World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Climate change is going to create millions upon millions of migrants
We should tell right wingers that if they don't stop climate change there's gonna be more migrants. That will unironically work better than warning them about the world ending.
Their solution will be "shoot migrants" not "solve climate change".
They already know the threats, they're just easily duped and believe it's all made up or that the claimed threats are exaggerated.
Wait until India implodes because of water scarcity.
Millions will become a billion.
You can say no to migrants. Just dont let them in. Its that easy.
Yes. Just tell millions upon millions of suffering people they can't cross the invisible line to find refuge.
Genius strategy.
Do you think the people who fear migration care the slightest bit about anyone but themselves?
An awful number of them would support attacking rafts filled with refugees with military warships.
Nah, but the sinking rafts bullshit is a super dangerous ploy and needs to be addressed somehow. We cant incentivize it. Maybe just jail everyone involved so no one wants to pay just to sit in an Italian prison?
I'm sure people who accept the realistic risk of drowning - most cannot swim - will be discouraged by the threat of... being in a prison with better living conditions than their home?
Thats true. But something has to done about the sinking rafts.
How would letting them across improve anyones situations?
Me me me me me me me me me me me ...
You're like a broken record already.
Are you suggesting people culturally removed from your own are a threat to you in some way?
Cause damn. That'd be embarrassing.
Like did they train your job in pantomime?
Or are your own police not more violent to their citizens?
What is it that allowing immigrants in doesn't improve?
I can rather confidently say that there are cultures with values that are a threat to me, my society and my values, yes.
Not in the slightest.
No. For a very long time our police was amongst the least violent in the world. Probably still is.
It reduces the productivity of society. Most certainly on an output/capita level, probably even on a total output level. Previously we were able to afford huge amounts of support to organizations such as the UNHCR (almost 1% of GDP) - money that could be used to make the places these people are moving away from better. That isn't the case anymore.
The solution isn't to move everyone to developed countries, it is to improve the situation in developing countries. We can't help with that if our country is an unstable mess of migrant gangs attacking each other and the rest of us.
lol I'd be embarrassed to have such a narrow-minded worldview. You should be too. But go on and stay stubborn, I don't care. I'd tell you to enjoy your life, but that won't be possible for you. Is sad.
It's amazing how quickly you resorted to toothless personal insults when you ran out of relevant things to say. Would be sad if it wasn't so funny. Thanks!
You're correct. I tagged you as "low value user" and will only respond to you as such from now on, because I don't value your opinion in any way shape or form.
Cheers! 🥂
Well yes, some cultures are dangerous. Rape culture for instance.
As for jobs, short sighted management will always take a lower skilled worker for less money.
Honestly, I dont see how immigration helps the worker, theyre scabs in my book.
...rape culture? Wtf kind of truth social bullshit are you on about? This question is rhetorical.
As for jobs, only if you have 0 fucking skills. Get good and stfu.
Your arguing that "foreigners are highly skilled professionals here to take our jobs but also they're criminals and rapist boogymen"
They can't be both, unless they're, ya know, just regular humans like your neighbor.
Christ.
I see you didnt bother actually reading my comment. Go back and try again.
lol no thanks 🥂
Wat?
Fuck off and watch "A Christmas Carol" again... but this time try and realize that Ebenezer Scrooge isn't meant to be a role model.
Did you reply to the wrong comment? I said nothing about prisons or unions?
No, this was the right comment to respond to - your comment lacked empathy to why people might become migrants and reminded me a lot of Ebenezer Scrooge commenting on the poor without empathy to the fact that he was contributing to their poverty.
Us first-world nations play a large role in the global warming that drives climate refugees... I think it's extremely immoral to just put up a big wall and tell people fleeing desertification to go somewhere else after making their home uninhabitable.
How does letting someone move to your country fix their country?
It doesn't, but we're all humans and if some of us wreck another person's country it feels unjust to leave that person stateless.
There might be a basic misunderstanding here... at the rate climate change is going some areas of the earth that are currently inhabitable are becoming uninhabitable. There are farms being swallowed up by desert and the people who were fed by that farm have no where to go.
