800 war migrants drowned on 22 April by EU policy: why ignoring war victims outside the EU is inhumane
Between 1 January and 21 April 2015, over 1,750 migrants drowned in the Mediterranean, 30 times higher than during the same period of 2014, according to the International Organisation for Migration. These migrants are fleeing the wars in Libya (South of Italy) and Syria (East of Greece).
"LISTEN to EU officials ... and you could be forgiven for forming the impression that the EU is a great champion of downtrodden migrants. But that is not quite how it worked out for the 900 Libyans who drowned in the Mediterranean on Sunday. Last October the EU withdrew the search and rescue operation which could have saved their lives. ... European countries need to defend their borders, but that should never come at the cost of abandoning people in peril. ... We have a European Court of Human Rights overflowing with petty cases such as prisoners’ voting rights and yet European countries collectively are breaching one of the most fundamental moral principles of all: that if you are in a position to help people in great danger you must do so. ... The EU’s excuses for discontinuing the search and rescue operation were that it was too expensive and that it was encouraging more migrants to take to the water.
"Given that the EU has a foreign aid budget of £5.1billion it shows a pretty perverse sense of priorities ... rather than saving people from drowning in the Mediterranean. ... refugees from Libya are taking to the sea in ever greater numbers. That is hardly surprising given the chaos into which Libya has descended since President Gaddafi was deposed in 2011. Yesterday’s sickening pictures of Coptic Christians being executed by Islamic State on a Libyan beach show just what people are escaping from. ... Gaddafi’s huge stockpiles of weapons are now in the hands of warlords and despots far worse than him. Ancient Christian communities which survived his rule are now being driven out. ... David Cameron, indeed, initiated the action.So why are we doing so little now to help Libyan refugees? ... hardly a word has been spoken on foreign policy and how we should be helping Libyans and others caught up in Islamic fundamentalism. ...
"Those who speak out against migrant camps in Calais and the upmarket hotel accommodation given to asylum seekers are often accused of trampling on needy people who are escaping persecution. ... What we should be doing in the case of Libya is helping people before they are driven to board boats. ... It will cost a lot of money to run refugee camps in Libya but if there ever was a proper use of Britain’s aid budget this is surely it. ... There was nothing more ridiculous than the sight, at last Thursday’s BBC debate, of party leaders indulging in sanctimonious ... generalities about how they were standing up for humanity – and then having absolutely nothing to say about the human tragedy in the Mediterranean. Most countries wracked by civil war eventually become peaceful again."
“The [European] Commission is the Executive, it is the Government of Europe, and it has the sole rights to propose legislation; it does so in consultation with 3000 secret committees, staffed mainly by big business and big capital, and all the legislation is proposed in secret.
“And once something becomes a European law, it is the European Commission themselves who have the sole right to propose repeal or change of that legislation.
“The Community Method ... the means by which the European Commission makes law and holds law, is actually the very enemy of the concept of democracy itself. Because it means in any member state there is nothing the electorate can do to change a single piece of European law.”
Civil war by multiculturalism, where dictatorships end up replacing democracy, as in the EU
Dictators arise in volatile multicultural countries to keep minority ethnic communities from turning to terrorist disruption, by use of spies and abductions by secret police, which is why Assad was using dirty methods in Syria, like Mubarak in Egypt, and why Saddam and Gadaffi ruled like thugs to keep their countries together despite opposition groups. The only real alternative to dictatorship to hold together a highly volatile, multicultural "democracy" is to split up the country, as happened for instance when Yugoslavia broke up into Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia in the 1990s. People with different cultures and financial ideas need to break up.
This is why the EU is a disaster, leading to hell for the Greeks, Spanish, Portugese, and Irish, while Germany and France profit at everybody else's expense. Dictators are always the ones who try to unify people, doing so always by the use of scare mongering and fear mongering about a "common enemy" like Russia or America. The EU is a superstate headed up by France and Germany. Numerous superstates from the Roman Empire to Napoleon and more recent dictators in Germany and Russia tried to coerce small nations, imprisoning or starving millions who disagreed (Stalin starved 40 million or so in the 1930s, even more than Hitler). The Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and the British Empire were similarly dictatorial "imperialists" but they all eventually collapsed.
"Democracy" doesn't really work in any country where politics is a matter of religion or ethnic culture, because it gives power to those majority cults which gets the votes of their supporters regardless of what they do, what policies they have, etc.
The largest ethnic tribe or religious cult then ends up in power, and the smaller ones lose in the elections, turning disillusioned with "democracy" because they have no power, eventually turning to terrorism/civil war when some spark causes discontent to erupt.
The problem is multiculturalism: the mapped out "boundaries of the country" overlap several tribes which traditionally don't admire each other, but can't be bothered to fight unless given some real motivation like money or ethnic cleansing, such as the discovery of oil somewhere, or religious intolerance (like ISIS) taking some tribes.
People prefer celebrity leadership to common sense when it comes to war prevention. To prevent war, economically stable democracy is required, and that will not be the case where multiculturalism makes effective slaves of minority cultures whose dissent is not tolerated by the majority:
“Free peoples ... will make war only when driven to it by tyrants. ... there have been no wars between well-established democracies. ... the absence of wars between well-established democracies [has a probability of being coincidence] less than one chance in a thousand. ... robust statistics ... When toleration of dissent has persisted for three years ... a new republic [is] ‘well established.’”
- Dr Spencer Weart, Never at War: Why Democracies Will Not Fight One Another (Yale University Press, 1998, ch. 1).