Attached: 1 image
The war of Fortress Europe against people on the move is overwhelming.
Preventing by all means the rescue of people on the move escaping from EU-funded hells like Libya means more killings at sea and more illegal push and pullbacks.
The Italian authorities made sure not only to use us as an element of deterrance for 7 years or to seize our boat during that time. They also made sure that the ship could not rescue people ever again after the farcical trial was over.
But in the face of state violence, many of us are resisting and looking for ways to hold them accountable for the deaths and suffering. Once again, we will fight for respect for freedom of movement.
Solidarity And Resistance
And nobody says so. The problems that lead to people dying while trying to reach Europe is multifactorial, and so the solutions need to be multifactorial.
To reduce the number of refugees we need to fight climate change, revoked neocolonialistic trade deals that pull the livelihood from where the refugees come from, stop delivering arms into a lot of active war zones and to oppressive governments, etc.
To ensure the safety of refugees already on the move and who will yet get to move, we need to establish safe routes, stop pushbacks, improve conditions in refugee camps in Europe, accelerate the asylum admission processes, agree on fair ways of distributions, improve on integration measures, etc.
And what do we do with the Russians starting civil wars in Africa? Or Chinese neocolonialism?
Yes, we should unfuck the asylum process and speed it up. Also the one for legal migration. The problem though is that if Europe plays the humanitarian and tries to fix Africa, Europe’s detractors will keep fucking it up even more.
Another problem is this, “agree on fair ways of distributions”. What’s fair? Is it fair when the German chancellor stands up and encourages migration, while the standing agreements put all the burden on other countries? Is it fair for Hungary to say “we did not fuck Africa up, we can’t afford to have a part in fixing it either”?
All I’m saying is that I agree that this is a multifaceted problem, but people like this ship’s crew make it worse for everyone.
I’m not against saving people from drowning, I’m against doing this “rebel” shit and putting them to shore illegally. Get them out of the water, ask them which port of entry they would like to go, and take them there.
Continuing this is just going to give idiots in the EU legitimacy, and it will end up with machineguns and barbed wire.
I think people who rescue people from drowning and instead of taking them to a port of entry, facilitate illegal immigration, give ammunition to the far right in Europe, which is going to result in idiotic racist pricks getting elected, and it really getting worse.
people like this ship’s crew make it worse for everyone.
Letting people die at sea just means being cruel. Nothing else. It doesn’t magically send some kind of signal not to cross the sea to would-be migrants. Despite “conservatives” constructing their own alternate realities, this is, in fact, a well-researched fact.
And nobody says so. The problems that lead to people dying while trying to reach Europe is multifactorial, and so the solutions need to be multifactorial.
To reduce the number of refugees we need to fight climate change, revoked neocolonialistic trade deals that pull the livelihood from where the refugees come from, stop delivering arms into a lot of active war zones and to oppressive governments, etc.
To ensure the safety of refugees already on the move and who will yet get to move, we need to establish safe routes, stop pushbacks, improve conditions in refugee camps in Europe, accelerate the asylum admission processes, agree on fair ways of distributions, improve on integration measures, etc.
Nobody said it’s easy though.
And what do we do with the Russians starting civil wars in Africa? Or Chinese neocolonialism?
Yes, we should unfuck the asylum process and speed it up. Also the one for legal migration. The problem though is that if Europe plays the humanitarian and tries to fix Africa, Europe’s detractors will keep fucking it up even more.
Another problem is this, “agree on fair ways of distributions”. What’s fair? Is it fair when the German chancellor stands up and encourages migration, while the standing agreements put all the burden on other countries? Is it fair for Hungary to say “we did not fuck Africa up, we can’t afford to have a part in fixing it either”?
All I’m saying is that I agree that this is a multifaceted problem, but people like this ship’s crew make it worse for everyone.
How? Please tell me you don’t want to say not letting people die is making the situation worse.
I’m not against saving people from drowning, I’m against doing this “rebel” shit and putting them to shore illegally. Get them out of the water, ask them which port of entry they would like to go, and take them there.
Continuing this is just going to give idiots in the EU legitimacy, and it will end up with machineguns and barbed wire.
@CyberEgg @HK65
Considers himself humanitarian. Thinks, people who rescue other people from drowning “make it worse for everybody”.
oO
Maybe you should reconsider.
I think people who rescue people from drowning and instead of taking them to a port of entry, facilitate illegal immigration, give ammunition to the far right in Europe, which is going to result in idiotic racist pricks getting elected, and it really getting worse.
@HK65
Educate me then. Where are those regular ports of entry and where do the activists on the rescue ships bring the rescued instead?
Letting people die at sea just means being cruel. Nothing else. It doesn’t magically send some kind of signal not to cross the sea to would-be migrants. Despite “conservatives” constructing their own alternate realities, this is, in fact, a well-researched fact.
Never have I said “let people die at sea”. I’m saying pick them up, and take them to any legal port of entry they want to go to.