Search the Community

To everyone interested in knowing the truth. I have seen no good summary of the events of the situation in Hungary and the Eastern Route, that sees 3/4 of all migrants to Europe as of yet, so here it is. This is a chronological summary of the "Migrant Crisis" events of 2015, 2016 and 2017, their impacts on Hungary, and how Hungary handled the situation as the primary Transit Country for migrants headed into the EU Schengen Zone. Sources are in blue, and I have listed them directly after the corresponding story. Some sources are in English, but since coverage on Hungary has been very scarce, most are in Hungarian or a few even German. I was very reluctant to use sources from left-leaning media, but I did include some that I know to be credible. Researched and compiled by myself using mostly reports of Hungarian media, EU data, police data, private citizens and my personal insight as a JRS Jesuit Refugee Service worker. Important words are in red. 2015 The First Wave: - August: For the Hungarian people, the "refugee crisis" really began in the last days of August, when without notice, hundreds of people of foreign origins set up a camp within the recently renovated Keleti train station. The camp had an uneasy feeling about it. One could smell the stench of urine, see the bored people, and feel the tension brewing between the locals and the newcomers. No bypassers understood what was going on, the average hungarian couldn't even find Syria on a map, from where hordes of people could be flooding into Europe. Nobody was informed by the authorities of why the camp was set up, the local media began investigating immediately, but all anyone could actually do was to watch and wait. (http://alfahir.hu/igy_nez_ki_a_menekulttaborra_valt_keleti_palyaudvar) - On the 1st of September however, the calm was gone. To this day, nobody truly knows what caused the unrest, but the people present at the station were witnesses to the migrants shouting, blocking roads, chasing after some men and being all-round unpeaceul. The hungarians didn't even know how to react to this behaviour. The last time anything of this sort happened in the peaceful city of Budapest was in 2006, when the people revolted against the leftist government that admitted to lying to the country. Some curious pedestrians went closer to the raging mob, whipped out their mobile devices, and did what any normal western millenial would do - take selfies. The riot police arrived on the scene in under an hour, and started pushing the mob off the roads. Nothing much happened after that, but this incident was enough to prompt the government to act. Most of the station became off limits to all migrants, and at least two dozen police officers stood guard at the gates at all times, all without heavy gear or firearms. (http://www.origo.hu/itthon/20150901-menekultek-tuntetnek-lezartak-kiuritetek-a-keleti-palyaudvart.html) - On 3rd September 2015, one day before the UEFA Euro 2016 qualifying Group F match, Hungarian football hooligans clashed with the Hungarian police in the streets of Budapest, 16 of them being arrested. No definitely credible sources exist on this, but many claim that the camp at Keleti was also attacked by the hooligans. This may have been the reason why on the 4th, hundreds of the migrants suddenly packed their things, and began their march towards Austria. By the end of September, no migrants were left at Keleti. (http://www.press-report.hu.com/clanek-102723818-osszeverekedtek-a-szurkolok-a-menekultekkel-a-keletinel) - On September 16th, to the surprise of the arriving migrants, and to the outrage of the EU and the global leftist media, the Serbian border crossing of Röszke-Horgos was closed to all illegals (Serbia not a Schengen country). As all criminals do, the migrants began throwing a tantrum, assaulting the border fence, throwing rocks at police. The police responded with tear-gas and water cannons. The western media reported on the incident, for whatever reason they also denounced the behaviour of the police. According to the hungarian press, 2 officers were injured, the migrants merely got a healthy dose of tear-gas. (http://www.delmagyar.hu/szeged_hirek/ez_tortent_penteken_kitores_kodobalas_es_konnygaz_a_roszkei_hangarnal/2444060/) - By September 17th the prime minister of Hungary had ordered a temporary fence to be erected on the 151km Serbian border, and a permanent 4 meters high razor-wire fence was already being constructed. (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/13/hungary-begins-work-on-border-fence-to-keep-out-migrants)(http://www.fidesz.sopron.hu/?p=4275) The chancellor of Germany, the EU parliament, Austria and the hungarian left all attacked the prime minister, accusing him with racism, xenophobia and far-right ideology. (http://index.hu/kulfold/2015/06/23/magyarorszag_kitette_a_megtelt_tablat/) The majority of the hungarian populace still had not caught up with the events. The 329km border with Croatia was also set to be fenced, as the migrants could still go around the serbian fence. (Croatia also not Schengen). