Around the world, progressive parties have come to see tight immigration restrictions as unnecessary, even cruel. What if they’re actually the only way for progressivism to flourish?
That the era of low immigration was also the era of progressive triumph is no coincidence. […] The United States felt more like a cohesive nation to many voters, with higher levels of social trust and national pride, and politicians were able to enact higher taxes on the rich and new benefits like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
Immigration to Denmark is not a human right.
Additionally, the vast majority of immigrants are under no specific risk of murder and torture, besides the part where the country they come from is just generally dangerous.
As we do not share values, let’s disuss technicalities instead:
Then everybody is like “Muh, but Dublin rules”. Yeah right, because those will work out perfectly for Europe, when all the southern states are left alone with all the immigrants.
In consequence, every “we want immigration to go down” comes down to using brutal violence against those immigrants. And now we’re back to square one: questions about human rights ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yes, it does come down to that.
Now either accept it, or lose the voters and lose elections and fight to overthrow the “unethical” democracy that refuses to share their country sufficiently.
That’s exactly what asylum is about and why asylum is a human right. (That said, asylum approval in Denmark is higher than the EU average and doesn’t seem like a problem.)
I’m an Atheist who is very acutely aware of where most of the danger in most of these countries comes from. It’s not left behind at the border. It’s also most of what makes conservatives in general dangerous, not just foreign conservatives.
Could you explain?
Sufficiently religious people always make everything bad, in big and small ways.