While the European Union grapples with how to address the worsening Mediterranean migrant crisis, some critics are laying blame for the unfolding tragedy on the U.S. and NATO, whose 2011 military intervention severely destabilized Libya, the North African country that has been described as "Ground Zero in the migrant crisis."
Those fleeing US wars and "democratic regime changes" in the Americas have it much easier; all they have to do is make it across the peaceful lands of Mexico and avoid privatized prisons here.
"Harvest of Empire" is a great film about the people fleeing US disruptions here like they flee US disruptions there.
So we wouldn't have this problem if we had left a brutal, deranged dictator like Gadhafi in charge?
The West has been driving immigration for a very long time. People migrate for social, political, and economic reasons. The white man's "free' trade deals, military exploits/coups, and consumer mind-set all drive migration throughout the world, not just in the Americas. Our government is our own worst enemy, creating problems of magnitude in service to corporate masters, and the two-party monopoly only serves to maintain the status quo.
There really is something terribly wrong when money and business can cross borders without a second thought, but when people do it, well...
In a word, yes. (edit: Do) You accept unchallenged the popularized American characterization of Gadhafi as "brutal and deranged." (?:edit) Yet both he and the "brutal and deranged" Sadam Hussein led countries that exceeded their US-friendly neighbors in health, education, and distribution of national wealth from national resources. All the ruling powers of all the nations there are brutally repressive of their traditional sectarian enemies. It is a seemingly endless cycle of hatred and violence. As for deranged, much of that evidence has been conjured through mis-quotes, misunderstanding of foreign cultures, and outright propagandist misrepresentation. Vilification of the US enemy du jour is one function that our media does with exceeding brilliance and absolute efficiency.
It is surprising that, if memory serves, the French and the Brits, but I'm not sure about the Italians, supported the regime-change reality of the NATO intervention. French culture is in turmoil already because of their large immigrant Muslim population; what did they think would happen? Did they learn nothing of farcical US leadership from the Iraqi disaster? The Brits don't care because the poor suckers can't even make the passage from Libya to Italy, so not much possibility they'll make it to merry old England.
Now if you happen to be of the ownership class, taking out Gadhafi was probably a good thing as it can only enhance your holdings of defense stock.
edited: because I appeared to assume to know what you think. I do not.
Yes and when that money crossing borders is from the countries of Africa and into the pockets of the rich "investor class" in The West , is it any wonder the poor people of Africa follow ?
The "commons" of Africa is all being privatized as we speak. Investors from the rich countries are buying up the land people once lived on and forcing those same people off it and into cities where they are supposed to find jobs. These dispossessed people then try to migrate to a place that has more or better jobs and then the nations that initiated the Corporate takeover of Africa bitch and moan about migrants ruining their way of life.
It sickening.
