Register
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Khủng hoảng

  1. #11
    Biệt Thự Triển's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    19,606
    Quote Originally Posted by ốc View Post
    Tình cờ xem được mấy cái video này trong Youtube mới biết Canada cũng có người tử tế.
    Ở đời có vay có trả. Ai không chịu trả kiếp này thì kiếp sau trả gấp 10 (lạm phát phi ... nghĩa).

  2. #12
    Biệt Thự Triển's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    19,606
    Quote Originally Posted by ốc View Post
    Cứu vật thì vật trả ơn, còn cứu thuyền nhân thì thuyền nhân nói chuyện "khủng hoảng"...
    Cứu thuyền nhân, thuyền nhân trả tố cáo. Làm như họ nứt từ trong vách đất Mỹ, vách Canada
    chui ra chứ không phải nứt trong cái ghe từng bị khẩm sắp chết đuối. Lại có kẻ hả hê trước nỗi lo,
    hoàn cảnh khó khăn của người khác. Thật là lãnh cảm, thật là ác độc.

  3. #13
    Nhà Ngói
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    198

    Ngôn Ngữ Mới

    Ngôn ngữ mới

    Từ trước đến giờ tui cứ tưởng ngôn ngữ "Newspeak
    " để tẩy não và kiểm soát tư tưởng người dân của xứ độc tài "Oceania" trong quyển 1984 của Orwell là chuyện … tiểu thuyết? Nhưng té ra không phải vậy, từ năm 1949 Orwell đã nhìn thấy trước được nước Mỹ ngày nay để lên tiếng cảnh cáo! "Newspeak” đã bắt đầu lan tràn từ năm 2016 và vẫn tiếp tục xuất hiện thường xuyên thêm những chữ "lạ"! Tuy nhiên, "Newspeak" nay cũng đã bị tước bản quyền để đổi tên thành "Trumpspeak" Sau đây là vài thí dụ về "Trumpspeak" có kèm luôn định nghĩa mà tui mới học được nên đem lên đây để ..."chia sẻ, sẻ chia, sẻ chia, chia sẻ...":

    - Fake News (tác giả đổi nghĩa là Châm): là 1) Tin tức nào Châm không thích hoặc bất lợi cho Châm; 2) Các cơ quan truyền thông báo chí loan tin tức Châm không thích hoặc bất lợi cho Châm.
    - Friend(s) (tác giả đổi nghĩa là Châm): là bất cứ người bạn (trong tưởng tượng) nào đầy quyền thế và tài năng luôn luôn xác quyết Châm là đúng và ủng hộ Châm.
    - Enemies of the people
    (tác giả đổi nghĩa là Châm): là... giới truyền thông báo chí nào không chịu tung hô wán xuề wán xuề Châm.
    - Alternative facts (tác giả là Kellyanne Conway): là "sự thật khác sự thật" về cùng một chuyện. Sự thật "thật" thì không phải thật mà sự thật "khác" đó mới là sự thật. Nói nôm na cho dễ hiểu hơn là tuy "sự thật khác" đó chính là "sự giả" nên cần được lặp đi lặp lại nhiều lần để tẩy não
    mọi người cho tin thành “sự thật”!
    - Truth isn’t truth (tác giả là Rudy Giuliani): là tất cả những "sự" do... Châm và đồng bọn nói ra đều là "sự thật", nhưng có thể bị phe Mueller cho là... "sự giả"!


  4. #14
    Ốckipedia.com ốc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Ốcland
    Posts
    4,774
    - would = wouldn't (tác giả là Trâm), được dùng trong khi giả nhời báo chí trước mặt Putin và khi không có Putin.
    - honest = liar (tác giả là Duliani), nói về Mai cồ Cò hen, trước và sau khi Cò hen kể tội của Trâm.

  5. #15
    Biệt Thự Triển's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    19,606
    Quote Originally Posted by 008 View Post
    Ngôn ngữ mới


    - Fake News (tác giả đổi nghĩa là Châm): là 1) Tin tức nào Châm không thích hoặc bất lợi cho Châm; 2) Các cơ quan truyền thông báo chí loan tin tức Châm không thích hoặc bất lợi cho Châm.



    Cái này là "chiến lược". Việt cộng có chữ tương tự gọi là "phản động". Ai mà không đúng ý mình, chỉ trích mình là "phản động".


