I know the EO Trump did ALSO opens up refugee status and fast tracking to the Boers/White Afrikanas.
And though the left will call me hypocritical (to which I say go fuck yourself I know what you cheer for) I say it's a great move welcoming THEM and only them to America especially if it saves their lives. Because they have the experience and knowledge to turn desert into productive farmland and knowing how many abandoned towns and unused land is in the US, just saying it might be one way to increase supply of non chemically enriched food into the market and lower the price of them domestically.
I can say it without hypocrisy: Those in life-threatening circumstances can apply for refugee status. In S.A., the government openly expresses, gives speeches on, their desire to genocide subsections of their population. Unfortunately, "nearest safe harbor" isn't a thing for them: Every single neighboring nation two nations deep around ALSO express explicit genocide-mongering towards the exact same classification. Their "nearest safe harbor" is Brazil or Australia, at which point it is a flight, and space is highly limited on those, so you take whichever exit you can, which may be Europe or North America or Russia.
But there's a keyword there: Apply. There is no hypocrisy, because I stand against illegal invasive action disguised as criminal migrant activity. Those following all the legal avenues are doing things properly, I have nothing against them. Some may not get their applications approved, and need to "shop around" several countries until finding one that can take them, that's a sad facet of fleeing your home nation, new nations can be leery of it, even when the reason is clear. I can vote or petition my government to change the migration quotas, but those who satisfy all of the requirements (including the actual getting approval part) are doing things right. And I do hope these poor farmers find arable land to plant new roots safely and swiftly, wherever they might be allowed to.
And zero fucks should be given because all they dispense are lies and propaganda. They take clinically retarded criminals and call them unjustly oppressed innocents who will enrich the country, the data proves that a lie. You take some successful boers who have had their life's work stolen and half their family murdered, and the data now proves the myth true.
I will laugh if under Trump the third world is mostly deported from America and in return, they take in the Boers and have old ghost towns turn into literal garden towns.
Because they have the experience and knowledge to turn desert into productive farmland
And considering how many food plants, processing plants and otherwise have burned down the last few years. And with bill gates buying up all the farmland, we need to protect farmers and farming knowledge.
This is a win/ win. Finally actually protecting white people. White immigrants from Africa are the only meet positive race for contributions too. And we get farmers out of it.
They're a minority that can provide a NET POSITIVE to an area thanks to their skills abd culturally close enough that they can blend into most of western society.
Only thing is that would make them an immigrant if we intend to actually keep them. The point of a refugee is to return them. They can apply for immigration status, after they've been a refugee if they would like, and if (as you say) they can positively contribute.
All aid should indeed be all aid. Luckily, this isn't all aid, and therefore doesn't need to be all aid.
The real issue here is the lack of definitions of the categorizer. What is "life-saving aid"? Is food life-saving? Could be. Condoms could be life-saving if they have shite medical technology and high pregnancy-death rates. Vaccines that ol' Gates likes to test on Africans because testing on rats is inhumane could be considered "life-saving" depending on the ailment. Or maybe "life-saving" is literally blood-plasma donations offered only in the event of immediate environmental disaster. It's too vague a term to be bandied about without definition. The lack of definition is what leads to feature creep, and leads to bloat.
I know the EO Trump did ALSO opens up refugee status and fast tracking to the Boers/White Afrikanas.
And though the left will call me hypocritical (to which I say go fuck yourself I know what you cheer for) I say it's a great move welcoming THEM and only them to America especially if it saves their lives. Because they have the experience and knowledge to turn desert into productive farmland and knowing how many abandoned towns and unused land is in the US, just saying it might be one way to increase supply of non chemically enriched food into the market and lower the price of them domestically.
I can say it without hypocrisy: Those in life-threatening circumstances can apply for refugee status. In S.A., the government openly expresses, gives speeches on, their desire to genocide subsections of their population. Unfortunately, "nearest safe harbor" isn't a thing for them: Every single neighboring nation two nations deep around ALSO express explicit genocide-mongering towards the exact same classification. Their "nearest safe harbor" is Brazil or Australia, at which point it is a flight, and space is highly limited on those, so you take whichever exit you can, which may be Europe or North America or Russia.
But there's a keyword there: Apply. There is no hypocrisy, because I stand against illegal invasive action disguised as criminal migrant activity. Those following all the legal avenues are doing things properly, I have nothing against them. Some may not get their applications approved, and need to "shop around" several countries until finding one that can take them, that's a sad facet of fleeing your home nation, new nations can be leery of it, even when the reason is clear. I can vote or petition my government to change the migration quotas, but those who satisfy all of the requirements (including the actual getting approval part) are doing things right. And I do hope these poor farmers find arable land to plant new roots safely and swiftly, wherever they might be allowed to.
And zero fucks should be given because all they dispense are lies and propaganda. They take clinically retarded criminals and call them unjustly oppressed innocents who will enrich the country, the data proves that a lie. You take some successful boers who have had their life's work stolen and half their family murdered, and the data now proves the myth true.
It's not hypocrisy, it's accuracy.
I will laugh if under Trump the third world is mostly deported from America and in return, they take in the Boers and have old ghost towns turn into literal garden towns.
And considering how many food plants, processing plants and otherwise have burned down the last few years. And with bill gates buying up all the farmland, we need to protect farmers and farming knowledge.
This is a win/ win. Finally actually protecting white people. White immigrants from Africa are the only meet positive race for contributions too. And we get farmers out of it.
To be clear, they are actual refugees, and are an actual ethnic minority being targeted with politicized violence.
Some random muslim Albanian that leers at children at the local elementary school is NOT a fucking refugee.
Yes but even beyond that:
They're a minority that can provide a NET POSITIVE to an area thanks to their skills abd culturally close enough that they can blend into most of western society.
That's an added bonus.
Only thing is that would make them an immigrant if we intend to actually keep them. The point of a refugee is to return them. They can apply for immigration status, after they've been a refugee if they would like, and if (as you say) they can positively contribute.
now restore Rhodesia.
I hate qualifiers. All aid should be all aid.
All aid should indeed be all aid. Luckily, this isn't all aid, and therefore doesn't need to be all aid.
The real issue here is the lack of definitions of the categorizer. What is "life-saving aid"? Is food life-saving? Could be. Condoms could be life-saving if they have shite medical technology and high pregnancy-death rates. Vaccines that ol' Gates likes to test on Africans because testing on rats is inhumane could be considered "life-saving" depending on the ailment. Or maybe "life-saving" is literally blood-plasma donations offered only in the event of immediate environmental disaster. It's too vague a term to be bandied about without definition. The lack of definition is what leads to feature creep, and leads to bloat.
it was toooooooooooooootally worth forcing them to end segregation though
Should have been done years ago.