Any proposed solution to the European Migrant Crisis that doesn’t involve the source of the supply of migrants isn’t worth considering. It is undisputable by this point that many of those entering or attempting to enter Europe are fortune seekers, economic migrants, welfare parasites and not genuine refugees. There are many good arguments against allowing all the migrants into Europe to settle. If you have a desire to help those less fortunate, the only argument you really need is the cost differential. You can house and take care of 12-13 migrants in bordering areas of Africa and the Middle East for every single migrant you settle in expensive Europe. I hereby accuse soft-hearted migrant welcoming leftists of harboring hate in their hearts.
What other reason could they have for preferring to save one person rather than a dozen? It is also an inconvenient fact that paying off human trafficking rings to transport them into welfare candy land (Northern Europe) is expensive. Therefore, those that complete the journey here are the most well off and those most able to take care of themselves. They are the ones that need help the least. What about those left behind? They are the ones that really need help. In addition, those people with the most money and brains leaving their countries of origin is sabotaging those countries future development. Who is going to create jobs and opportunities for lifting the economic and social development of the country?
The steady and endless supply of new migrants must be addressed head on. The amount of people in the world that would enjoy better living conditions if they could move to Europe number in the billions. Are we proposing to drain the rest of the world of their people? Solving this by resettling migrants here is like trying to put out a fire with a serial arsonist on the loose. You are not really attacking the cause of the misfortune. The amount of new people born in poor undeveloped countries is staggering. Their birth-rates are usually several times those found in Western nations.
If we truly care about a permanent and sustainable solution to this problem, we must address the migrant supply. First, after shutting the borders of Europe (and thus saving several thousand lives in the Mediterranean each year) we must acknowledge that there are not enough resources in Africa to sustain its huge population. Africa has continually suffered from starvation for a long time now. The key reason for their high birth-rate is the necessity of having many children in order to ensure that at least a few survive into adulthood.
If Europe’s borders are sealed for good and this is cemented politically we can move ahead. Medical aid could be given very cost effectively to poor African nations conditional on them preventing the outpouring of migrants. Giving daily multivitamin pills is a ridiculously cost-effective means of saving the most amount of people from certain aspects of malnutrition and disease. More would survive into adulthood, and the need for high birth-rates would disappear. There would then be more food to go around, a self reinforcing positive feedback loop. Conditions would then be ripe for economic development. A bright future for poor Africans would then become possible. The second prong of aid would be family planning. Condoms, birth control pills, vasectomies and so on would limit the strain on Africa’s limited precious resources. A prerequisite for future development.
To the critics linking the family planning aspect of this plan with eugenics, you can scream all you want. Both you and I know that you’re not truly interested in solving the actual problem. After all, the instructions on a fire extinguisher reads: aim at the base of the fire. The best part of this proposed plan? It helps both Europe and Africa at the same time. Win-Win.