Just to name a few reasons for these flows are the rampant corruption theft and oppression, poverty, medieval traditions and malpractices of democratic principles,. These situations are perpetuated by other factors such as, the growing demographics and the strong determination of the young to learn and improve their living conditions and working opportunities by exploiting the availability of global communication and access to the markets of the developed western nations.

As for racism in Malta, this comes mostly because of fear and this is everywhere to some extent. Those Maltese who have studied in international foreign universities or worked in such places as London Paris, Rome, Madrid, New York, Sydney or Toronto have experienced no inhibitions towards people of all races that they came across. In fact many have dear colleagues of different races who live in these cities.

Terrorism comes from the violent crazy bad apples and yes, these should be stopped just the same as for the hardened criminals in every country. Of course there are law wnforcement and safety problems but the question arises as to where the balance of our democracy should stand, between accepting the incidence of these violent elements in today’s societies and our personal liberties.

Yes, total respect to Jonathan and all those vulnerable people who cross our path whether Maltese, neighbors or Africans.

Out of Africa, likewise, I’ve heard all your “arguments” before, from Lowell supporters. So nothing new there as well.

You say that none of those who sent replies to your comments said anything about where the saturation point lies. Now, since it is you who brought up the saturation point in the debate, the onus is on you to give it to us and substantiate it with the evidence. Then again, you have already suggested that we should send ALL African refugees back, so your talk of saturation points, and whether we can continue taking in Africans is just racist bulls*it.

You would also like to note that I never suggested that we should let immigrants in without control. Controls are already in place. Of course, these would never be enough for the racists among us. After all, control as much as you like, only a push-back policy can guarantee that no black Africans stay here (just because the racists among us don’t like them).

You conclude by saying you remember when, 30 years ago, other Europeans you met in Malta would tell you how lucky Malta was to have no immigrants. Well, perhaps you should move away from redneck and racist circles and perhaps get a proper education.

No, No, No, Integration has not failed. Go to Marseille. It’s Jews and Muslims and Christians and Atheists. Go to America or Argentina or Auckland or Melbourne. Look at Malta and Sicily historically. We have already been a crucible in the past.

Liberal, thank you for taking the time to reply. I’ve heard all your arguments before — nothing new.

Future Maltese will have the opportunity to decide which one of us was right if nothing is done to solve this situation.

Another contributor mentioned “home-grown” terrorists: precisely, that is what we should worry about right now as the children of these immigrants will be disgruntled Maltese in future.

Integration of non-Europeans into European societies has failed everywhere, in some places more than in others. Do you have children? If you do, think again. None of those who sent in replies has said anything about where the saturation point lies.

Can we continue taking in Africans without any limits as is happening now?

Yes, there are no limits at this time for all an immigrant needs to do is take a boat and cross the sea or be rescued. Your arguments seem to point in that direction for letting in immigrants without control is an open invitation to all Africans to make it to Europe. I leave it to you to ponder.

I remember 30 years ago when other Europeans I met in Malta would comment to me how lucky Malta was in having no immigrants. Well, we’ve gone a long way since then. Ai posteri l’ardua sentenza. I have nothing else to add.

Racism in Malta should be condemned because it’s silly. And that’s that.

The link between the human condition and violent reaction is circumstantial at best. If Jonathan were right, we’d be seeing mass terrorism by the massively unemployed, mistreated and dissatisfied under-35s. All I see is a few feeble sit-ins.

Total respect to Jonathan though.

“But why should we allow into Malta human beings of a different culture?”

Do you mean those who do not have our ‘I’m all right Jack’ culture ?

Oh dear. Where to begin?

Jonathan’s argument was mainly that we must treat refugees and asylum seekers well, and that failing to do so might bring about violent repercussions. I won’t go into the merits of this argument, but to go from Jonathan’s point to saying that his argument proves that we should send all immigrants back is grossly absurd. Essentially, what you are saying is this: If we treat immigrants wrongly (emphasis on wrongly), then some other people (emphasis on some) might retaliate through violent means. So we should send all refugees back (emphasis on all) to avoid trouble.

By that same reasoning, for instance, to avoid lawsuits from employed women for sexual harassment, we shouldn’t go into the trouble of educating people about harassment, or prosecute people for sexual harassment. Why go into all that trouble when we could eliminate the harassment by forcing all women to stay at home? No women at the workplace = no sexual harassment from men versus women at the place of work. Right? While this would be factually a correct statement, I’m sure you’ll understand that this is just the elimination of one problem through creating a bigger one. The same applies in the case of refugees.

You imply that if we send them all back, there won’t be an opportunity for them to feel aggrieved through being mistreated, and so the potential problem of violent retaliation by others would be eliminated. Let us disregard for a moment the gross injustice of punishing individuals for the potential future crimes (violent retaliation) of others. What makes you think that the single act of sending all black African immigrants back just because they are black Africans won’t itself be correctly perceived as a gross (racist) injustice? You say immigrants should be treated with dignity. Punishing them for the potential future crimes of others is not treating them with dignity. It is the essence of racism.

You also ask why we allow into Malta human beings of a different culture. Well, if you really believe that Malta is a mono-cultural society, you’ve certainly lived a sheltered life. From the things you’ve written, I can already say that we share little in common besides our language and passport. Would you kick me out at the first opportunity if I wasn’t Maltese?

Freedom is a by-product of those basic elements.

It is when those elements are lacking that protection is warranted.

Too often the basic elements are stifled.

I think the main thrust of Jonahan’s argument is to treat people with respect. Sending them back as you commend is not the solution. How difficult is it to treat people with respect regardless of colour or race?

To a man – or should that be wild animal? – none if them achieved anything more than spreading fear and unease. Even with their backers in power, they never rose above the gutter they came from.