Despite President Trump tweeting about it being a “dumb deal” and the Left’s whining about “disparaging” and “denigrating” comments of refugees, the proposed swap of Middle Eastern for Central American refugees between Australia and America is proceeding, according to Reuters.
Under the deal, the United States would receive approximately 1,250 refugees mostly from Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq who are currently in camps outside of Australia, while Australia would receive an unstated number of refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras who are currently in America.
The soft-hearted among us have always enjoyed making victims of the disadvantaged (or the non-white), a phenomena known as “the soft bigotry of low expectations,” wherein society expects less of people of color, of lower classes, or of different cultures. We consider this type of discrimination not demoralizing but humane.
In advocating that the United States follow through on this “refugee swap,” it seems we have ignored the deal’s most glaring detail: that Australia won’t allow Middle Eastern refugees to set foot on Aussie soil. According to complaints by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, the approximately 1,200 refugees have been “forcibly transferred to the remote Pacific island nation of Nauru,” where they “suffer severe abuse, inhumane treatment, and neglect.”
What does it say that the Australian prime minister spent “months and months of very careful planning” trying to reach a deal that, in the end, bars Middle Easterners but welcomes Central Americans?
Can we safely assume, since both demographics are brown, that the problem is not skin color but belief, culture? Ought it matter to America, since it matters to Australia, that one group of refugees is predominantly Muslim (and outlawed) while the other is Catholic (and welcomed)?
These are rhetorical questions. The answers are yes, particularly in light of Amnesty International’s claim that (beyond their barbaric, oppressive, bigoted religious beliefs) many of the refugees now bound for America have “dire mental health problems.”
Should we view this as “gross and racist,” or, considering that huge portions of the Muslim global community support terrorism in the name of Islam, and vast majorities support Sharia Law, is Australia’s lack of tolerance for this type of immigration, you know, smart?
And if sending away Middle Eastern Muslims is smart for Australia, is it “dumb” when another country does the opposite?