What can history tell us about countries accepting refugees?

The cotton and the sugar and the house slaves back on the mainland too.

Also here's a quote from 1921:
"The Somali wanders afar. You will find him working as deck hand, fireman, or steward, on all the great liners trading to the East. I know of a Somali tobacconist in Cardiff, a Somali mechanic in New York, and a Somali trader in Bombay, the latter of whom speaks French, English, and Italian fluently".

Ah yes, how could I forget the invaluable contributions of farming machinery

Yes, just see how the Roman Empire flourished after they accepted Gothic refugees in 376.

You needed niggas to operate the cotton gin.

Some of the migrants are good people. Some of them are really, really shit and need to be BTFO.

From the demographics on those pew polls it seems that it's around half and half with them in Europe.

But politicians are either too stupid to realize a problem or too lazy to separate the good from the bad

Why didn't the plantation owners get poor white people to operate the cotton gins?

>some of them are good people
They don't belong in Europe

Between 1970 and 1980, the size of the non-resident population in Singapore doubled. The trend continued in the 1980s and 1990s (Year 2007). Foreigners constituted about 29% of Singapore's total labour force in 2000, which is the highest proportion of foreign workers in Asia (Yeoh 2007). Over the last decade, Singapore's non-resident workforce increased 170%, from 248,000 in 1990 to 670,000 in 2006 (Yeoh 2007). By 2006, there were about 580,000 lower-skilled foreign workers in Singapore; another 90,000 foreign workers are skilled-employment pass holders (Yeoh 2007). As of June 2014, the total population of Singapore stands at 5.47 million: 0.53 million permanent residents, 3.87 million residents and 1.60 million non-residents with work passes and foreign students as well.

In Singapore, the term immigrant workers is separated into foreign workers and foreign talents. Foreign workers refers to semi-skilled or unskilled workers who mainly work in the manufacturing, construction, and domestic services sectors. The majority of them come from places such as People's Republic of China [1], Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, and Thailand, as part of bilateral agreements between Singapore and these countries. Foreign talent refers to foreigners with professional qualifications or acceptable degrees working at the higher end of Singapore's economy. They come from India, Australia, the Philippines, People's Republic of China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Europe, New Zealand and United States.

Sunk costs, mostly.

You don't belong in Europe.

While I don't live in Europe (and probably never will as it's a sinking ship), I have European citizenship thanks to my dad :^)

As long as you understand your proper place (out of Europe, that is), no one needs to get purged.

The ones that are good people too?

That deal is much different than what Europe wants though.

Not for being nice exactly, but for more reasons.

Yeah. Europe isn't god for having people of multiple ethnicities, religions and creeds in. The Americas are a better place for them.

The non fundie ones that is. The fundie ones, of which there are a fucking lot of in Europe, don't belong anywhere. Except maybe Hell.

Anatolia became a shithole after the turks mixed with th greeks.

Latin America became a shithole after the europeans mixed with indigenous people.

Iberia became a shithole after the arabs mixed with spaniards. (Castilla, Aragón, etc...)

America is becoming a shithole after they mixed with latinos.

>Anatolia became a shithole after the turks mixed with th greeks.
>Latin America became a shithole after the europeans mixed with indigenous people.
>Iberia became a shithole after the arabs mixed with spaniards. (Castilla, Aragón, etc...)

This is basically the opposite of what happened.

>Iberia
>Shithole
Anatolia was pretty great for a long time after that happened. Only turned to shit once Nationalism started to exist and then fucked Islamism.

Come to think of it, I think that's the biggest reason Latin America is shit, to. Nationalists and Commies jerking themselves off about a modern "people's" state.

Horn of Africa was pretty based

I researched the Mongol invasion of Hungary in highschool for a project. One of the most interesting parts of it was the way that, prior to the invasion, the country was flooded with Cuman refugees escaping the invasion of Cumania. The king let them stay so long as they agreed to convert to Christianity and offer military support against the inevitable Mongol invasion. The Hungarians and Cumans couldn't get along though, and when it was discovered that there were Cumans among the Mongol forces a mob killed their leader and drove them out of the country. The Cumans then went on to raid the Balkans while Hungary, having lost a major military asset, was quickly conquered by the Mongols.

If you want an example of refugees doing good for their hosts, the Huguenots seem of have been pretty useful for the Prussians/Germnas; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huguenot#Effects

I think the most important factor (out of mnay) when it comes to refugees is whether or not they're culturally compatible with the host society. French Protestants going to Germany is hardly going to cause much turmoil. Steppe nomads entering a feudal agrarian kingdom is another story.

Keep them separate from the population, and send them back when the situation is safe again.

Is Merkunt going to figure that out though? No, of course not.

>horn of africa and based in the same sentence
Don't see that too often.

If both countrymen and refugees can independently moderate their (likely) conflicting values, then it works - all it really takes is a sense of humour and a willingness to listen to their views, no matter how disagreeable.