    Quote Originally Posted by 008 View Post
    - Enemies of the people
    Quote Originally Posted by 008 View Post
    (tác giả đổi nghĩa là Châm): là... giới truyền thông báo chí nào không chịu tung hô wán xuề wán xuề Châm.

    Trâm không có kẻ thù. Chỉ có "nhân dân" mới có kẻ thù. Trâm chỉ là đày tớ của nhân dân. Đây là một phương thức tranh đấu kiểu "bán cái".


    Quote Originally Posted by 008 View Post
    - Alternative facts (tác giả là Kellyanne Conway): là "sự thật khác sự thật" về cùng một chuyện. Sự thật "thật" thì không phải thật mà sự thật "khác" đó mới là sự thật. Nói nôm na cho dễ hiểu hơn là tuy "sự thật khác" đó chính là "sự giả" nên cần được lặp đi lặp lại nhiều lần để tẩy não
    Quote Originally Posted by 008 View Post
    mọi người cho tin thành “sự thật”!


    Chân lý 2. Chữ này là châm ngôn số một làm trò cười cho thiên hạ của Con Quậy. Đã là chân lý thì làm gì có chân lý thứ hai để mà chọn với lựa.


    Quote Originally Posted by 008 View Post
    - Truth isn’t truth (tác giả là Rudy Giuliani): là tất cả những "sự" do... Châm và đồng bọn nói ra đều là "sự thật", nhưng có thể bị phe Mueller cho là... "sự giả"!

    1984 phải gọi là sấm George Orwell. Cũng có thể 1984 là sách gối đầu giường của toàn bộ gia đình Đổ Thừa: "bí kíp".

    Chân lý 2, Truth isn't truth là một kiểu "từ ngữ chiến lược" để biện minh cho "fake news".

  6. #16
    Biệt Thự Triển's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    19,606


    Tác giả có bài viết đã cũ 2 năm nhưng vẫn còn có giá trị hiện thực.

    "....
    While this article does suggest that the US can
    do more, the main purpose is to demonstrate that
    we as a country have experienced a crisis similar
    to this before.

    ..."







    New Crisis, Old Approaches: Lessons for Today’s Syrian Refugee Reception Crisis from the United States’ Effort to Resettle Vietnamese Refugees

    by David Truong



    David Truong wrote “New Crisis, Old Approaches: Lessons for Today’s Syrian Refugee Reception Crisis from the United States’ Effort to Resettle Vietnamese Refugees” as part of the 2016 Humanity in Action Diplomacy and Diversity Fellowship.


    Six years have passed since the Syrian Civil War started in 2011, displacing millions of Syrians. The estimated count of internally displaced Syrians stands at over six million, while almost five million are registered as refugees with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and living in neighboring countries such as Turkey or Lebanon. (1) Various European countries within the European Union (EU) have also received a large influx of Syrian refugees, with those seeking asylum at a cumulative count of over a million. The dilemma of an outward flow of Syrians does not seem to be subsiding either; instead, it will likely continue to increase. As of July 2016, more people have arrived in Europe than in the previous year (249,854 versus 220,054) and more are seeking asylum than in the previous year (305,700 versus 217,600). (2)

    The hundreds of thousands of people seeking entry and refuge in Europe signal that the situation is still dire and the crisis is far from reaching any solution. While many European countries have devoted significant efforts towards alleviating this issue, the problem persists and the populaces, both within and outside of Europe, have become divided in their attitude towards the influx of refugees. In this time of turmoil and divided sentiment, which has led to violent backlash from both ends of the political spectrum, a potential learning point may be to look towards the past at an analogous crisis and how many countries, in particular the United States (US), stepped up to solve a, then-pressing, global crisis: Vietnamese fleeing after the Fall of Saigon in April 1975. The economic outcomes of these former refugees provide insight on how to potentially respond to the current refugee reception crisis. In particular, it shines a light on how the positive economic contributions from these resettled refugees and their families largely outweigh the “costs” of resettling them. This economic lens can be utilized towards alleviating the fears of those opposed to a humanitarian intervention to the present crisis. It also sets itself up to encourage an increased role by the US toward helping to address this refugee crisis.

