Portugal announces immediate granting of visas for Ukrainian refugees
theportugalnews.com
theportugalnews.com
Now not so good tidbit. Just few months ago we had a lot of people lured into Belarus by Lukashenko trying to come to Europe. Poland treated them really really poorly. Catching them after crossing border and pushing them back. The society was split among pro-refugees and anti. The political parties almost all focused on "protecting our border".
I was afraid that this natalist sentiment might repeat, even though Ukrainians are one of the closest people to Poland. I am very happy to note I haven't heard anyone speaking against refugees from Ukraine, not on twitter not on facebook not by far-right parties, altough I am sure some people are silent about their opinions.
Separate a regime from a nation. I don't know any Russian (I’m Russian in Spain) who would have any negativity to the Poles. Maybe it would be better to stop the hatred from another side as well.
Those people were from the middle east, pakistan, afghanistan and so on no? A big difference when it's your neighbor in need.
There are many people from the Middle East living, studying and working in Poland, Hungary, Romania, Czechia, etc. without any issues. One for them is my dentist and another in engaged to one of my cousins and is studying medicine to become a doctor.
The big difference is they came here legally and with money, studies, jobs or skills to support themselves, so the locals only have an issues with the illegal economic chancers trying to game the asylum and welfare systems, and nothing against people from the Middle East.
Those welfare migrants usually end up in countries like Sweden or Germany anyway, where whatever is left of the middle class taxpayer, is "happy" to give away half their income to support them indefinitely, with the wishful thinking that they will eventually contribute to their economy, pension system, and reverse the declining birthrates. At least they were right about the latter.
What the Poles see when they look at Ukranians are the same thing that most of the anglosphere sees -- fair skinned Caucasians. That's why "everyone" cares and why this relatively uneventful situation is getting this amount of news coverage.
You must know very little of history, to think coverage is only due to race.
Show me another country with the same nuclear arsenal, or with the military might, invading countries this large, in a location which has started two world wars.
Playing the race card is... weak.
Exclusively due to race.
> Show me another country with the same nuclear arsenal, or with the military might, invading countries this large, in a location which has started two world wars
Might as well say "show me another country also named Ukraine." How about Syria? Where Poland, specifically, sent its forces to train separatist rebel groups and had an airforce positioned to support the rebel offensives? Help me understand the difference, considering when refugees from Syria get to Poland they're rounded up, beaten up and expelled.
> Playing the race card is... weak.
Calling it weak helps skirt around the cognitive dissonance at seeing two tragedies, exactly the same barring ethnicity, and fabricating scenarios that justify one and disregard the other. The same people who are fascinated with what's happening in Ukraine are the same ones who had "Je suis Charlie" over their Facebook profile photos in 2015. They see fair skinned Europeans in crisis and their opinions change dramatically. This is an extension of missing white woman syndrome[0] and part of the training the Western world receives as children to disregard the suffering of non-anglophone and non-Europeans.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome
If Poland invade the Ukraine, most people wouldn't be 1/10th as interested.
It is almost like you have no grasp of the history of NATO, the USSR, two world wars, nuclear weapons, and the power to deploy military might.
Can rebels in Syria destroy the entire planet with nukes? Can a conflict in Syria cause all NATO nations to be pulled into mutual defense agreements?
Quite literally, this single act of Russia's could have the potential result of turning entire planet into ash, or dragging 100 countries to war, or seeing a new empire carved out.
And I haven't even discussed China's role in all of this, current and future.
This invasion, this single act, could result in billions dying.
But sure, it's all just about race.
The rebels in Syria can't destroy the planet with nukes... and neither can the rebels in Ukraine. The conflict in Syria has a higher likelihood of pulling in NATO members considering NATO is already in Syria, with Russia, the US and Turkey all engaging in direct combat there.
> Quite literally, this single act of Russia's could have the potential result of turning entire planet into ash, or dragging 100 countries to war, or seeing a new empire carved out.
Except none of that is true. You know, because Ukraine is not a part of NATO and there are literally no NATO forces in Ukraine?
It's funny how you seem to ignore that NATO nations are already engaged in war with Russia's proxies in Syria -- in some cases seeing direct confrontation -- but somehow Ukraine is the one that matters. But it's not about race.
> This invasion, this single act, could result in billions dying.
The single act being invading a country filled with fair skinned Caucasians, you mean.
> But sure, it's all just about race.
