NationStates

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:What’s the reason, if you know, for such a difference in treatment? Is it financial? I’m not going to give my opinion on Australian asylum seeking because I know next to nothing about it but I can’t help but wonder about this departure in location.

Method of transport. The "Boat people" as they are known as are usually picked up by the Australian Border Patrol and the Royal Australian Navy as they're sailing over, as it's generally easier to intercept them and transfer them from RAN ships to those detention facilities. Whereas you don't know someone is claiming asylum until they turn up to customs officers at the airport terminal. And as most airports generally lack the kinds of facilities to hold people for significant periods of time (most people who are rejected entry are put on the next flight to the country of origin), they have to be taken into Australia for processing.

Nakena wrote:It's actually the name of it

Now that I think about it, it doesn't surprise me at all. I've said before that Australia's immigration policy is Trump's wet dream. Not that it will change soon because both parties have either supported it, or replaced it with similar policies, as Julia Gillard reopened both Manus Island and Nauru facilities.

What I don't understand is what these people think they will achieve by killing them self. If someone does not like you and does not want you killing your self is hardly going to change their mind. It's not like people care about the death of someone they don't like or want.

Purpelia wrote:What I don't understand is what these people think they will achieve by killing them self. If someone does not like you and does not want you killing your self is hardly going to change their mind. It's not like people care about the death of someone they don't like or want.

An end to their suffering, and many of them are suffering badly. They're not trying to achieve anything, they're trying to escape pain.

Shrillland wrote:

Purpelia wrote:What I don't understand is what these people think they will achieve by killing them self. If someone does not like you and does not want you killing your self is hardly going to change their mind. It's not like people care about the death of someone they don't like or want.

An end to their suffering, and many of them are suffering badly. They're not trying to achieve anything, they're trying to escape pain.

Death seems to be a rather poor way of improving ones lot in life if you ask me. But if these are just suicides for their own sake instead of a grand political gesture why are they being reported on at all? Seems to me it's problem solved. Unwanted visitors are dead, Australia wins.

Purpelia wrote:

Shrillland wrote:
An end to their suffering, and many of them are suffering badly. They're not trying to achieve anything, they're trying to escape pain.

Death seems to be a rather poor way of improving ones lot in life if you ask me. But if these are just suicides for their own sake instead of a grand political gesture why are they being reported on at all? Seems to me it's problem solved. Unwanted visitors are dead, Australia wins.

Not everyone in Australia feels that way, otherwise the Greens wouldn't exist. Also, it shows the world how horrific the Pacific Solution actually is to the people that experience it, that they would sooner kill themselves from loss of hope than live another day in the detention centres.

Costa Fierro wrote:Now that I think about it, it doesn't surprise me at all. I've said before that Australia's immigration policy is Trump's wet dream. Not that it will change soon because both parties have either supported it, or replaced it with similar policies, as Julia Gillard reopened both Manus Island and Nauru facilities.

Well the new Leader of the Opposition, Anthony Albanese, voted against boat turnbacks when it was put to a vote at the ALP conference and there's a growing move within Labor Left to overturn the current policy towards those arriving by boat.

It's important to not conflate a policy as applied to a dwindling number of individuals, however harsh, and our overall immigration policy. We have one of the highest rates of immigration in the world, much higher than places like the UK and the US. I can't think of any other country where there is a state-funded broadcaster dedicated to promoting immigrant languages within the community by broadcasting in Chinese, Hindi, Arabic, Serbian etc. Australia's immigration policy in its totality as well as our policy of multiculturalism at the state-level is more like Trump's nightmare, not his wet dream.

Turbofolkia wrote:Well the new Leader of the Opposition, Anthony Albanese, voted against boat turnbacks when it was put to a vote at the ALP conference and there's a growing move within Labor Left to overturn the current policy towards those arriving by boat.

They put Albanese in? Yeesh.

It's important to not conflate a policy as applied to a dwindling number of individuals, however harsh, and our overall immigration policy. We have one of the highest rates of immigration in the world, much higher than places like the UK and the US. I can't think of any other country where there is a state-funded broadcaster dedicated to promoting immigrant languages within the community by broadcasting in Chinese, Hindi, Arabic, Serbian etc. Australia's immigration policy in its totality as well as our policy of multiculturalism at the state-level is more like Trump's nightmare, not his wet dream.