    The widely used definition of a refugee originates from the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, which defines a refugee as “a person … owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.” (3) These parameters are in contrast to economic immigrants, who have left their countries in pursuit of economic opportunities that they could not obtain at home and who are considered able to return to their home countries and who had originally left their countries in pursuit of economic opportunities that they could not obtain at home. In order to clear up any misperceptions about how the US government has recently approached refugees, for the last three years leading up to 2015, the US has taken around 70,000 refugees annually (4) and in 2016 the 10,000th Syrian refugee arrived in the US. (5)

    Many of the first Vietnamese refugees who came to the US after the Fall of Saigon, now Ho Chi Minh City, were quite poor and experienced many economic hardships, some for a whole generation. Subsequent generations, however, have become rather successful, both benefiting from and giving back to American society. The ultimate, positive outcomes from accepting refugees require patience, and where there is patience, there can also be an economic positive that derives from welcoming refugees. These benefits may not be seen immediately.

    The Fall of Saigon

    On April 30, 1975, the North Vietnamese Army captured Saigon, presently Ho Chi Minh City. This marked the end of the Vietnam War and started the first of two major waves of mass migration out of Vietnam. The first wave occurred right after the Fall of Saigon in 1975. The US evacuated about 130,000 high skilled, well-educated Vietnamese. (6) This group of refugees, often, had established close ties to the US, had provided the US with assistance during the war, and consisted of skilled professionals, who many Americans wanted to sponsor for services they could provide. Following that first wave, there was little to no immigration in 1976 and 1977 due to the US denying admission for Vietnamese refugees, with the exception of family reunification resettlements. The second wave of resettlement started in 1978 with an initial mass exodus, followed by many years of subsequent migration to the US. These refugees usually fled on small fishing boats for a variety of reasons, including oppressive government policies, fear of persecution by the government, and economic hardships. The journey was extremely dangerous and many perished at sea or were ambushed by pirates. Uneducated Vietnamese from more disadvantaged backgrounds comprised most of this second wave, with many of them coming from more rural areas. As the outflows from Vietnam progressed, boatloads of people landed on various Southeast Asian nations, but the influx was so great that receiving Southeast Asian nations even pushed boats back to sea. Many thousands of Vietnamese are estimated to have died at sea. Eventually, in 1979, the UNHCR created the Orderly Departure Program, which created a mechanism to resettle the Vietnamese who fled Vietnam, with other Southeast Asian nations serving as temporary transition points for refugees before other countries resettled them. It is estimated that more than 500,000 refugees went to the US through this program. (7) Altogether, the conflict in Vietnam created over 1.6 million refugees from Vietnam alone, and many more from the Indochina region broadly. (8) Most of them eventually resettled in the US, Canada, Australia, and countries of Western Europe.

    Similar to public opinion of Syrian refugees now, public opinion of the Vietnamese was not very high then, in these early stages of migration. At the beginning of the first wave of migration in 1975, polls found 37% of respondents supporting the Vietnamese and 49% of respondents holding negative views against the Vietnamese. (9) Public opinion dropped in 1979, after US President Carter announced he would double the number of refugees accepted, with 62% of Americans disapproving of this action. (10) This would make the percentage of those with a positive view of the Vietnamese then even lower than those holding positive views towards Syrian refugees today. (11)

    Vietnamese Refugees in the US

    But are refugee immigrants significantly different to economic immigrants? A 2004 study by Kalena Cortes provides some clarity on any differences between economic immigrants and refugee immigrants. (12) She examines refugee and non-refugee groups who entered the US between 1975 and 1980, including those from Vietnam. Cortes found that refugee immigrants had, on average, lower annual earnings upon arrival than economic immigrants. Over time, however, their earnings grew rapidly compared to economic immigrants. Specifically, refugee immigrants in 1980 earned 6% less and worked 14% fewer hours than economic immigrants. By 1990, the circumstances of both groups had improved, but refugees had made larger gains. They had earned 20% more and worked 4% more hours than economic immigrants, along with improving their English skills over economic migrants by 11% more. An explanation for this includes the possibility that refugees tended to have higher country-specific human capital investment, such as learning English, when they first came to the US. (13) In addition, social science research suggests that migrants do not displace native-born workers, but might even raise the wages of these native-born workers. (14) For the Vietnamese specifically, the nail salon industry presents this positive effect, wherein most salons are owned and/or operated by the Vietnamese. (15) A recent study found that the Vietnamese did not take jobs away from native-born workers in this industry, but instead created their own jobs. (16)

