Comments
-
@pleroma77, that's a slippery slope if not properly managed. Best solution there is to avoid a direct conflict, offering shelter to refugees and the means to fight for their freedom. If the majority of the culture truly believes and follows it, who are we to hold them to our standards? But if the majority rejects it, they will be made strong enough to overthrow it.
-
@Empshok, I agree with the principle, the issue is in its execution. What is the line you don’t cross and how do you/your government keep to it. Because the same argument can be extended to literally any governmental form that imposes itself from a distance, from genocide down to the most minor of taxes. If Person A believes they shouldn’t pay taxes because it benefits only Person B is that simply the way government works or is that a form of slavery that should be resisted.
-
@pleroma77, yeah, that's the real trick isn't it? So, I'd start with refugee camps in my own country which would evolve into rally camps encouraging refugees to discuss solutions to problems in their country. Camps will not be luxurious; they are temporary shelters for refugees to figure out their options. Cntd.
-
@pleroma77, assimilation into my society would not be the first option, nor would it be common for refugees, unless it benefits my society to do so. The main goals involve returning refugees to their home in better circumstances. Refugee camps will evolve into a sort of embassy. This is where interventions will be most significant; political education comparing their government to others (including mine), and in particular, historical records of revolutions/major governmental alterations with special note to the costs (i.e.; diplomatic vs. aggressive)
Yeah...even if they had truly moral intentions, forcing beliefs on others has never been a good thing, and slavery warrants a modded explosive sniper bullet right between the balls causing all the pee to leak out of them