What a bunch of haters!
The Chinese public generally holds that currently China cannot accept a large number of refugees, although many are sympathetic toward these victims. The reasons are complex, rather than being seen as lack of internationalism and humanitarianism. It is related to China’s economic development, population, ethnic composition, legal mechanism and history.
The priority for China is still development. An excessive influx of refugees will have a huge impact on social order. If terrorists infiltrate China among the refugees, the safety of 1.4 billion people will be under threat, a fear that can be proved by the current European refugee crisis. Accepting too many refugees may deprive China of a stable environment for development.
Doesn’t the Chinese government know that its obligations to hordes of displaced and migrant foreigners outweigh its obligations to the citizenry it nominally serves, and that anyway the risks of letting in large numbers of alien Muslims to a non-Muslim society are negligible?
The refugee issue must be addressed at the origin. Refugees are not immigrants, rather they are victims of wars and turmoil. It is not China but the West which has caused the refugee crisis that currently plagues Europe. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, launched by the US after the 9/11 attacks, have battered the two countries and displaced large numbers of residents. The Arab Spring, the violent social movement promoted by the West, has devastated the North African area, leading to serious refugee problems.
Hmm………. it’s almost as if they’re on to something there.
The true way out to solve the refugee problem is to achieve stability and development in refugees’ own countries and help them return to their own homes.
Hmmmmm…………… so offering the safety valve of mass refugee resettlement to the screwed-up countries of the world is not necessarily the best way to tackle said countries’ problems over the long term? Do the Chinese really believe that? So hateful.
Some deep thoughts on travel by the English author G. K. Chesterton, writing c. 1922:
I have never managed to lose my old conviction that travel narrows the mind. At least a man must make a double effort of moral humility and imaginative energy to prevent it from narrowing his mind. Indeed there is something touching and even tragic about the thought of the thoughtless tourist, who might have stayed at home loving Laplanders, embracing Chinamen, and clasping Patagonians to his heart in Hampstead or Surbiton, but for his blind and suicidal impulse to go and see what they looked like. This is not meant for nonsense; still less is it meant for the silliest sort of nonsense, which is cynicism. The human bond that he feels at home is not an illusion. On the contrary, it is rather an inner reality. Man is inside all men. In a real sense any man may be inside any men. But to travel is to leave the inside and draw dangerously near the outside. So long as he thought of men in the abstract, like naked toiling figures in some classic frieze, merely as those who labor and love their children and die, he was thinking the fundamental truth about them. By going to look at their unfamiliar manners and customs he is inviting them to disguise themselves in fantastic masks and costumes. Many modern internationalists talk as if men of different nationalities had only to meet and mix and understand each other. In reality that is the moment of supreme danger–the moment when they meet. We might shiver, as at the old euphemism by which a meeting meant a duel.
Travel ought to combine amusement with instruction; but most travelers are so much amused that they refuse to be instructed. I do not blame them for being amused; it is perfectly natural to be amused at a Dutchman for being Dutch or a Chinaman for being Chinese. Where they are wrong is that they take their own amusement seriously. They base on it their serious ideas of international instruction. It was said that the Englishman takes his pleasures sadly; and the pleasure of despising foreigners is one which he takes most sadly of all. He comes to scoff and does not remain to pray, but rather to excommunicate. Hence in international relations there is far too little laughing, and far too much sneering. But I believe that there is a better way which largely consists of laughter; a form of friendship between nations which is actually founded on differences.
The experience of travel interacts with the knowledge, personality, and mental habits of the traveler to generate a wide variety of effects, usually positive but often negative. The same goes for living abroad. I’ve seen far too many disgruntled expats in Asian bars, consumed with hatred for the people and customs of the countries in which they have, quite voluntarily, taken up long-term residence.
Interesting cautionary tale about what happens when an American man searches for the woman of his dreams on the internet, finds her in a small town in Russia, flies her out to the US and marries her (you guessed it, long-term happiness does not ensue):
Everything was fine for about a year and a half(?), until one day James found messages on her phone communicating with another man. (As an Alpha Male 1.0, he compulsively checked her phone and Facebook semi-regularly.) Long story short, she had met this guy through some of her new American friends and was seeing him on the side, though I don’t know if they were actually having sex. He wasn’t better looking than James, and he was a beta, but he was both older and had more money.
As you might imagine, nuclear explosions went off in their relationship. They even become physically violent with each other (ah, monogamy). After much arguing, screaming, fighting, and bullshit, they “tried to make it work” and continued their relationship.
A few months later she moved out, and moved right in with Mr. Rich Beta.
Gentleman, don’t be this moron. If the perfect woman actually shows interest in you — grab your wallet.