    From a daily life perspective, many of the “boat people,” the term given to those who fled on small fishing boats, struggled upon their arrival to the US. Over time, however, their circumstances changed. A study conducted on the second-generation of Vietnamese Americans, or the children of Vietnamese immigrants, particularly those educated in the US, indicated that this generation has done quite well for themselves. Using 2000 census data, Sakamoto et al. found that second-generation Vietnamese especially stand out relative to many other immigrant groups, showing high values on education, wages, and managerial/professional employment relative to, for example, African Americans and whites. (17) Presently, the median income of Vietnamese immigrants actually tops that of the median income of both immigrants broadly and native-born households. When polled, 83% of Vietnamese in the US believe that hard work can help people get ahead. (18) A separate poll, conducted around the same time, found that generally, only about 58% of people hold this view. (19) This optimism serves as a positive sign and creates a strong case that Syrian refugees could follow such a path.

    Throughout the US’ short history as a nation, refugees have arrived from all over the world. My father himself was a refugee, fleeing in 1978 Vietnam after the war ended and landing in a refugee camp in Malaysia. It was because my father endured the voyage across the Pacific Ocean that I have the privilege of now serving as an American diplomat. It was also because this country granted opportunities to refugees like my father. Our family’s experiences in the US did not follow a straight, easy, or narrow path, however. My father struggled most of his life to provide for my family. Eventually, while my parents remained uneducated, my three siblings and I all ended up with college degrees and are on the path toward successful careers. Not only does this demonstrate the values that embody the US, but it also showcases how the acceptance of refugees can ultimately benefit the US as well, especially as my own story shares a common trajectory to many other immigrant groups and refugees. This is why it is important to consider the past, specifically the economic history of refugees, when examining the refugee situation now.

    Applying Lessons to Today’s Syrian Crisis


    Islam and anti-Muslim sentiments drive much of the negative attitude toward Syrians presently, a phenomenon that makes the current crisis different than the one toward the Vietnamese. A Pew survey showed that on average, Americans tend to view Islam quite coldly. Almost half of Americans polled viewed “some” Muslims as anti-American. (20) Yet, the negative sentiment toward race with the Vietnamese can act as analogous to the present anti-religious sentiment. In the case of the Vietnamese, with the right opportunities and resources to integrate, they ultimately thrived in the US, a scenario that potentially could occur with Syrians.

    Though it may change as the current crisis progresses, the majority of immigrants from Syria presently arrive in the US through family reunification. They tend to be educated and work in high-skilled positions, with labor participation overall lower than other migrant groups, because of a lack of female participation in the labor force. However, these immigrants tend to receive a larger average income than native-born workers. (21)

    Based on this profile, two main points arise. First, these immigrants are similar to that of the first wave of Vietnamese refugees – educated and high-skilled, possibly indicating an easier transition into the formal economy in the US, given the US’s status as an advanced economy. In addition, the economic context then and now varies quite drastically, which is always the case with any comparison of different time frames. These are important caveats to consider when using this comparison to inform policy decisions.

    With the Vietnamese, the US had a responsibility toward thousands of people. The conflict initiated there led to regional instability and mass movements of people, along with broad disapproval of the conflict. The resettlement of individuals displaced by this conflict signaled to the world that the US was a humanitarian country after engaging in such a brutal war. The current Syrian refugee crisis presents another unstable region, with mass movements of people occurring. In this case, the resettlement of people can assist in not only America’s image as continually humanitarian, but also assuage some of the concerns about terrorism resulting from extreme anti-American sentiment stemming from American intervention in the region.

    Conclusion

    Ultimately, the US accepted over 800,000 refugees from Vietnam and resettled over one million immigrants displaced from the region as a whole. From these immigrants, the second-generation has done reasonably well for themselves in finding greater success. The Syrian refugee situation exhibits many parallels with other refugee situations of the past, so perhaps there will also be parallels in what is to come. While these refugee populations experienced significant hardships in their new host countries upon arrival, the economic benefits eventually helped both the new arrivals and the countries that welcomed these refugees into their land. However, it is important to remember that each situation has its own context, which can complicate the actual implementation of refugee acceptance and resettlement policy.