Considering the pearl clutchers happily armed the rebels in Syria and supported its partition, and are now crying doom and gloom when Russia does the same in Ukraine, then it is about race.
Let me know when the Polaks on the far right start kicking up a stink about the European refugees about to enter the country and you'll hopefully start to see it's all about ethnicity.
That's fantastic. A person I know is in Ukraine (currently at the border with Poland, AFAIK) and he reports multiple-kilometer long queues of people on foot trying to cross the border. It sounds like they'll need all the help they can get.
Poland has bitter painful recent memory of aggression from Soviet Union just recently. Now there is a real risk obliteration of whole Ukraine, who just recently got independence after hundreds of years of invasion.
But also, most countries have had endlessly shifting borders, with endlessly shifting immigration, emigration, and cultures are a result.
All current states, are at best a few hundred years old, really.
England has had mostly unchanged borders since 927!
You treat an attack very differently.
If Poland let the refugees in, I expect Belarus would pull more stunts like this. It was no good for anyone.
There is some mild tension with Ukrainians coming to Poland as low-cost labor, but at the end of the day, it's the same culture. Or at least it was before Poland started to Westernize its culture. Honestly, I think the right solution here is to reform the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Poland, Lithuania, and Ukraine really ought to be one country. If Latvia, Estonia, Slovakia, or Moldova want to join in, the more the merrier. Belarus and Russia, when they're ready.
Estonia, by the way, is the odd man out. It has the least cultural or ethnic connection; much less than you'd expect. But I think it'd be a happy marriage. It's a compatible kind of diversity, where each side brings something complementary rather than conflicting and both sides benefit.
All of this happened before Ukraine closed its borders to fighting-age men.
(But then, I like my adopted city state home. So I might be biased.)
Tear down the borders between countries instead as much as possible. Like eg the EU does (despite all its other faults).
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/research/2021/09/poland-be...
If we had free Belarus by today, this war wouldn't have happened.
Without constant pressure on the capital, Ukrainian military would have easy time doing a general offensive on southern direction, or maybe even reaching Rostov, and Volgograd.
It was very appaling to see Polish government initially agreeing to sneak in weapons bought by volunteers, and then detaining it on the border.
Russia will lose.
I mean he basically flew refugees from the Middle East to Belarus for the purpose of putting them in Poland border and embarrassing Poland.
When a foreign power is trying to violate a neighbors borders, it’s fair to talk about protecting your borders.
Is anyone actually OK with Poland taking any refugee Lukashenko leaves at your border?
Portugal has a large and extremely well integrated Ukrainian community. Ukrainians constitute the second-largest foreign community residing in Portugal.
But not to take away from the solidarity which is indeed genuine. Portugal also has an extremely low birth rate problem and needs tax payers fast in order to prevent state pension funds' collapse in the next decades. So there is also a secondary motive here to attract families to Portugal.
I just wish I go with my car and help someone come to Portugal.
Ukraine birth rate: 1.23 births per woman (2019)
Portugal birth rate: 1.42 births per woman (2019)
Ukraine-to-Portugal migration is just displacement of low-birth rate white people from one place to another.
If you get only young immigrants, it does help you, to the detriment of their place of origin, which is left with an older population. A lot of people who migrate for economic reasons and such are young or younger. 65-year-olds don't often get up and emigrate somewhere. But I don't suspect that's the case under war time evacuation though.
He kept in touch with my in-laws, eventually started his own business and has since brought his family over. Last we heard one of his kids graduated from college here.
More countries should do this; Germany and my home country the Netherlands in particular. I live in Berlin currently as a foreigner (perfect place for that). Lots of people from all over eastern Europe live here, lots of companies here outsource all over eastern Europe, lots of people that I know either come from or have friends/family from the Ukraine. Also, about 200k people of Russian origin live here that chose to move here after the wall fell. And I assume quite a few Ukranians.
I remember meeting refugees from the former Yugoslavia in the nineties. I think 25 years later, a lot of those people did pretty well. I actually visited Bosnia for work last summer and met a guy that went to school in Munich. Likewise a lot of Syrian refugees that ended up in Germany seem to be doing OK. Quite a few ended up here in Berlin. In times of war, people are generally grateful if you accommodate them; even if it isn't always with open arms.
It's usually the smart, free thinkers that need to flee. Incidentally those are also people likely to find a way to make it in life; start businesses; or otherwise be generally successful.
