98% of Chinese would reject receiving refugees: online poll

[my2cents]

98% of Chinese would reject receiving refugees: online poll

By Li Ruohan Source:Global Times Published: 2018/6/20

97% of netizens reject receiving refugees

An overwhelming majority of Chinese netizens said they are against the idea of China taking refugees from other countries, saying the US, who incited wars and turmoil that caused the issue, should take the leading role and stop being a "quitter."

In an online poll on China's Sina Weibo platform that started on Wednesday noon, 97.7 percent of over 8,600 users said they oppose China taking foreign refugees. In a similar week-long poll from last June, 97.3 percent of over 210,000 users voted for the same choice.

The Wednesday poll comes after the official Weibo account of the UN said the same day, which marks World Refugee Day, that the world should unite with sympathy as over 68 million people are forced to flee their homes due to war and persecution.

By the end of 2017, over 25.4 million refugees were forcibly displaced, a record high and 2.9 million more than in 2016, the UN Refugee Agency said Wednesday.

"Why should China clean up the mess of other countries such as the US? Most of the refugees are coming from places threatened by religious extremists and taking them might damage the peace in China," wrote Weibo user "Qidanxiaobian."

"China did not implement the family planning policy for decades to make room for refugees," said Weibo user "Hou Meng'en," which was liked by hundreds of other users.

Refugees are caused by irresponsible moves from the US and some Western countries, and China should not be "morally hijacked" to play a leading role in taking refugees, Li Yunlong, a professor of international strategic studies at the Party School of the Central Committee of Communist Party of China, told the Global Times.

China has played a positive role in helping develop local economies in war-troubled countries in a more sustainable way, Li stressed.

Online criticism also ridiculed the US' withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council on Tuesday, saying China should not be a "troubleshooter" as the US continues to be a quitter in global affairs.

The US' withdrawal from the council, as well as the Paris Agreement and Iran nuclear deal, are signs of its unilateralism and hegemony, which will further separate it from the international community, said Li. The withdrawal by the US makes it more urgent for the international community to strengthen their cooperation on human rights and promote healthy development in the endeavor, he added.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1107731.shtml

**

That's the right, moral, and pragmatic attitude. Whoever has created the chaos (US+EU minions and their regional poodles) need to assume responsibility and bear costs.

Don't blame the victims for the sins of the west. Empty talk for a superpower.

 

[Cybernetics]

It's strange that some people are seemingly upset because China doesn't want to take in refugees. Nobody wants refugees but providing aid, reconstruction and security would be good. I don't think other regional nations want refugees either and I sympathize with that. Playing the moral high ground that is detrimental to oneself can only last so long, it may feel good in the short run but long term implications is what matters for China.

Can people articulate why it would be good for China to accept particular groups of refugees? Good reasons would be considered. If not then the answer is simple.

Don't blame the victims for the sins of the west. Empty talk for a superpower.

China doesn't claim superpower status. There is only one superpower in the world right now, it is the United States. China is a developing country. This is not sarcasm.

Don't blame China for the sins of the West either.

Not accepting refugees is not blaming the victims. I sympathize with their struggles thus support China providing aid, reconstruction and security to these people. Sending refugees to China is a whole other issue, that to most people is destroying the golden goose that provides the aid.

Some people might be taking this personally by thinking it means China doesn't like any foreigners. That is not true, unless you imagine yourself as a refugee with no skills, unstable mentality, can't tolerate Chinese society, etc. Productive and well adjusted foreigners in China are praised and celebrated. If you can contribute and fit in, then there won't be much issues in reality. Illegals, refugees, and invaders/conquerors are another story.

China only wants smart and productive people from other countries. Wouldn't people want their countries to be represented by upstanding individuals?

From Bangladesh (this is a friendlier face of Bangladesh than Rohingya refugees)

From Iran

 

[seesonic]

LOL

Seriously, go watch some TV, World cup is on.

What i do with my TV is my business

 

[jhungary]

Apolitical population should compose a large majority of any healthy society. A society that is highly political is probably the most problematic and prone to internal conflicts.

Depends.....In case like Hong Kong, yes...….But in other case, it's depending on different situation

Political Society does not mean it have to be political activisms or political extremism, it can simple be politically aware. It's like religion, being religious and secular does not mean either one is better, some country works in a religious government (such as Vatican, South American, selected Islamic Country) some work better being secular.

Being political have their advantage, normal citizen could know and participate what's their country is doing. Which mean it can really solve the core problem of a country, being apolitical however, would be totally depend on the minority that's political and basically put their faith to those who's in charge, if those people did a good job, then yes, it would benefit the society more because law would be able to pass with less hurdle, but if those people do a poor job, the normal citizens usually don't know until the end.

What i do with my TV is my business

You should said "Would I watch TV is my business" saying What I do with my TV is my business mean you concede that you will go watch TV.

 

[AndrewJin]

Don't blame the victims for the sins of the west. Empty talk for a superpower.

China is no superpower.
But english-speaking supa powa 2012 should bear the same sin of the evil west.

It's strange that some people are seemingly upset because China doesn't want to take in refugees. Nobody wants refugees but providing aid, reconstruction and security would be good. I don't think other regional nations want refugees either and I sympathize with that. Playing the moral high ground that is detrimental to oneself can only last so long, it may feel good in the short run but long term implications is what matters for China.

Can people articulate why it would be good for China to accept particular groups of refugees? Good reasons would be considered. If not then the answer is simple.

China doesn't claim superpower status. There is only one superpower in the world right now, it is the United States. China is a developing country. This is not sarcasm.

Don't blame China for the sins of the West either.