    A policy recommendation encouraging opening the borders to all refugees is not what should be done. It is not suggested here nor would it be wise, both economically and logistically (or arguably, even morally). While this article does suggest that the US can do more, the main purpose is to demonstrate that we as a country have experienced a crisis similar to this before. The prevalence of a fear of the “Other” existed then as well, but over time the Vietnamese overcame adversity and “Othering” to become successfully integrated into the socio-political and economic landscape of the US. This parallel casts doubt on the premise of the current fears that many have toward Syrians.

    Yet, the possibility of any substantive action has begun to slip away. Under the Obama Administration, the White House announced that they would accept 110,00 refugees in 2017. (22) The unexpected result of the 2016 US Presidential election, however, has led to the opposite outcome. Instead of accepting more refugees, the new administration ordered a temporary ban on individuals from Syria, along with five other Muslim-majority countries. (23) This ban does not align with American values, nor does it showcase the generosity and compassion this country has exhibited many times before in its short history, especially to the Vietnamese. While, realistically and logistically, any possibility of resettling all individuals displaced from the civil war in Syria does not exist, this current trend signals that the easiest to help will not get any assistance. This is extremely troubling as the US should fulfill its responsibilities as a rich nation to intervene when crises such as these occur. Acknowledging that large groups of refugees have been gradually resettled in the past, the US can do more to accommodate the growing supply of Syrians seeking refuge, much like they have done in the past. It is my personal hope that the new administration considers this course of action, especially before it finds itself on the wrong side of history.

    Disclaimer

    The views expressed herein are those of the author alone and in no way constitute an endorsement, expressed or implied, by the United States Department of State.


    • • •

    About the Author

    David Truong is a Foreign Service Officer with the United States Department of State. Originally from Dallas, Texas, he is headed off to Bangladesh to serve his first tour as a diplomat. His interests include social justice, particularly racial and socioeconomic inequality, along with all things Texas. He studied Political Science at Yale University and received a Master in Public Policy from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.


    Acknowledgments

    The author and editor thank Carly Goodmann for her dedicated efforts in reviewing earlier versions of this article.


    References


    1. "Quick Facts: What You Need to Know about the Syria Crisis," Mercy Corps, Jun. 16, 2016, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, https://www.mercycorps.org/articles/...-syria-crisis; “Syria Regional Refugee Response Inter-agency Information Sharing Portal,” UNHCR, accessed Nov 13, 2016, http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php#.

    2. “Migrant, Refugee Deaths at Sea Pass 3,000 as Arrivals Near 250,000,” Jul. 26, 2016, accessed Nov. 13, 2016, http://www.iom.int/news/migrant-refu...s-near-250000; “Asylum Quarterly Report,” Eurostat, Sept. 21, 2016, accessed Nov. 13, 2016, http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statist...arterly_report. These numbers refer to first-time asylum seeking applicants from all countries, not just Syria, though Syrians added most to the increase from 2015 to 2016.

    3. “Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees,” United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Dec. 2010, accessed Jan. 8, 2017, http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/protectio...-refugees.html.

    4. "Cumulative Summary of Refugee Admissions," U.S. Department of State, Dec. 31, 2015, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/...ics/251288.htm.

    5. "Statement by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice on Syrian Refugee Admissions," The White House, Aug. 29, 2016, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...syrian-refugee.

    6. Alicia Campi, "From Refugees To Americans: Thirty Years Of Vietnamese Immigration To The United States," Immigration Policy Center, Jun. 2005, accessed Mar. 9, 2017. https://www.americanimmigrationcounc...oAmericans.pdf

    7. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), “Flight from Indochina,” In The State of the World’s Refugees Fifty Years of Humanitarian Action, 90, Jan. 1, 2000, accessed Nov. 13, 2016, http://www.unhcr.org/3ebf9bad0.pdf.

    8. Karl Miller, “From Humanitarian to Economic: The Changing Face of Vietnamese Migration,” Migration Policy Institute, Apr. 29, 2015, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, http://www.migrationpolicy.org/artic...mese-migration. The official numbers by country were: US accepted 823,000 refugees, Australia and Canada accepted 137,000 each, France accepted 96,000, Germany accepted 40,000, and the United Kingdom accepted 19,000.

    9. Drew DeSilver, “U.S. Public Seldom has Welcomed Refugees into Country,” Pew Research Center, Nov. 19, 2015, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...-into-country/.