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_border_barrier) - On 22 September 2015, European Union interior ministers meeting in the Justice and Home affairs council approved a plan to relocate 120,000 asylum seekers over two years from the frontline states Italy, Grrece, and Hungary to all other EU countries (except Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom which have opt-outs). The relocation plan applies to asylum seekers "in clear need of international protection" (those with a recognition rate higher than 75%, i.e. Syrians, Eritreans and Iraqis) – 15,600 from Italy, 50,400 from Greece and 54,000 from Hungary – who will be distributed among EU states on the basis of quotas taking into account the size of economy and population of each state, as well as the average number of asylum applications. The decision was taken by majority vote, with the Czechia, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia voting against and Finland abstaining. Since Hungary voted against the relocation plan, its 54,000 asylum seekers would not be relocated for now, and could be relocated from Italy and Greece instead Historical context: It is important to understand the position of the people who were not ok with the actions of the pm. These people took it as a given that every single one of the migrants were refugees. Hence, as the Geneva Convention of 1949 dictates, every country that signed the treaty agrees to take in every person the treaty designates as a Refugee. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions) An example of the treaty in effect was Austria in 1965, when revolutions broke out in Poland, Hungary and Chechia. Following the failiures of the insurrections, thousands of refugees fled to Austria. The Austrian border guards could have simply shot the refugees, since they were crossing the border illegally, but thanks to the Geneva Conventions the refugees were distributed among the western nations. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/ir2/hungaryrev2.shtml) Why did Hungary build the fence? The only reason is that these new types of refugees had no papers, they refused to comply to the rules, to cooperate with the hungarian authorities and register. (http://www.bmbah.hu/index.php?lang=hu) How a refugee is admitted to the EU is outlined in the Dublin agreement. According to which, the the first country that foreigners enter into, must be the one to register them. https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum/examination-of-applicants_en And Hungary, being the very edge of the Schengen zone, was responsible for vetting every foreigner that sets foot in the EU. Also, it is worth mentioning that the border was not completely closed, and legal immigrants were still allowed to enter at checkpoints, as long as they had papers. (https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/asylum/examination-of-applicants_en) By 2016, if sources are at least some indicator, Hungary has seen 2/3rd of all immigrants into the Schengen zone. Which until 2016, was 300 000 persons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_migrant_crisis#Migrant_routes.2C_development.2C_and_responses_in_individual_countries Hungary's history with refugees: - From the 17th until the 19th century, the southernmost part of the country, a 50-100km wide, 1000km long strip of land including Croatia, Slavonia, Vojvodina and Southern Transylvania was officially designated the Borderguard Territories (Határőr vidék). The only job of every person living in this land was to systematically keep out or vet every refugee fleeing from the Ottoman Empire. Thousands of people fled from the South, and most settled and contributed very diligently to the economy and the culture that had given them asylum. Please note that Hungary, as all other European powers, has a long History dealing with multiculturalism. For 900 years only half of the country's population was ethnically Hungarian, the others were Romanians, Slavs and Germans. During Communism many Palestinians were settled in the country and they were integrated without much effort. Today 10% of the population of Hungary is ethnically Gypsy. Quite stereotypically, they do not work, they are uneducated, they are violent, and they are hostile towards Hungarians. The FIDESZ government implemented many solutions to integrate the Gypsy population: Revoked child support for the unemployed, started low-wage job programs, subsidised education... Everyone who immigrates to Hungary simply has to learn the language, the customs, the laws, must work, and above all, has