brexit the EU. The refugee crisis and the Brexit calamity that it spawned have reinforced xenophobic, nationalist movements that will seek to win a series of upcoming votes– including national elections in France, the Netherlands, and Germany in 2017, a referendum in Hungary on the EU refugee policy on October 2, and a rerun of the Austrian presidential election on the same day.
Rather than uniting to resist this threat, EU member states have become increasingly unwilling to cooperate with one another. They pursue self-serving, beggar-thy-neighbor migration policies – such as building border fences – that further fragment the Union, seriously damage member states, and subvert global human-rights standards.
What would a comprehensive approach look like? Whatever its final form, it would be built on seven pillars.
First, the EU must take in a substantial number of refugees directly from front-line countries in a secure and orderly manner. This would be far more acceptable to the public than the current disorder. If the EU made a commitment to admit even a mere 300,000 refugees annually, most genuine asylum-seekers would view their odds of reaching their destination as good enough to deter them from seeking to reach Europe illegally – an effort that would disqualify them from legal admission.
Second, the EU must regain control of its borders. There is little that alienates and scares publics more than scenes of chaos.
Third, the EU needs to find sufficient funds to finance a comprehensive migration policy. It is estimated that at least €30 billion per year will be needed for a number of years, and the benefits of “surge funding” (spending a large amount of money up front, rather than the same amount over several years) are enormous.
Fourth, the EU must build common mechanisms for protecting borders, determining asylum claims, and relocating refugees. A single European asylum process would remove the incentives for asylum shopping and rebuild trust among member states.
Fifth, a voluntary matching mechanism for relocating refugees is needed. The EU cannot coerce member states to accept refugees they do not want, or refugees to go where they are not wanted. A scheme like the one used by Canada could elicit and match the preferences of both refugees and receiving communities.
Sixth, the EU must offer far greater support to countries that host refugees, and it must be more generous in its approach to Africa. Instead of using development funds to serve its own needs, the EU should offer a genuine grand bargain focused on the needs of recipient countries. This means creating jobs in refugees’ home countries, which would reduce the pressure to migrate to Europe.
The final pillar is the eventual creation of a welcoming environment for economic migrants. Given Europe’s aging population, the benefits migration brings far outweigh the costs of integrating immigrants. All the evidence supports the conclusion that migrants can contribute significantly to innovation and development if they are given a chance to do so.
George Soros – Read the full article here.