Do you know what the word sustainability means, though?
Or are you just piling us all into one stereotype and now I have to starve along with everyone else while the rich that caused the problem are the only ones that can afford to live?
This is xmunk's secret plan for cleansing migrants and low socioeconomic majorities off the planet. Put them all in areas that can't logistically support them until only those that could afford to survive remain. The same that ruined the climate.
Yup, I'm an evil villain. In actuality I just don't believe in borders or nationalities - being born into a western country is an extreme advantage and it's a matter of fucking chance. I dislike discriminating based on country of origin and I think we should strive to ensure everyone gets as equitable a chance at success as we can.
Also, our climate isn't under pressure because we're at the population limit for earth - climate change is happening because of greed. In theory we can fucking fix it if we work together.
Youre not evil, just short sighted and you favor foreigners over your countries citizens.
There are people who live in the artic and those who live in deserts. People even farm in the desert. It might not be great, but itll be more than inhabitable.
You do know that not very many people live in those places, right? It wouldn't be sustainable. India has over a billion people and the Himalayan glaciers they depend on for water are not getting replenished.
And moving them here doesnt fix the sustainability problem either. It just moves sustainability problems here.
I'm pretty sure moving from a place that has no water to a place that has water does, in fact, fix the problem. Maybe you would prefer them to just die?
Who says therell be water here?
If there isn't, enjoy dying of thirst.
But generally, places that don't rely on glaciers for their water do better than places that do in a warming world.
Okay, so the plan is move tye entirity of china here then? All 1.4 billion people?
Thats not a reasonable goal. Even you moved in 10 percent of china, youd overwhelm every social service and everything else for that matter. And youd be leaving 90% of china to die while destroying the west's ability to function.
Migration is not a solution.
Now you're moving the goalposts. And you've moved them more than once already.
First you claimed that it would be sustainable for the over a billion people in India to stay where they were because it's possible to survive in tundras and deserts.
Then you said that moving them to a place where water exists wouldn't fix the problem of them dying due to a lack of a water.
Then you asked why water would exist in the new place, which was just a silly question for anyone who understands basic geography.
Now you're talking about moving all of China, when China wasn't even discussed.
And at each step, you haven't gone back to the previous one and acknowledged it was a silly thing to say.
I never said India, this is the first comment india was uttered. Youre the one that brought up glaciers. And China is largely watered by glaciers, its the logical next part in the discussion. And even it was India, they also have over a billion people and you face the same problem with simply too many people.
Immigration is not a solution.
So you're not going to acknowledge anything else you said. I guess there's no point in this conversation continuing.
Just let them slowly cook in the global oven that our industrial consumerist society has created?
Oh, you must mean the ones who migrate the properly legal way?
Living in a stable safe country is a privilege we're born into, much like inheriting a trust fund. It's an ethical duty to take in people in a less fortunate position. The emphasis should not be on numbers of immigrants so much as better integration once they're here. And also on helping less fortunate countries (yes I realise why they aren't as fortunate) become more developed. People don't tend to migrate if the place they live is good. Oil wars are not helpful.
I think its not ethical to just let in everyone who was born in a third world country. That doesnt even make sense, its just not sustainable, fucks a lot of things up, and doesnt solve problems for anyone. It makes their country worse, make our country worse, what is the plan here?
The alternative would be helping those countries most affected to prevent migrations from happening. In practice, that would look like giving them [Shitloads] of (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8694300/) money .
Like, regardless of ethics, those people will not stop existing once climate change makes their homelands unlivable. The two available plans appear to be "solve climate change as rapidly as possible and bootstrap poor countries up to developed countries pro Bono" or "shoot migrants at the border".
No clearly, but people don't usually want to leave their home country to live. It's usually just people who are displaced or academics. A good solution would be offering scholarships to gifted students from developing countries on the condition that they then use that education within their home country. But in the case of war /persecution, yes every country needs to do their part. Integration classes actually help.
Just look at the difference between Norway and Sweden. Norway has compulsory classes for non eea immigrants to learn about what it means to live in Norway and will actually help people get into work. Sweden sticks them in husby and puts them on benefits. Which country has more problems?