to come in legally. Just like my father did, who came in from Mongolia, worked, graduated University, married a very nice Hungarian lady, and never asked for free stuff. Then he went back to Mongolia along with his family, to spread European culture to the East. The first terror attacks in Europe (reactions of Hungarian citizens and the government): - November 15th, Paris attacks. One of the attackers was found to have crossed the Hungarian border in September. The west suddenly stops attacking Hungary, and in fact, I myself have not found a single English-language article about Hungary and the refugee crisis since then... One wonders why. State of emergency declared in most EU countries. (http://estiujsag.hu/belfold/rendkivuli-allapot-kihirdetese-meg-nincs-magyarorszagon)The Visegrad 4 hold meetings almost every month after that in order to address the crisis. Slovakia, Poland and Chechia all dispatch police units to patrol the now 500km long Southern border barrier. (http://kitekinto.hu/cimke/visegradi-negyek/) - March 22, Brussels attacks. I was talking to my brother on skype, who studies in Brussels. I belive our talk very accurately embodied the tragic state of the European mindset that day. During the conversation he picks up his phone and comments in a calm voice "They bombed the train station". Without lifting an eyebrow, I said "Yep". After a couple minutes he continues "the airport as well", to which following a brief pause I ask "So germany next?". He said "Yep". Shorty afterwards, a Facebook notification arrives on my phone, saying that my brother has been marked to be alive. Yes, apparently Facebook has developed a service just for such catastrophies. I can almost imagine an ad like: "Next time a terrorist blows himself up next to you, you too can be marked as alive by your friend!" Almost every country in the EU declared a state of emergency. That including Hungary, where every metro station was patrolled by a squad of heavily armed counter-terrorism officers (TEK). This was the first occasion in my lifetime on which I saw a sub-machine gun in Budapest. I had seen quite a few in London 3 years prior, where they always have had armed police at every major Underground station since the London bombings. (http://nepszava.hu/cikk/1089030-terrortamadas-brusszelben-34-halott-106-sebesult---videok) - The Austrian and the Slovenian governments place orders to Hungary for 1000km of razor-wire fence. (http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/691905/Austria-plan-build-huge-border-fence-stop-migrants-Schengen-EU-Brussels) Hungary stocks up with enough fence to be able to seal off the 443km border with Romania in a single day if the order is given. (http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-hungary-minister-idUKKCN0UX284) Bavaria stands by Hungary. (http://www.dw.com/de/festakt-zum-ungarn-aufstand-im-bayerischen-landtag/a-36072499) 2016 The Second Wave: - The spring brought hundreds of new "refugees" to Hungary. Nevertheless, the hungarian government ordered all except 3 refugee camps closed For perspective, the small camp at Fót, which used to house around 60 refugees until April, was suddenly home to 250 people. Every week, about 50 people left for Austria, and 60 new people came. This meant that every list the camp authorities had at any given time were 3 days out of date. (http://alfahir.hu/tulzsufoltak_a_magyarorszagi_menekulttaborok) About our refugees. We had no means to verify their names, their age, nor their nationality. I myself have no idea how they were allwed through the border. The rounded ratio of nationalities in the camps at any given time were 40% Afghani, 25% Pakistani, 10% Subsaharan, 10% Saharan, 5% Bangla, 10% other including Iraqi, Turkish (note: I have not seen confirmed reports of a single person from Syria.) These numbers are classified information , so there are no sources to this data anywhere. Official reports, if to be trusted are here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_migrant_crisis#Origins_and_motivations - By summer, contrary to what we were expecting - a tidal wave of immigrants - things were extremely calm. To everyone's surprise, the government closed down another refugee camp, and the remaining two had their occupants reduced to normal numbers. Only 40 total number of refugees are admitted each day. Most continue on to Germany anyway. (http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/22/hungary-border-fence-massive-success-balkan-route-trickle/) In all fairness, there had been only one confirmed violent action carried out by a migrant within Hungary. An afghani stabbed another unknown migrant at Bicske. This low crime rate is probably a result of strictly enacted policies from the right-leaning FIDESZ majority government. - October 2. Hungary holds a referendum over whether or