The US is full of such people that emigrated there after various wars in the last century. Now is not a time to be xenophobic about this sort of thing.
Also we need to talk about volume and skills - the current Ukrianian diaspora in the EU is highly skilled, young and relatively small. What happens when you inject millions more (Ukraine has a population of 40+ million) including the elderly and the unskilled? It's a different ballgame.
I think the best we can hope for is for the situation there to relax and for the poor Ukranians to be able to live peacefully in their home country. For most people - living in a foreign country is hard and not a blessing.
The contemporary US spends a lot on welfare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social_we... says it's about 30% of GDP.
Now this..
They seem to have their priorities right
I really hope we are not going to see an iron curtain v2! But there is hope: Finland, the Baltic States, Poland. Russian rule never lasts.
Even skilled immigration depresses wages of skilled workers. There's an analysis from the Dutch government Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis on this, which shows essentially this, which can be found in English translation on https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/....
One thing that I think is neglected even in this study however, is that bringing in even a very productive person increases things like housing competition, and even just bringing in a few people can cause prices to balloon, just as a tiny shortage can cause prices to balloon.
It would therefore almost certainly be better to have Ukraine functioning and for Europe to trade with an ever more integrated and ever more well-functioning Ukraine.
Letting these people in isn't something is good for the economy, it's a matter of protecting people from war-- i.e. they're refugees.
Indeed, it sound crazy to me for Europe to be able to successfully absorb 40+ million Ukraianians. And even if the guy is only talking about absorbing the young and skilled, it's just gonna hurt those in the Ukraine who will be left behind.
> There is a massive shortage of labour in large parts of Europe
Citation needed?
They're well-integrated in the sense of "keeping your head down and not causing any trouble." If you cause trouble, you're liable to be deported, lose your job, or have other consequences.
Tolerance for foreigners has gone down in the past two decades by quite a lot. There's a perception the current culture wars have helped, but for most immigrants, they've done the opposite.
“Slavs” is a European term. I worked with a bunch of Eastern Europeans in Canada and everyone is like “oh, that’s the former communist countries”.
The reputation of “slavs” in Europe does not carry to the Americas. They’re just “europeans” to us.
I used to chuckle s bit when Europeans would say “oh im from the Lorraine region” or “my ancestors were from Prussia”. I’m like “mother f’er nobody gives a shit, here you’re just white”.
Next time you're watching your favorite TV show, have a look at the person with the Slavic accent, and see what stereotype they play.
Are they the evil villain? The awkward nerdy pervert? The village crazy?
Pay attention for a few months. In my experience, 100% of the portrayals are based on stereotypes. Those stereotypes show up in schools, workplaces, and courts.
I would agree that in general “foreign accent” had certain connotations, but I would challenge any average North American to identify a Russian vs Polish vs Yugoslavian accent.
And maybe my take is because I’m from a part of North American that was pretty much settled by Eastern Europeans? I mean they were most of the farmers back in the early 1900’s.
The SNL episode this weekend, talking about Ukraine, went with the Eastern European prostitute stereotype.
It's worth thinking about what Yakov Smirnoff was loved for. The black actors in minstrel show were often beloved too. So was Aunt Jemima.
CBS just called us "relatively civilized" and "relatively European." Everyone picked up on the anti-Muslim racism, but few noticed that Eastern Europeans took a middle rung. More human than the Middle East, but less human than Europe.
https://twitter.com/imraansiddiqi/status/1497607326487826435
That does not ring true at all. I am one of the slavic minority who lived in UK for 2,5 years and I do not remember a single instance of being treated poorly for being slavic. And I have not heard anything like that from any of my friends (and I believe I would know - people talk about these things). Sure, I went West, made some money and returned to my country. But not because I was treated poorly - many people have this plan from the beginning: you go to UK, improve your English, gain a lot of experience, make money and use those to jumpstart your career after you return.
Portugal is extremely welcoming of new residents.
It's Putin's war. He is destroying lives. He is a war criminal.
I would rather be cold than see Russians at the end of my street.
That is a bit of a broad generalization. The baltic countries, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, Austria and Germany are the main dependents on Russian gas, most of the EU27 are not energy dependent on Russia.
Angola standards of living improved remarkably in the last few years, has oil reserves as big as Saudi Arabia. Oil production from Angola has increased so significantly that Angola now is China's biggest supplier of oil.
There are plenty of protocols between Portugal and Angola, including visas, access to education, etc.
