Hypocrite or Saint: Should the US let in Refugees to Assuage the Migrant Crisis?

originally posted on my personal blog: wildcharismaandwanderlust.wordpress.com

Hypocrite or Saint: Should the US let in Refugees to Assuage the Migrant Crisis?

Oh, the hypocrisy of mainstream media. After weeks – months – of vilifying, demonizing, and dehumanizing refugees, it turns around and cries out at the injustice of children drowning. “For the children!” is the battle cry that rings out of the media. The tune has changed from the idea that the migrant crisis is an invasion of Western civilisation to actual sympathy for the migrants. It is abhorrent that it took a viral picture of a drowned child washed up on the coast of Bordum, Turkey, for the world to recognize the shared humanity of refugees fleeing war and oppression in Syria, etc for a better life.

At this point does the US even have a moral obligation to take in any refugees? A country of 53,041.98 USD as its GDP per capita is considering taking in just 10,000 refugees after months of the E.U. migrant crisis, whereas Germany, a country of 46,268.64 USD GDP per capita, has already welcomed at least 10,000 more asylum seekers than it already has just this previous Saturday. Germany affirms, “Our boat is nowhere near full” to the thousands of migrants making the perilous journey to the Western world from Africa and the Middle East.

How then can America, the land of the free, only deign to accept 10,000 asylum seekers/migrants/refugees? We consider ourselves the pioneers of the developed western democracies, and we should start acting that way. We can do better than 10,000 migrants. We have the resources and capacity to take in much more. We are the Home of the Brave, and if those refugees are courageous enough to risk their lives on a precarious boat on a quest for humane living conditions, they deserve to be welcomed into the United States with open arms.

There have been arguments that the EU’s migrant crisis is too geographically distant from the United States to expect us to get involved. Yet, this country has created a pattern and a history of getting involved in other countries’ affairs. Why is that, as the leader of the free world, we have a precedent of violently interfering with the business of countries that are geographically isolated from us, rather than extending a hand of peace and friendship to asylum seekers from countries in need?

After all, the United States of America was originally founded as a nation of immigrants, of men desperate to cross uncharted waters to find liberty and evade oppressive governments. Much of the United States’ history includes an influx of even more immigrants from countries such as Ireland and Italy who were seeking a good life of honest labor as well as fleeing persecution and famine. Ellis Island, New York, is notable for being a symbol of freedom for immigrants entering the Land of the Free via ships. What makes these migrants any different that we should turn our backs on our brothers and sisters in their time of dire need?

I call up on the Great United States of America to do the “right thing” and accept at least 50,000 migrants onto our shores. They, too, deserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They, too, are human beings just like us. They, too, are worthy of acceptance.