More or less every person who has access to news and information know about the current refugee situation, which is mainly caused by the terror group ISIL. Of course terror isn’t the only reason people are fleeing from their countries and seeking better conditions. Hunger, poverty and lack of human rights are also among the reasons people chose to travel to Europe and then risking to get kicked out because of the politics in the European countries they enter.
The UN recently reckoned that approximately 4.000 refugees are coming to Europe, every single day. Many countries in Europe have problem coping with the large amount of refugees and it could make a possible threat to these countries economy. But should the potential threat be a reason now to accept these people into the more rich and developed countries? Would it be fair to send back the refugees to the terrible conditions they came from, because they will cost a state money?
…show more content…
But, is that equal to just accepting every single person who enters a European country and demands asylum? Again, that’s a no. Every person, except if they are truly racists, must agree that these people have to be helped in some way or another, but the question that stands is how. To me, the best possibility is to help them in their own communities. Instead of having them flee half of Europe, they should only have to flee to a neighbouring country. Other countries, in my opinion every country that’s a part of the UN, should then help the host countries financially. This would spare the refugees from having, to have to push themselves through that journey and risk not getting the help they need. They wouldn’t have to experience such a huge culture shock, moving to a more western-minded country inevitably would bring. Learning a new language would be avoided and they wouldn’t have to face a large amount of stigmatization. No one deserves to get judged solely because of who they