It's not so much the legal immigration policy as opposed to the illegal immigration policy, of which this would count primarily because they're not arriving in Australia as documented migrants or documented refugees.

Costa Fierro wrote:

Turbofolkia wrote:Well the new Leader of the Opposition, Anthony Albanese, voted against boat turnbacks when it was put to a vote at the ALP conference and there's a growing move within Labor Left to overturn the current policy towards those arriving by boat.

They put Albanese in? Yeesh.

It's important to not conflate a policy as applied to a dwindling number of individuals, however harsh, and our overall immigration policy. We have one of the highest rates of immigration in the world, much higher than places like the UK and the US. I can't think of any other country where there is a state-funded broadcaster dedicated to promoting immigrant languages within the community by broadcasting in Chinese, Hindi, Arabic, Serbian etc. Australia's immigration policy in its totality as well as our policy of multiculturalism at the state-level is more like Trump's nightmare, not his wet dream.

It's not so much the legal immigration policy as opposed to the illegal immigration policy, of which this would count primarily because they're not arriving in Australia as documented migrants or documented refugees.

It's all but confirmed that Albanese is the next Labor leader. I mean, I'd rather see someone new, but at least he's better than Tanja Plibersek, Penny Wong or Chris Bowen, who were some of the other names floating around.

Yeah, I accept the "boat people" policy is one of the strictest in the developed world. Which is quite a contrast when you compare it to our overall migration program or the fact that the the government opened the door for the Vietnamese boat people who arrived in the 70s.

Turbofolkia wrote:It's all but confirmed that Albanese is the next Labor leader. I mean, I'd rather see someone new, but at least he's better than Tanja Plibersek, Penny Wong or Chris Bowen, who were some of the other names floating around.

Having someone experienced is probably a better option. Our PM was only elected as a list MP in 2008, and won an electorate the same year she won the top job.

Yeah, I accept the "boat people" policy is one of the strictest in the developed world. Which is quite a contrast when you compare it to our overall migration program or the fact that the the government opened the door for the Vietnamese boat people who arrived in the 70s.

I would say the difference between these people and the Vietnamese was that the latter were fleeing a communist regime and feared retribution. It's hard to tell what the current lot are fleeing, and whether or not they're genuine refugees or simply economic migrants.

Costa Fierro wrote:

Proctopeo wrote:This should be the plan going forward. On average it's a net positive for everybody, with relatively few getting the short end.

Though I do question how Labor managing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is somehow the fault of Coalition, as the OP implies.

I would say the latter is based down to inaccurate poll reporting more than anything else.

Nate Silver had some interesting things to say about the polling and Australian journalists in an aside for his Silver Bullet points article this week. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ma ... oters/amp/

Anyways, this seems pretty horrific. Something should be done to make the situation more humane.

Costa Fierro wrote:Having someone experienced is probably a better option. Our PM was only elected as a list MP in 2008, and won an electorate the same year she won the top job.

Yeah, at least Albo comes in with the least baggage from the Rudd/Gillard era, unlike Shorten who was instrumental in removing two Prime Ministers, so he was never really trusted by the public because of that.

I would say the difference between these people and the Vietnamese was that the latter were fleeing a communist regime and feared retribution. It's hard to tell what the current lot are fleeing, and whether or not they're genuine refugees or simply economic migrants.

I think so too. Many of the individuals arriving by boat in recent year are from Iran, where there is no war or mass persecution going on, so they are claiming to be homosexuals or converts to Christianity, which as you say, is a lot harder to prove. That's also compounded by the fact that they already had to spend thousands of dollars in flying to Indonesia and then paying a people smuggler to sail them to Australian waters. I guess that explains why there's a lot less sympathy for them, rightly or wrongly.

Where do these refugees come from? Couldn't they find "safe" countries closer to their places of origin, instead of heading to Australia?
Why is there an apparent presumption on some people's part that refugees have a right to demand that a specific country of their choice must admit them, instead of just a right to seek refuge combined with an obligation to accept the first reasonable offer?

And if there aren't enough reasonable offers of shelter then why demonise any one nation for being reluctant to accept large numbers instead of campaigning for a global solution to the whole problem?

Bears Armed wrote:Where do these refugees come from? Couldn't they find "safe" countries closer to their places of origin, instead of heading to Australia?

For the Arab ones, most of them do. Australia gets a minority.