    10. Ibid, 9.

    11. Ibid, 7.

    12. Kalena Cortes, “Are Refugees Different from Economic Immigrants? Some Empirical Evidence on the Heterogeneity of Immigrant Groups in the US,” IZA Discussion Paper No. 1063 (2004).

    13. Ibid.

    14. “Value Added: Immigrants Create Jobs and Businesses, Boost Wages of Native-Born Workers,” American Immigration Council, Jan. 1, 2012, Accessed Jan. 8, 2017, https://www.americanimmigrationcounc...e-born-workers.

    15. Anh Do, “In Vietnamese Salons, Nails, Polish and Unvarnished Opinions,” Los Angeles Times, Jul. 13, 2013, accessed Nov. 13, 2016, http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-f...htmlstory.html.

    16. Maya N. Federman, David E. Harrington, and Kathy J. Krynski, "Vietnamese Manicurists: Are Immigrants Displacing Natives or Finding New Nails to Polish?," (Industrial and Labor Relations, Review 59, no. 2, 2006), 302-18.

    17. Arthur Sakamoto and Hyeyoung Woo, “The Socioeconomic Attainments of Second-Generation Cambodian, Hmong, Laotian, and Vietnamese Americans,” (Sociological Inquiry 77, 2007), 44–75.

    18. “Vietnamese Americans are Upbeat and Optimistic,” Pew Research Center, Jun. 18, 2012, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/asian...e_attitudes-2/.

    19. “For the Public, It’s Not about Class Warfare, But Fairness,” Pew Research Center, Mar. 2, 2012, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, http://www.people-press.org/2012/03/...ness/3-2-12-4/.

    20. “Republicans Prefer Blunt Talk About Islamic Extremism, Democrats Favor Caution,” Pew Research Center, Feb. 3, 2016, accessed Mar. 9, 2017, http://www.pewforum.org/2016/02/03/r...favor-caution/. Islam was scored 40 on a scale from 0 to 100 where 0 was the coldest; this is about what atheism scored (41).

    21. Jie Zong, “Profile of Syrian Immigrants in the United States,” Migration Policy Institute, Nov. 2015, accessed Nov. 13, 2016, http://www.migrationpolicy.org/resea...-united-states.

    22. Melanie Garuany, “Refugees Welcome: Celebrating the Communities That Shape and Strengthen America,” The White House, Sept. 15, 2016, accessed Sept. 18, 2016, https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016...ngthen-america.

    23. “Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States,” The White House, Mar. 6, 2017, accessed Mar. 13, 2017, https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...-united-states.


  7. #17
    Nhà Ngói
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    198
    Newspeak thay hình đổi dạng thành Trumpspeak:

    - Newspeak: Trong quyển "1984
    ", lời Đảng: “The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.” (Đảng đã bảo "nhăn răng" là không được tin vào những gì "nhăn răng" nhìn thấy tận mắt và nghe được tận tai.)

    - Trumpspeak: Ngày nay, lời Châm đứng trên bục hò hét xuống đám lâu la reo hò tở mở bu quanh ở dưới:
    "What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening" (Những gì mà chính mắt "nhăn răng" nhìn thấy và đọc được đều không hề có thật)

  8. #18
    James Đậu Đậu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,394
    Rồi thì những người di dân lậu tiên khởi gốc Việt được các nước trong khối Thế Giới Tự Do cho nhập cư. Người đi Mỹ, người đi Canada, đi Đức, đi Pháp. Mọi người mừng vui hết lớn. Từ chỗ lậu, bỗng nhiên, những người di dân tiên khởi gốc Việt hết lậu thì còn gì vui sướng cho bằng. Cái quyết định cho nhập cư có khác gì cái ơn cứu mạng, cứu rỗi.

    Rồi thì một số người di dân tiên khởi gốc Việt chọn Mỹ là nơi định cư. Ngày ấy, họ được chính phủ Mỹ lo lắng rất chu đáo. Từ cái ăn, cái ở cho đến cái hoc. Tất tần tật. Cái ăn thi có tiền phút tem này. Cái ở thì có tiền mặt hàng tháng này. Cái học thì có tiền Pell Grant này. (Pell Grant chắc là học bổng?) Những sự ấy xẩy ra đặng là nhờ vào đồng thuế của nhân dân Mỹ tiến bộ hằng năm nộp cho chính phủ. Rồi thì nhờ những sự giúp đỡ tận lực như vậy mà một số di dân gốc Việt đã vươn lên từ nơi khốn khó. Nói dại mồm, giá như ngày ấy chính phủ Mỹ không cho người di dân lậu tiên khởi gốc Việt nhập cư thì cuộc đời của họ trôi về nơi mô? Hỏi chơi thôi chứ ai mà biết đặng.