not to accept the EU dictated migrant quotas. With a 43% participation rate, 98% of voter vote to reject the quotas. This referendum in effect is inconsequencial, since the government can only act on referendums for which the participation rate is above 50%. Nevertheless, the results mean that FIDESZ is still by far the most popular political party among voters. (https://www.rt.com/news/361390-hungary-referendum-migrant-quotas/) (http://www.dw.com/de/referendum-orban-hat-sein-ziel-schon-erreicht/a-35933763) - By the end of 2016 only 1 refugee camp remains in Hungary. (http://444.hu/tag/menekulttabor?page=1) Accepted refugees, who do exist, of course, are given 2 months to find residence in Hungary. They are provided free education, as education is free in Hungary, so they have no reason not to learn Hungarian. Meanwhile, volunteers and from all over the country, civil services, and various Christian denominations, most notably the Catholic Church, all assist in the assimilation of these people. Lesson: You do not need to build a wall, America. Just purchase a fence from Hungary! - 2017 February Update: With the "Border Hunter Initiative" fást in motion, with cooperation of the Visegrád Alliance, and with the Second Border Fence being built, one would expect not to see any more illegal migrants coming in from the Balkans ever again. http://www.police.hu/hirek-es-informaciok/hatarvadasz-kepzes/hatarvadasz-hirek http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-hungary-fence-idUSKBN16614A However, since there is currently virtually no unified stance on the matter between all EU countries, it is quite impossible to completely halt the flow of illegal migrants. 9 EU members have already reinstated border controls, but only Spain, Hungary, Austria and Slovenia have built fences along their borders. https://eblnews.com/news/europe/current-migration-border-controls-europes-schengen-area-6981 - 2017 The third wave: There is always a sizable influx of people from the south at the arrival of Spring. Just like it happened in 2015 and 2016, the March of 2017 is seeing a another Wave of men without papers, nor nationalities, nor the will to apply legally. The Hungarian Police have reported that the migrants seem to make an attempt of crossing Hungary every Weekend, as the Police would arrest one or two illegals on a slow day, but over 20 or 30 on Mondays. It is almost as if they were organising a trekking party on a weekly basis. http://www.police.hu/hirek-es-informaciok/hatarinfo/elfogott-migransok-szama By now, there is only one Refugee Processing camp left in Hungary. Numbers have finally stabilised at 80, but almost all of them leave west in less than a month. Austria has not erected a fence on their border with Hungary, which means that it is impossible to know how many migrants slip past Hungary into Western Europe. As of April 2017, at least 50 000 people are stranded in Greece, and another 8000 in Serbia, partly due to the border controls of Hungary. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_migrant_crisis#International By April 28th, Hungary has completed construction of second layer of razor-wire fence. http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/28/hungary-builds-a-second-wall-against-illegals/ - The sorry state of the EU: In short, the EU has still not come up with a comprehensive proposal to deal with the crisis. https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/understanding-migration-and-asylum-european-union The plan of distributing migrants was vetoed by 4 EU states in 2015 (Czechia, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania). http://publications.europa.eu/webpub/com/factsheets/refugee-crisis/en/ They haven't got sufficient hands on the ground, their numbers are out of date by almost a year, all asylum centres west of Bratislava are overcrowded, real information is very hard to obtain, and the independent organisations are unable to cooperate with each other. Terror attacks in Europe in 2016: http://indianexpress.com/article/world/world-news/list-of-terrorist-attacks-that-have-struck-europe-in-2016/ - Official EUROSTAT statistics on asylum seeker applications (have a blast, but take a salt mine with it): http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_statistics - Analyzing EUROSTAT data: 1. All data are extremely outdated, with last records from early 2016. 2. There is no way to actually track anyone. Most asylees have no papers, and they apply multiple times in various countries, or they do not apply at all. 3. There is no centralised bureau that handles immigration in the EU, henc reports come from various EU states, most of whom have not set up border controls, thusly unable to acccurately measure numbers. 4. I am unable to find reliable data on the number of admitted refugees and their origins. Curious.