\
Why is there an apparent presumption on some people's part that refugees have a right to demand that a specific country of their choice must admit them, instead of just a right to seek refuge combined with an obligation to accept the first reasonable offer?

…The majority of the countries in the region aren’t exactly safe, and India isn’t a great place to be a Muslim. So, Australia would be among the first reasonable offers.

Thermodolia wrote:And if there aren't enough reasonable offers of shelter then why demonise any one nation for being reluctant to accept large numbers instead of campaigning for a global solution to the whole problem?

One: Australia’s solution is particularly horrific, and two: A global campaign would require the reactionary right wingers to get out of politics before anything could be done, and then you’d have to get everyone else to cooperate…

Emotional blackmail is what this is.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:Emotional blackmail is what this is.

People dying off under extreme conditions, for years on end?

EmOtIoNaL bLaCkMaIl lol

Duhon wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:Emotional blackmail is what this is.

People dying off under extreme conditions, for years on end?

EmOtIoNaL bLaCkMaIl lol

Why not just go to any other country?

Australia seems pretty... out of the way.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Duhon wrote:
People dying off under extreme conditions, for years on end?

EmOtIoNaL bLaCkMaIl lol

Why not just go to any other country?

Australia seems pretty... out of the way.

It's no more out of the way than Europe is, and certainly nearer than north America.

Duhon wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:Why not just go to any other country?

Australia seems pretty... out of the way.

It's no more out of the way than Europe is, and certainly nearer than north America.

Europe is pretty out of the way. It makes one question why refugees didn't stop at closer countries.

The same question applies here.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Duhon wrote:
It's no more out of the way than Europe is, and certainly nearer than north America.

Europe is pretty out of the way. It makes one question why refugees didn't stop at closer countries.

Because they think it may take years or even decades before their homecountry is safe to return; and therefor pick countries where one does not have to spend those years in a tent.
So indeed - the welfare systems and such are a reason. And a pretty understandable one.

The Alma Mater wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:Europe is pretty out of the way. It makes one question why refugees didn't stop at closer countries.

Because they think it may take years or even decades before their homecountry is safe to return; and therefor pick countries where one does not have to spend those years in a tent.
So indeed - the welfare systems and such are a reason. And a pretty understandable one.

Choosy beggars.

And it's nice to know they pick their countries based on how much free shit they can leech from taxpayers.

Shrillland wrote:

Purpelia wrote:Death seems to be a rather poor way of improving ones lot in life if you ask me. But if these are just suicides for their own sake instead of a grand political gesture why are they being reported on at all? Seems to me it's problem solved. Unwanted visitors are dead, Australia wins.

Not everyone in Australia feels that way, otherwise the Greens wouldn't exist. Also, it shows the world how horrific the Pacific Solution actually is to the people that experience it, that they would sooner kill themselves from loss of hope than live another day in the detention centres.

Not everyone is just another way of saying some people but not enough to form a government and thus matter.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

The Alma Mater wrote:
Because they think it may take years or even decades before their homecountry is safe to return; and therefor pick countries where one does not have to spend those years in a tent.
So indeed - the welfare systems and such are a reason. And a pretty understandable one.

Choosy beggars.

And it's nice to know they pick their countries based on how much free shit they can leech from taxpayers.

And Human Smugglers love to lie to these people in order to convince them to pay them large amounts of money to try and sneak them into Australia.

Sometimes in amounts of money Money that they could have actually used to not live so horribly in their own countries. Really the whole system is sick.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

The Alma Mater wrote:
Because they think it may take years or even decades before their homecountry is safe to return; and therefor pick countries where one does not have to spend those years in a tent.
So indeed - the welfare systems and such are a reason. And a pretty understandable one.

Choosy beggars.

And it's nice to know they pick their countries based on how much free shit they can leech from taxpayers.

Wouldn't you ?
Seriously - if your home was destroyed in a war and you were certain that you could not return there for the next 10 years, where would you go with your kids - the country where you will get money and eduation for the kids or the country where you will be forced to play prostitute for scraps ?

If a non-hypocrite you should pick the latter.

‎

Shrillland wrote:Aye, it appears that Manus, Nauru, and Christmas Island will be full of death and misery for years to come. And all because Queensland couldn't do without its damn outdated coal mine.

Queensland is the Florida of Australia.