    Rồi thì một số trong những người này bảo lãnh cho cha me, vợ chồng, con cái, anh em của họ qua Mỹ theo chương trình ODP gì đó. Chả biết chữ ODP viết tắt từ chữ mô nhưng có nhẽ là giông giống cái chương trình, cái diện "di dân dây chuyền" mà lão Trâm lớn tiếng xỉa xói chứ gì. Cái chùm chữ "di dân dây chuyền" nghe mất cảm tình và cũng là động lực thúc đẩy tính tự ái dân tộc dâng cao. Có nhẽ, trộm đóan là vì tự ái sẽ có người chả thèm dặt chân lên đất Mỹ?

    Cũng may là ngày ấy lão Trâm còn ham tiền, chưa mần chính trị hoặc vị thế của lão trên chính tràng còn tép riu nên tiếng nói của lão không có cân lượng. Thì như làm vậy, người di dân tiên khởi gốc Việt ở Mỹ nhanh nhẹn làm đơn và người xứ ta cũng tranh thủ nộp đơn xin đi Mỹ.

    Rồi thì trong nhóm di dân tiên khởi gốc Việt ngày ấy và nhóm ODP sau này, bây giờ rủ nhau tỏ thái độ không thích dân "di dân lậu" từ các xứ khác đổ về. Sao lạ vậy ta? Chắc là ganh tỵ, chứ gì nữa? Sợ rằng họ sẽ hơn mình? Con cái của họ, sau này, cũng sẽ hơn con cái mình? Có Giời mới hiểu đặng.

    Thì như làm vậy, xin nghỉ viết nơi đây.
    Đỗ thành Đậu

  9. #19
    Biệt Thự Triển's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    19,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Đậu View Post
    bây giờ rủ nhau tỏ thái độ không thích dân "di dân lậu" từ các xứ khác đổ về. Sao lạ vậy ta?
    Có thể là học tập từ tư tưởng sô vanh, sô diễn trong lý tưởng của Trâm mập. Coi dân tộc da voàng là trên hết, chỉ đứng sau da ... trắng thôi.

  10. #20
    Biệt Thự Triển's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    19,606



    Don't speak from crisis, it's just a challenge!


    "....The precedents highlights how, as new challenges
    arise, there are opportunities to develop new standards,
    guidelines and approaches. But it requires imagination,
    creativity, and political leadership....
    "









    Five history lessons in how to deal with a refugee crisis

    What can we learn from the way we dealt with previous refugee emergencies? After all, this is not the first time, says Professor Alexander Betts


    Some 16,500 Vietnamese refugees came to Britain between 1979 and 1992. Photograph: UNHCR

    There is a tendency in refugee policy to assume that the latest “crisis” is unprecedented and forget the past. In fact, Hungary’s current hostility to refugees sits uncomfortably with its population’s own history of receiving sanctuary in Europe after the 1956 revolution. In the 1920s, Greek refugees even sought sanctuary in Syria.

    But there is a lot that can be learned from history that could help inform responses to current global challenges. Five particular precedents stand out as instructive for informing contemporary policy responses in Europe and globally.

    1. Enabling safe passage

    During the inter-war years, the League of Nations high commissioner for refugees (UNHCR) created Nansen passports. These were internationally recognised refugee travel documents used to address refugee movements resulting from the collapse of empires and state formation within and on the borders of Europe. The Russian Revolution of 1917 and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire the following year, in particular, led to statelessness and refugees movements. Between 1922 and 1942 they were honoured by 52 countries and gave protection to 450,000 mainly Russian, Armenian, Assyrian, and Turkish refugees. This precedent offers an example of how, today, refugees might be given safe passage to Europe through a humanitarian visa or refugee travel document scheme to prevent them having to make dangerous journeys.