I'm starting a thread on the economics of the migrant crisis because that at least is one area where it's possible to push back on fashionable but very wrong beliefs. We have to get the word out on this. The German government's policy on refugees is deeply un-humanitarian. The annual cost of their 2015 migrant intake alone could have supported around 20m refugees, had they supported them in the normal way via agencies such as the UNHCR. Instead they chose to support just 2.5% of that, around 500K refugees, together with roughly the same number of economic migrants, by resettling them in Europe. Even the 2.5% who were helped are likely to be amongst the least needy refugees, because they were able to pay thousands to the people smugglers. Meanwhile as at 22 March, the UNHCR's budget to support Syrian refugees in the Middle East was about 1/3 underfunded and the overall agency funding for Syrian refugees in the Middle East (because only about 25% of the Syrian refugee aid budget goes through the UNHCR) was at just 31% of budget. http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/download.php?id=10555. That's the real refugee crisis. Had the German government just funded the relief agencies in the normal way instead of resettling migrants, it could have single-handedly funded all the relief agencies' entire 2016 Syria budgets (total $4.5bn) more than 3 times over for the annual cost of their 2015 migrant intake. A recently published report showed that the cost of resettling refugees in Europe was crowding out billions from foreign aid budgets: Centre for Effective Altruism. Effects of the Refugee Crisis on ODA. . 2016-04-06. URL: https://drive.google.com/a/givingwhatwecan.org/file/d/0B551Ijx9v_RoSG1JS2NlY0J1LWlHTFR0RHMyTXNlMk9sVnlB/Accessed: 2016-04-06. (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6gYo5ZeIs) Some details: At the end of 2014 there were an estimated 59.5m refugees and internally displaced persons worldwide http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html The UNHCR's annual cost per refugee is around $1K for Syrian refugees http://cis.org/High-Cost-of-Resettling-Middle-Eastern-Refugees#23and around $380 in Kenya http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49e483a16.html. This compares with estimates for resettlement in Germany (from the Deutscher Städtetag and the Institut für Weltwirtschaft Kiel) of EUR13K ($14.5K) per year: Greive, Martin. Flüchtlingskrise kostet bis zu 55 Milliarden Euro im Jahr. Die Welt. 2016-04-06. URL:http://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article149854636/Fluechtlingskrise-kostet-bis-zu-55-Milliarden-Euro-im-Jahr.html. Accessed: 2016-04-06. (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6gYpP7kSm) General information about Syrian refugees from the UNHCR: http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php

Check out article version on Medium here! :https://medium.com/@joelpatterson_52315/what-libertarians-really-need-to-understand-about-the-immigration-debate-ef2998589c18#.1mcn6cxx5 There’s a rather interesting objection I’ve heard in response to some of the arguments Stefan Molyneux has made in videos such as, “What Pisses Me Off About The Migrant Crisis”. It’s an objection that I’ve seen frequently enough that I think it deserves a response. The objection goes like this: “Stef talks about the terrible consequences of open borders in a welfare state. He says the mass importation of millions of people who are part of a culture that is antithetical to western values will result in a bloodbath, not assimilation, particularly because the welfare state allows for these little isolated communities wherein nobody has to adapt to the native culture at all, which would be required to some degree in a free society in order to enter into the job market. In other words, Stef is saying the consequences of open borders will be bad. But, Stef has also said that, ‘consequences don’t matter, only principles’ such as the non aggression principle, and it is a violation of the non aggression principle to close the borders. So, isn’t Stef being hypocritical? “ Admittedly, I am exaggerating a little bit. The objections I’ve read like this aren’t nearly as humble, curious, or articulate. But besides that, why is this objection wrong? Well, the first and most common mistake I see people make when they’re criticizing Stef is that they ignore context. This is not a minor error. This is like misreading the nutritionist’s recommendations so that you think it says to take 500 grams of a supplement, rather than 500 mg and then declaring the nutritionist is “trying to get people killed!” It shows a considerable lack of attention to detail. This is an important distinction. The people who are making the argument from consequences are the CEO’s , the leftists, and the politicians who are saying, ‘The most effective way to help the migrants would be to take them in. Taking in the migrants will have good consequences for the economy. Therefore, we should take in the migrants.” Talking about consequences is entirely appropriate when you are rebutting an argument from consequences. Stef is rebutting this mainstream narrative that taking in the migrant is the best way to help them by saying, “Actually, taking the migrants in is not the most effective way to help them, nor will taking in the migrants who hold an opposing culture benefit society and here’s the data that shows why. People imagine that Stef, by simply pointing out these facts is making a leap to saying, “Therefore, we should close the borders because the consequences