Not accepting refugees is not blaming the victims. I sympathize with their struggles thus support China providing aid, reconstruction and security to these people. Sending refugees to China is a whole other issue, that to most people is destroying the golden goose that provides the aid.

Some people might be taking this personally by thinking it means China doesn't like any foreigners. That is not true, unless you imagine yourself as a refugee with no skills, unstable mentality, can't tolerate Chinese society, etc. Productive and well adjusted foreigners in China are praised and celebrated. If you can contribute and fit in, then there won't be much issues in reality. Illegals, refugees, and invaders/conquerors are another story.

China only wants smart and productive people from other countries. Wouldn't people want their countries to be represented by upstanding individuals?

From Bangladesh (this is a friendlier face of Bangladesh than Rohingya refugees)

From Iran

There are more constructive ways to help them instead of providing refuge in foreign countries.

You can easily see how disastrous those boat people are to their adoptive countries.
Not all of them are rapists and criminals, but they do contribute NOTHING to the racist white society.
They could have been done way better in their non-white homes.

 

[rott]

I am wondering if those pro-British Hong Kongers are familiar with this sign - "Dog and Chinese not allowed".

 

[nang2]

Depends.....In case like Hong Kong, yes...….But in other case, it's depending on different situation

Political Society does not mean it have to be political activisms or political extremism, it can simple be politically aware. It's like religion, being religious and secular does not mean either one is better, some country works in a religious government (such as Vatican, South American, selected Islamic Country) some work better being secular.

Being political have their advantage, normal citizen could know and participate what's their country is doing. Which mean it can really solve the core problem of a country, being apolitical however, would be totally depend on the minority that's political and basically put their faith to those who's in charge, if those people did a good job, then yes, it would benefit the society more because law would be able to pass with less hurdle, but if those people do a poor job, the normal citizens usually don't know until the end.

I think it is generally true everywhere. The whole purpose of having a government is to have organized defense, which is far more beneficial than the system in which everyone has to defend his own life/liberty/property by himself. This leaves more time for them to the productive activities. This is of the same principle of the division of labor. When a government is competent and limited to this basic function, it really doesn't require average citizen spend much time concerning how well the government is doing. If it doesn't work well, the impact is very obvious. After all, things like life, liberty are property are concerned by average people the most. People will quickly jump on their feet when any of them is negatively affected. On the contrary, when a government likes to interfere with citizens' many other aspects of their lives, it will make it almost a necessity to be political because government impact becomes much subtler and more obscure, which requires constant vigilance to watch over.

In the case of HK, though it is true that they didn't get much political power when British was in power, it is also undeniable that British brought in an effective organized defense. Its legacy still lingers and makes HK one of the freest places on earth.

 

[Vapnope]

Indians trying to pedal higher moral pedestal here were vocal opponent of refugees from Bangladesh and Myanmar. Oh the double standards !

 

[my2cents]

Indians trying to pedal higher moral pedestal here were vocal opponent of refugees from Bangladesh and Myanmar. Oh the double standards !

We are doing our fair share of refugees. We have refugees from Bangladesh, Myanmar, Tibet, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka. Not to mention recent exodus of Hindus of Pakistan.

 

[925boy]

For Chinese foreign money is great, but foreign people aren't, unless they bring money.

boom! thats the perfect answer to the Cambodian who said CHinese dont like Africans...because they will surely like the Africans' money or business, but doesnt seem like they like the people. smh.
I am just worried by lack of sympathy for some refugees from some Chinese members here. There is a difference between supporting taking refugees in and showing compassion for people(at least some) who didnt create the instability that chased them away from their countries.

 

[Vapnope]

We are doing our fair share of refugees. We have refugees from Bangladesh, Myanmar, Tibet, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka. Not to mention recent exodus of Hindus of Pakistan.

Pls do understand that this statement was meant for "some" not all Indian posters.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

Let's be honest.

The overwhelming, vast majority of nations in the world WILL take in refugees. It all depends on the traits/quality of the refugee.

EU takes in everyone- including rapists n pedophiles.

America takes in most people, especially human rights n liberty refugees, except muslims

India takes in anyone if they r Hindu or Dharmists.

Russia takes in anyone who are Western refugees

Even ultra homogeneous countries like China and Japan will take in refugees provided they are of East Asiatic stock. The Hoa people of Vietnam is an example.

The only country that truly refuses all refugees is Singapore.

 

[TaiShang]

Let's be honest.

The overwhelming, vast majority of nations in the world WILL take in refugees. It all depends on the traits/quality of the refugee.

EU takes in everyone- including rapists n pedophiles.

America takes in most people, especially human rights n liberty refugees, except muslims

India takes in anyone if they r Hindu or Dharmists.

Russia takes in anyone who are Western refugees

Even ultra homogeneous countries like China and Japan will take in refugees provided they are of East Asiatic stock. The Hoa people of Vietnam is an example.

The only country that truly refuses all refugees is Singapore.

East Asian societies are definitely more selective, which is good in terms of the overall quality (and make up) of the demographics.

 

[seesonic]

You should said "Would I watch TV is my business" saying What I do with my TV is my business mean you concede that you will go watch TV.

Do you know a TV can be used as a monitor and not just for watching videos? Try it on your CF card

 

[Yingluck]

There are definitely a differences in race. Diversity for all her merits promoted by the Jews, are going to break to big western states such as USA. You want diverse, and you get it, in the form of fragmentation.

Chinese has a hard time with Muslims during the Panthay rebellion. It takes genius such as General Zuo Zongtang and General Wang Zhen to make Sunni evolve to better people. Similarly Assad is doing the same job now.

East Asian societies are definitely more selective, which is good in terms of the overall quality (and make up) of the demographics.