    A French warship picking up a boat full of Armenian refugees fleeing from the massacre of their people by Turkish forces during the first world war. Photograph: Mansell/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Image

    2. Comprehensive plans of action


    After the end of the Vietnam war in 1975, hundreds of thousands of Indochinese “boat people” crossed territorial waters from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia towards south-east Asian host states such as Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, as well as Hong Kong. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s the host states, anxious about the influx, pushed many of the boats back to sea and people drowned.

    Eventually, as now, there was an international public outcry to images on television and in newspapers of people drowning. In 1989, under UNHCR leadership, a comprehensive plan of action was agreed for Indochinese refugees, based on an international agreement for sharing responsibility. The receiving countries in south-east Asia agreed to keep their borders open, engage in search and rescue operations and provide reception to the boat people.

    They did so based on two sets of commitments from other states. First, a coalition of governments – the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the European states – agreed to resettle all those judged to be refugees. Second, alternative and humane solutions, including return or legal immigration channels, were sought for those who were not refugees in need of international protection. The plan led to millions being resettled and the most immediate humanitarian challenge was addressed. The example offers insights into ways in which the international community might develop a comprehensive plan of action for Syrian refugees.

    3. Development assistance for regions of origin

    At the end of the Cold War, millions of people were displaced by proxy conflicts in Central America. They were spread across Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Belize, and Costa Rica. Some were able to go home but others could not.


    Conflict in Central America led to a whole new generation of refugees. Here a family flees violence in El Salvador in 1979. Photograph: Matthew Naythons/Getty Images

    The international community adopted an initiative known as CIREFCA (the International Conference on Central American Refugees), which between 1989 and 1995 created opportunities for refugee self-reliance across the region. The premise was that through targeted development assistance, opportunities could be created for both host communities and displaced populations.

    Health, education, and infrastructure projects were funded mainly by the then European Community across the entire region. In total around half a billion US dollars was spent on 72 development projects across seven countries. To take an example, Mexico, with a significant number of Guatemalan refugees, recognised that it had areas of underdeveloped land. With European money for agricultural projects, it agreed to provide self-reliance opportunities and local integration for Guatemalan refugees.

    The outcome was that refugees were able to contribute to the agricultural development of the Yucatan Peninsula in ways that are now well documented. The example shows how development assistance can be focused to promote more sustainable solutions for refugees in their regions of origin. Today, in countries such as Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan, development-based approaches are needed to support mutually beneficial outcomes for hosts and refugees.

    4. European burden-sharing


    During the Kosovo crisis in 1999, Europe faced a refugee crisis on its doorstep. In the space of just a few weeks, some 850,000 Kosovan refugees fled into neighbouring Macedonia and Montenegro. The host countries were overwhelmed and Macedonia threatened to close its border unless the rest of Europe shared responsibility.

    Consequently, in April the UNHCR launched a humanitarian evacuation programme, temporarily relocating nearly 100,000 on a form of quota system. Germany took the highest number but almost every European country contributed. The programme showed how, with clear United Nations co-ordination, states were willing and able to cooperate. The example offers an obvious parallel to contemporary challenges within the same region and a source of inspiration for similar relocation proposals.

    5. Adapting international legal standards

    During the 1990s, there was growing recognition that the nature of global displacement was changing. With the end of the Cold War, an increasing proportion of the world’s conflicts had become intra-state rather than international, leading growing numbers of people to be displaced within their own countries rather than across borders.

    So, could the world build upon the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees to create a normative framework to protect internally displaced persons? In 1998, the international community created the “Guiding principles on internal displacement”. These emerged in part from the role of non-state actors. The American think-tank the Brookings Institute, together with Bern University, collaborated on the consolidation of existing human rights law, international humanitarian law, and refugee law standards into a consolidate “soft law” framework. It has subsequently received global recognition by states and international organisations, and been translated into national and regional legal frameworks. The precedents highlights how, as new challenges arise, there are opportunities to develop new standards, guidelines and approaches. But it requires imagination, creativity, and political leadership.

    Professor Alexander Betts is director of the Refugee Studies Centre at the University of Oxford. He is author of Survival Migration: Failed Governance and the Crisis of Displacement (Cornell University Press) and can be followed on Twitter at @alexander_betts


    /* src.: https://www.theguardian.com/global-d...refugee-crisis




    Last edited by Triển; 08-20-2018 at 11:32 PM.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-11-2013, 05:51 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2013, 06:49 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-10-2012, 08:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:12 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
Forum Modifications By Marco Mamdouh