of open borders would be bad.” It is true that Stef has said that there would be practical consequences to halting the mass importation of child hostile cultures into, for example, the United States that would be beneficial, despite the fact that closing the borders would be a violation of the nonaggression principle. “If the path to a free society requires friendly parents and if there are pouring into America hundreds and hundreds or thousands, if not millions of child unfriendly or child hostile cultures and if Donald Trump can put a stop to that, then that buys some time to convince people closer to the child friendly paradigm to change their behavior so that a more peaceful society can come about. I don’t view Donald Trump as someone who is going to bring about a free society, but if Donald Trump can buy enough time for the peaceful parenting message to spread against the massive influx of child unfriendly cultures and histories coming into america, which not only means that there are more people who are coming in who are child hostile, but it also means that the quality of the people’s childhoods and adult lives become tax slaves to child unfriendly cultures, the quality of families declines even for the people who are native. ( See Stefan Molyneux Podcast 3174 for full quote. ) But, because there’s a violation of the non aggression principle either way, since opening the borders also violates freedom of association due to the fact that so many illegal immigrants take welfare, it doesn’t matter. There’s no ideal short term moral solution to the problem and because of this all you can do is look at the practicality of each option and the evidence seems to suggest that closing the borders would result in less force that allowing them to be open. (See Are Libertarians Wrong About Immigration) “People say if people are not allowed to come into the country, then that is the initiation of the use of force. I completely agree with that. I completely and totally agree with that. However, if the actions of someone by entering a particular area results in the greater initiation of force, then it’s not as simple as people think. The problem is that people are showing it in isolation. So, let me give you a tiny example. If I go into my own house, I am not initiating the use of force. If some guy with a gun wants to come into my house, well, guess what? He’s initiating the use of force. If he comes in while I’m sleeping and steals from me he is initiating the use of force. Now, if someone comes into my house because I’ve invited them and we’re going to play Yahtzee and Monopoly or he’s going to fix my toilet because I had Indian food, then he’s coming into my house voluntarily and he’s not initiating the use of force and neither are his actions initiating the use of force against me. So, the reality is that statistically, by and large and by far both legal and illegal immigrants coming into America vastly increase the use of force in America. And so, simply by looking at putting putting a barrier around america to prevent people from coming into america and saying, ‘Well, that’s the only initiation of force that matters’ That’s ridiculous. There’s a little thing called the welfare state, which I believe I’ve seen a few Libertarians talk about. But, immigrants use welfare at vastly higher rates than domestic citizens. So, 51% of immigrants are using the welfare state, compared to 30% for natives. And those natives include high utilizers of the welfare state such as blacks and hispanics. Among illegal immigrants, it’s even higher. It’s more than twice the rate of natives. So, the reality is and this is a basic mathematical reality that you can only escape by sticking your head so far up your ass that you can drill though your nipples and call them telescopes. The reality is that immigrants in general, on average, coming into america are both going to use, be dependent on, and vote for increases in the welfare state. If you care about the welfare state, then you need to diminish the number of people on the welfare state. This is not brain surgery. People do not vote to get rid of or even intellectually oppose that which puts bread on their table and puts a roof over their heads that is necessary for their survival. And the fact that this is even debatable or even debated, I don;t even know what to say. It’s very hard to get a man to understand something when his livelihood depends on him not understanding something. And when you bring a bunch of people in with no history of free market thinking in their culture, and for illegal immigrants in particularly, get on welfare at a rate of 62%, those people in order to survive in america require massive amounts of government spending in America and indeed the only reason they can stay in America, as Dr. Steven Camarota has pointed out on this show, is by voting for an ever increasing welfare state. When, you get people coming in to a country who can only survive and live in that country because of government spending, what do you think they’re going to vote for? An expansion of extraction of government power? “- Stefan Molyneux(Are Libertarians Wrong About Immigration) Still, even if closing closing the borders would result in less force than allowing them to be open, there’s a difference between saying, “If open borders, the consequences will not be good” vs “ Because the consequences will not be good if we open borders we SHOULD do X, such as close the borders or vote for Donald Trump.” When Stef says things like consequences don’t matter he was saying that the