In October of 2013, a 66 foot long
fishing boat filled with over 500 migrants left Libya and headed for port in
Italy. As the ship neared the island of Lampedusa, the engine gave out and the
ship began to sink. The boat eventually capsized and upwards of 360 people lost
their lives before the Italian rescue mission could arrive. Reports indicated
that the people on board had each paid around $3,000 to be smuggled across the Mediterranean
and onto the European mainland. Since January of this year, 3,000 people are
reported to have drowned attempting to reach Europe. This event was yet another
in a long line of similar tragedies that inspired the Italian government to
increase efforts to save migrants. Since its implementation, operation “Mare
Nostrum” has spent $11 million a month or about $114 million in total. The
operation has successfully saved the lives of around 100,000 people crossing
over the sea into Italy. This operation
was taken up by the Italian government without the aid of the EU and was only
intended to be a short term answer to the issue. The end of that program has
arrived. Italy has decided to cut the program as the number of new arrivals
from across the sea reaches record levels.
This piece of news caused me to
reflect on the meaning of hospitality and the ethical issue faced by European
governments in dealing with tragic loss of life of unwanted migrants seeking to
enter the countries illegally. How might the bible be used to inform ones
thinking about the meaning of Christian hospitality and how hospitality in
accepting refugees might be different from accepting new permanent citizens at
the potential expense of the whole nation? These topics became part of American
conversations in the face of the tens of thousands of children who walked to
the United States over the summer. A major ethical concern, other than what happens
to illegal immigrants once they arrive, is the risks they must face along their
journeys to their destinations. Is there an ethical solution to control
immigration while still combating illegal and dangerous trafficking gangs? In
the Italian case mentioned above, it seems that humanitarian aid to those
already in the water does not only fail to address the greater issue of incessant
migration from places like Africa and the Middle East, it even encourages
migrants to seek passage in potentially dangerous conditions with the knowledge
that they will likely be rescued by the European authorities.
Caldwell quotes two passages from
the Bible to describe the Christian tradition of hospitality. Leviticus
19:33-34 commands that one should care for strangers and treat them “as one
born among you.” In Matthew 25:31-46, the consequences of rejecting travelers
in need are made clear. With these passages in mind, it seems clear that the
answer to the ethical question of accepting refugees and migrants is obvious.
Good Christians should take these people in and care for them as their own.
Caldwell comments that “hospitality is meant to protect travelers in hostile
territory; it is not meant to give large groups of visitors – who may include
militants, freeloaders, and opportunists – the run of the place.” As I
mentioned in the previous summary posts, Immigrants to Europe were initially welcomed
by the native population. After their history during and after World War Two,
Europeans felt an strong sense of responsibility to aid political refugees from
war-torn nations. Caldwell calls this the “reflexive courtesy accorded guests.
Immigrants stayed long enough to lose their ritualized role as ‘guests.’”
I would argue, and Caldwell seems
to agree, that, rather than being a blessing that nations actively seek to
attain, diversity can be a strain on the cohesion of a society. Natural human
compassion drives people to tolerate those that are different from themselves,
but it does not always cause people to fully accept or trust outsiders. Caldwell
cites the work of Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam, claiming that “people
living under conditions of ethnic diversity ‘hunker down.’ They trust their
neighbors less and are less inclined to devote their money to common or social
causes.” While a biblical argument could be made that Christians should be
above such tendencies, the empirical evidence seems to suggest that an excess
of tolerance in allowing for mass influx of people from different cultures could
hinder the process of building real Christian communities. Rather than
encouraging communities to become more accepting of outsiders, growth of
minority populations causes civil strife and mistrust. As we discussed in
class, being equal and one in Christ does not necessarily mean that everyone
must be exactly the same. Male and female are both equals, but they have
different functions and play different roles in the unfolding of Gods plan for
humanity. I believe the same is true for the different ethnic human populations.
Each group contributes its cultural heritage to the human story and the loss of
a single culture should be regarded as a tragedy. This brings me to the main
issue of mass immigration into Europe in Caldwell’s book. Low birthrates in
western nations combined with the influx of foreign migrants with higher
birthrates both in their host countries and globally could change the character
of European society. European culture is in danger of being fundamentally
altered and therefore is under threat of a being lost.
The following is an excerpt from a
previous class assignment of mine regarding the aging population in Europe:
In 1950 there were around 2.5 billion people
living on the planet. After 60 years, that number has soared to over 7 billion.
In 2012, the birthrate in China was 12.31 and 20.6 in India. Demographers estimate
that the total count of humans will reach 9.1 billion by 2050 (European Commission ). However, this
growth of population has not been evenly distributed to all regions of the
world. Up to 95% of the population growth by 2050 will come from today’s
developing countries. While the populations of all other parts of the world
have been increasing and are projected to keep rising, European nations are
experiencing a fall in their numbers. In 2011, 5.9 million babies were born in
the EU which is a birthrate of only 1.59. A minimum population growth rate of
2.1 is required to prevent a nation from becoming extinct without migration (European Commission ). People in Europe are also living longer. On
average, Europeans are living decades longer than their predecessors. A combination of a low
birthrate and an increased life expectancy leads to a population that is aging
and shrinking. The EU population is expected to drop 14% from 729 million to
628 million. This decrease will cause a loss of 25% of the working age
population while the number of elderly will increase from 101 million to 173
million over the next 50 years (Bermingham).
Europe is facing a demographic crisis that will force EU governments to rework
their extensive welfare systems and immigration policies to accommodate for a
large increase of retirement age workers with fewer young people paying into
social security. Current pay-as-you-go style pension systems that rely on a
constant source of public income will face the problem of an aging population.
More people will reach pension age without a sustainable amount of new
contributors. By 2050 in Europe, the number of working age individuals will
drop from four for every person above 65 years of age to only two. The annual average growth
rate of the EU-25 GDP will fall from the 2004-2010 rates of 2.4% to 1.2% for
the years 2030-2050 (European Commission ).
This decline in birthrates seems to have a correlation to
the rise of the sexual revolution that took place in western nations. While
this is not necessarily the ethical issue I’m focusing on in this section, it
is interesting to note the impact of changing notions of gender roles on
population growth patterns. In class we
mentioned the potential impact of pornography on birthrates. While this might
be a contributing factor, especially in Japan, I believe the effects of changing
opportunities and lifestyles of women are the main factors. Marriage does not provide the level of
security it did in the past and it is becoming less frequent in general. Changing
ideas about the purpose of marriage and relationships in general have caused
westerners to delay starting a family with children, opting in favor of more
casual relationships and protected sexual intercourse. 
No comments:
Post a Comment