(November 17, 2015 at 9:52 am)Aractus Wrote:(November 17, 2015 at 9:14 am)Dystopia Wrote: I voted "no". I have found no compelling reason to vote "yes". I'm not someone who believes there is a moral duty to help other countries unless there's some sort of long term friendship or alliance between them. By a matter of coherence, I think it's unfair to take only some refugees and ban others, so either I choose to help all of them or none. Therefore, my answer is "no".
PS - I wouldn't really answer any differently if the group fleeing were non-Muslims.
But... As with anything, being strategic matters. The enemy of my enemy is my friend... I feel compelled to say I don't disagree with taking in all refugees because it will speed up the collapse of the EU, something I've been awaiting far too long.
It's not a moral issue, it's a legal issue.
A legal issue that exists due a pseudo-objective smug sense of morality that is imposed on western nations for no particular reason other than pity and making people feel guilty. Is there any reason I should care about the UN or consider them a respectable institution in the international paradigm, other than the fact that it is ruled by countries with more power?
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