Do you realize that by asking that question, you're undermining the situation in Ukraine, right?
What is happening in Ukraine, Portugal is not complicit in anyway. But in Angola and other places where Portuguese complicity was involved were such warm gestures and measures so forthcoming is the question.
The point here is that the Portuguese government (the current one, not the one in power during the dictatorship which ended over 40 years ago, and which you seem to be confused about) has done a good thing, and for that they deserve praise.
So far stopping giving us visas is quite like how European countries were turning away jews fleeing the Nazi Germany. Jews should have stayed and 'disrupted the regime internally'.
Also the comparison with the Holocaust is extremely tasteless.
[0] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ukraine-war-...
[Edit: see my response further down, this looks to have been addressed by a change in the Home Office's wording]
> "Ukrainian nationals in Ukraine (who aren’t immediate family members of British nationals normally living in Ukraine, or where the British national is living in the UK), are currently unable to make visa applications to visit, work, study or join family in the UK.”
The Home Office site[0] now says:
> "Ukrainian nationals in Ukraine (who aren’t immediate family members of British nationals normally living in Ukraine, or where the British national is living in the UK), are currently unable to make visa applications to visit, work, study or join family in the UK through a VAC in Ukraine. If you are able to safely travel, you can apply through a VAC in one of the nearby countries."
Which of course is in line with the reality of the consulate being closed in Kyiv.
[0] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/support-for-family-members-of-br...
There's geopolitics to play here, so I expect the UK will take on Ukrainians regardless of domestic pandering (Eastern European migration is not seen positively by many British people).
Which is incredibly ironic.
I love how Jimmy Carr put it: "These damn Romanians and Bulgarians, coming over here, stealing the jobs of our Poles." LOL
Or that British TV show 'Benefits Street' or something like that, where the only house on the street who's inhabitants were not on welfare and actually had jobs, was full of Romanians.
We have a rotten political system (and political class), but many cannot fathom their surrounding and thus we end up blaming immigrants and the poor as per usual.
And because a 50 year old man, is alway more able than a 20 year old woman?
Because he was trained 30 years ago? Maybe?
Come on. The context was "women and children" as the vulnerables. And the order is, men must stay, not military trained men.
I bet there are loads of "vulnerable" women who have stayed to fight.
> the men involved are not vulnerable to harm [...]?
That's not what I said. I'll restate my thought more plainly: in any kinetic conflict, you are more vulnerable without military training. Full stop.
Again, service is compulsory for men in Ukraine. So, generally speaking, yes - a 50 year old man with a few years of military experience will be more capable in a conflict than a 20 year old woman with no military experience whatsoever. The ability to shoot, move, and communicate - under extreme pressure, and hopefully coordinated with others - is not something you can muster up on-the-fly.
Are there exceptions to that? I'm sure of it. But we should try not to argue a position which hinges largely on outliers.
> I bet there are loads of "vulnerable" women who have stayed to fight.
You should feel welcome to find and provide data to support your assertion.
Your attempts to explain away bias, are not very convincing.
Not to mention the fact:
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/12/27/ukraine-requi...
and
https://nypost.com/2022/02/10/meet-ukraines-gun-toting-femal...
But yeah, sure, it's never sexist to think a woman can't possibly be doing something, right?
Women are not vulnerable. Stop with the shifting sands, attempt to reframe the statement.
Women are not vulnerable.
Recognizing that most of an army is comprised of men is not automatically sexist; clearly the Ukrainian military doesn't prohibit women from joining.
Encouraging people with no military background or ability to leave a conflict zone is not sexist, neither is it ageist or ableist. It is purely a matter of survival.
On that note, I'm going to take some breaths and be thankful for the privilege to argue about nuance on the internet.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30477450.
The UK government has in that domain a lot of work to do.
Also in insanely damning excerpt from that conversion with Putin and Sergei:
Sergei: "I support the proposal about entry of Donetsk and Luhansk into Russian Federation."
Putin: "We are not talking about that. We are not discussing that. We're talking about recognizing their independence or not. Yes or no?"
Sergei: "Yes. I support the proposal to recognize their independence."
Also both Donetsk and Luhansk leaders became members of Putin's United Russia political party in 2021. Just in case anyone had any doubts about Russian's intentions for independent states.
Under no circumstances can or should it be removed. Even being able to give it up of ones own initiative is a morally repugnant, if necessary, compromise.