validity of a moral theory cannot be determined based on its outcome. If the consequences to freeing the slaves are negative, that is irrelevant because slavery is immoral. Context is key. Criticizing the government program called open borders is not by default endorsing a statist solution to the problem. It’s merely pointing out the facts. However, whenever you start to criticize open borders as the government program it truly is people, usually Libertarians, without giving your argument a moment’s thought will jump to the conclusion that you must saying, “I think we should shoot people!” The goal is not to impact statist policies, but to impact parenting. There is no contradiction. “Am I in support of closing the borders? I’m not sure what that would even mean? Because that would mean to say that I am in support of a government doing something effective towards whatever end I might have, which would be to accept that the government could do something competently”- (Stefan Molyneux Are Libertarians Wrong About Immigration?) Sources: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world... http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisti... http://www.theguardian.com/world/data... http://www.economist.com/news/europe/... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world... http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/0... http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-... http://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/ca... https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s... http://www.newsweek.com/become-even-more-prosperous-we-should-open-our-borders-372875

More and more informations are gathering, that U.S. intelligence is secretly directing and supporting the refugee crisis and even helping migrants on their way to Europe and through European countries, by printing flyers in arabic language with important phonenumbers of each country, informations about where to apply to get welfare measures and even travel routes, border checkpoints and advice how to get to Europe by ship or how to get illegal transportation by resident people. This broshure was printed by an organisation related to George Soros, Hedgefund owner from the U.S. The "migrant business" is a multi billion industry, and natives in certain areas are comitting crimes on a large scale supporting the illegal migration. It is a very lucrative business, to transport refugees illegally across the borders and more and more resident people are joining in. Refugees pay up to 500€ to get across the German border, even after having payed 10.000€ just to get into the EU. That means a regular car load makes 2000€ for a 20 mile ride. Surveillance of German citizens show highly increased traffic of Minivans with eastern European numberplates in certain areas. But no border patrol anywhere. German officials are ignoring this on purpose, which means that the "official" numbers of migrants can at least be doubled or maybe tripled, meaning that Germany itself is invaded by more than 2 Million illegal immigrants only this year. In addition, German government is highjacked by Turkey and has to pay some hundred million € for Erdogan to hold back the refugees and not letting them proceed their way to Germany. It is so obvious, that all this is directed. Critical Germans opposing the general media informations and the political propaganda are massively attacked for example by printing their fb profiles on newspapers, by actively financing leftwing violens against peaceful protesters. Peolple are loosing their jobs just for pointing out the violation of "constitutional" rights ( Germany still has no real constitution, especially since the reunion of east and west Germany, because our "Grundgesetz" was only ment to be a temporary measure until we reunite, which means that we still have the status of being occupied by the U.S. and U.K. after WWII. The people have to agree officially with a constitution and we never did anything like that after the war. ) and exposing true crimes by the government. Angela Merkel has now been accused for treason by thousands of Germans for harming our country and not protecting it. It becomes more and more obvious, that the U.S. are using this refugee invasion as a weapon against the different kultures of Europe in order to extinct them and to set up a mediteranean super union including ALL nations surrounding the mediteranean sea and of course their resources with the overall aim of establishing a mixed population with low average intellect, smart enough to work but to stupid, to revolt against exploitation and slavery. Stefan has said a lot of this in his shows about the migrant crisis and the fall of Europe besides the involvement of U.S. intelligence. Let me know what you think...the riots have allready begun in Sweden and they going to start in Germany soon too. Being invaded by a totally oppsed and intolerant culture, is the worst that could possibly happened. Rapecrimes and sexual assault are increasing everywhere and mainstream media is not covering it. Amunition and firearms, even pepperspray and pepperguns are sold out across the whole of Germany. You have to wait three months to get selfdefense weapons. The memberships in "gunclubs" or whatever that´s called are skyrocketing. All this is not going to end peacefully, but no one wants to hear the truth. Everybody being patriotic and seeing the necessaty to stop this, is discrimminated for being a Nazi and for being intolernat and zenophobic. It is just unbelievable, what´s going on and it has just begun.