Countries with high levels of censorship are usually governed by tolerance, which is not to be mistaken for genuine cultural integration. The former perpetuates a cold, othering distance between individual cultures - you have your space, I have mine, but I have no interest in engaging with you - whilst the latter is celebrated far more frequently in dense capital cities.

both of them have their merits, but when coupled together its very easy for a country's ideological landscape to be governed by geography - even within urban centres you find strict racial, cultural or religious spaces which rub shoulders but don't actively participate or engage in either's society. Whereas in more rural areas it becomes such an anomaly to see a person of colour that even the propagandistic news would cause an elderly conservative to start panicking about overpopulation.

Jews

What reasons?

>le funny cuck meemay

It worked for early Rome.

It genuinely depends on the society of the country and the refugees

When they flee from Huns they're the catalyst in destroying already weakened civilizations.

That's impossible to determine idiot.

Modernity has been shit for everyone but Anglo's.

>muh iphones 'n black plagueless world fucking librul arts students not contribootin

The muslim community is well respected in Russia. This picture is Reddit tier.

Don't be silly.
Every Orthodox Christian Russian treats Muslims with a certain sense of suspicion.
Kalmyk Buddhists on the other hand, they don't have an issue with.

>Orthodox Christian Russian

Russians are barely religious if at all.

lol they are

I'm sure all 12 remaining 7 balls agree with you

Jordan is only a functional country because of refugees.

The arrival of humans.

That and billions of American support.

Do they flourish before or after the genocide?

Our media already is getting its pants wet speculating about how the germany of the future will have a fluid murricalike identity .

They are here to stay.

Besides that I remember the indians taking zoroastrian refugees and allowing them to settle seperately after explaining the ways of their faith in order to sort out potential conflict.
They did good to the country and were gratwful about it, but the hindus remained inquestionable rulers and probably settled for social contracts that would be deemed politically incorrect today.

>In the summer of 376, a massive number of Goths arrived on the Danube River, the border of the Roman Empire, requesting asylum from the Huns. They came in two distinct groups: the Thervings led by Fritigern and Alavivus, and the Greuthungi led by Alatheus and Saphrax.

>It is usually supposed that the Goths were to have their weapons confiscated, but the Romans in charge accepted bribes to allow the Goths to retain their weapons, or perhaps due to there being so many Goths and so few Roman soldiers, not all of them could be adequately checked.

>So many people in so small an area caused a food shortage, and eventually the Thervings began to starve. Roman logistics could not cope with the vast numbers.

>This treatment caused the Therving Goths to grow rebellious. Fritigern and the Thervings decided it was time to break the treaty and rebel against the Romans. All the junior officers were killed, the military standards were lost, and the bodies of dead Romans provided the Goths with new weapons and armor. The Thervings then raided and pillaged throughout the region.

>The Therving Goths would now be able to negotiate their position with Rome, with force if necessary, as a unified people inside the borders of the Empire, and would transform themselves into the Visigoths. This change in Rome's relationship with barbarians would lead to the sack of Rome in 410.

It ends like shit

you only need like 5-10% of the population to be niggers who take pride on being niggers to ruin a country

t.from a country that took a couple of millions if niggers in 15 years

Remember white people have dozen of generations of civilizations, niggers have barely 200 years tops

small amounts of numbers spread across the country is fine. But accepting or allowing large numbers to enter without restrictions or screening will be a strain on the infrastructure and politics will mean people will become increasingly anti refugee/foreigner and will stop accepting them alltogether. There's plenty of other countries that can share the burden and could use some new migrants, but overburdening countries European countries with them won't help.

Sweden is gonna find out the hard way that for them to help out refugees they're gonna have to reject them.

france?

Goths did just had a bit of revenge against the Romans.

I don't think we can look at history in this case, at what point in time have we ever seen a movement of peoples on such a grand scale in such a short amount of time? Personally I think we should be looking at the refugee situation from less of an emotional point of view and more of an objective one. With the sheer number of people on the move we're looking at the possible complete and utter demographic subversion of Western Europe. I don't really think it is worth it.

nationalism/racism elements get more active. sometimes they actually do things in their horribly insane and incompetent way.

History teaches that the immigrant that contributes is the one that has no weapons and is in a state of slavery.

Honestly a good deal of these immigrants is going to live in somewhat similar conditions, so I don't see the problem, illegal work is going to paid the least possible, with the least possible human rights, and least access to weapons, because you don't want a slave revolt.

I mean, who do you think profits the most from all this migrating going on?

It's even more efficient than the Atlantic slave trade, because this time the slaves are the ones paying for their boats.

Our government wants to churn out 0.80 euro per hour jobs for them, that is 0.20 less then our welfare receivers get for the lowest working programms used for resocialisation.

Our demographic crisis on the other hand will hit so hard, combined with automisation and lots of completely useless jobs that are artificially held up that they wont stay "slaves" for long as there wont be anything to slave for in 2-3 decades.
Integrating them even as banlieu-tier lowerclass will cost us more then we could gain.

Its infuriating to see how the great potential of western europe to channel its vast ressources gets wasted like this.

[spoiler]/pol/fag reasons[/spoiler]

Not the user you replied to but what do you mean? Do you mean Europe is merely accepting migrant refugees as part of humanitarian desires while Singapore does it to complete the jobs that none of their population wants to do!

Not him but it sounds like that.