dckingsfan wrote:sfam wrote:We certainly have a responsibility to be taking in far more than we are today. This is why Obama wanted this ramped up. 1.9 million is far far too much. But 30,000 is crazy small.
Why, if we aren't going to be the world's policeman why do we have to be the world's mama? We are saying we don't want to get engaged in the world's politics to ensure that their aren't a large number of displaced - but on the other hand we have a responsibility for taking in those displaced?
This may seem self-evident to you - but this is exactly what has turned the Europe politics to the right.
Oh I definitely get the concern. The best analogy I can come up with is the indigent sick person. You may hate paying for him or her insurance, but if not, you're going to end up paying higher costs at the hospitals regardless because they are forced to cover them by law.
The same thing applies internationally. Contrary to some on this board, horrific acts of violence stem far more from horrific circumstances. Horror breeds more horror. To think that the US, Europe, Japan or anyone else who benefits from a peaceful world order - the liberal world order that Putin and Bannon are trying to dismantle - can ignore the refugee crisis is to be begging for unintended consequences. Al Qaeda may have started with funding from Saudi Arabia, but it took root because of the conditions in many of these countries. Similar to homelessness in the inner cities, we end up paying for it eventually.
And often, the long term costs are lots lots higher than if we had done well care up front. Well care in this case is both development and peacebuilding dollars but also a set of standards, not unlike air flight standards that we hold countries who want to participate in the international economy. External pressure, including moral pressure, economic incentives and mutual assistance works far better than demonizing people and advocating for more tensions and war.
As for the world's policeman analogy, the US's current contribution doesn't even quality as a school crossing guard. We simply aren't involved from the standpoint of refugee adoption right now.
dckingsfan wrote:sfam wrote:The larger issue though is the refugee crisis. This is THE problem facing humanity besides climate change. Terrorism contributes to it, but its honestly huge. There really needs to be well thought out systemic responses to stop the flow of refugees. This is a worldwide issue, not just from North Africa to Europe.
And the US is responsible for the solution? Bush tried the all-in and that didn't work. Obama tried the all-out and that didn't work. What makes you think that we can have a positive affect?
I think Obama and now Trump have essentially been moving toward isolationism. How would you sell that to an American public that doesn't want to be engaged with the problems of the world? Both the Ds and Rs are trending toward nationalism vs. globalism.
Obama didn't move toward isolationism at all. He was all about strengthening the international order, sometimes to a leadership fault. Agree with the nationalism on both the left and right versus globalism. Its more properly called populism. Bilateral relationships often lead to instability or even war. Involving entire regions dramatically increase stability as the implications for breaking the agreement are worse.
Point of the matter is, if you can buy a 48" TV for $300 dollars from Taiwan or $500 in the US, most are buying foreign (which is why there are no TVs or other basic commodities made here). This isn't going to change, no matter how many protections we put up. The problem of course is those protections slow down the economy. The better answer is rethinking our training and education process, and overtly teaming government investment with industrial growth in future growth industries like clean energy and geospatial.
EDIT: If its not clear (it is) I am definitely an institutionalist, a multiculturalist and globalist on the populist scale. Anarchy usually leads to pretty poor results.
EDIT: Regarding selling globalism, someone has to do a better job. Nationalism is in essence advocating we stick our head in the sand and act like the events of the rest of the world won't impact us. Even though we are more connected economically, politically and socially with the rest of the world than at any time in human history.
