The Syrian Refugee Debate Takes to Social Media: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

In the era of Facebook, controversial topics play out in various ways on the social networking site and it's often not pretty. Such has been the case with the ongoing debate over whether the United States should accept Syrian refugees in the wake of the tragic terrorism acts in Paris.

While Syrian refugees have been seeking safe harbor in several countries over the past few years, the debate here in America has escalated in recent weeks and turned into divisive political arguments. A majority of U.S. governors have publicly voiced their opposition to providing asylum to the Syrian migrants even though immigration remains a federal issue. The debate has also become a litmus test for the presidential candidates and their views on domestic security.


FITS OF FURY ON FACEBOOK

Facebook, with its free accounts and ability to weigh in on anything in a public forum, has provided bully pulpits to anyone with an internet connection at home, at the office or on their smartphone. Now, as soon as someone offers their opinion in the form of a Facebook post as to whether the U.S. should welcome Syrian refugees, that post quickly becomes an explosive back-and-forth among commentators from every demographic and political affiliation.

After Michigan's governor, Rick Snyder, reversed his earlier position in support of Michigan welcoming Syrian refugees, debates on the social network started by local residents turned into tempestuous back-and-forth arguments with each side posting links to articles in support of their opinion on the matter. Analogies to the U.S. closing its doors to Jewish refugees in the 1930's were quickly rebuffed by those arguing that allowing the Syrian migrants into our country would lead to domestic terrorism. Others cited statistics showing the majority of terrorist attacks were caused by those affiliated with Islam. These posts garnered hundreds of comments with both sides vehemently concerned about the issues they prioritize, whether the security of our country and the refugee screening process or the ethical considerations of turning away hopeless women and young children in need of shelter.

The Jewish community, with its strong values, remains divided on these issues as evidenced by the outpouring of strongly held viewpoints on Facebook. Some descendents of those who were turned back to Europe in the 1930s took the position that the U.S. must use its moral compass and not transgress as it did before the Holocaust. Others called such a comparison preposterous as the Jewish immigrants from Europe eighty years ago posed no threat to American citizens. On such a contentious issue, strong disagreements are bound to occur online. Several such Facebook debates over the Syrian refugee topic led to Facebook users blocking each other, even those who are friends in real life.

In many instances, the Facebook discussion space has proven to be detrimental to open and honest dialogue with regard to the Syrian refugee crisis, but surely there are some positive outcomes from Facebook in this matter.

Governor Rick Snyder's Flip Flop on Refugees is Shameful

I first learned about the Holocaust as a middle school student at Hillel Day School in metro Detroit, but it wasn't until high school that I became aware that the United States could have done more to help European Jews looking for safe haven. As a high school student studying the Holocaust I remember being shocked that the U.S. State Department clung to its strict application of the 1924 Immigration Law during the Holocaust, which made it very difficult for Jewish refugees of Nazi Europe to obtain entry visas.

Later, as a college student I devoted an entire semester to researching the restrictive immigration policies maintained by U.S. consuls, which delayed and rejected granting visas to the Jewish refugees fleeing persecution for national security reasons. By the time the U.S. realized it needed to take in these refugees, it was too late.

That was a harsh lesson that our nation learned in the middle of the last century. However, it's now more than seventy years since that time and our country seems to have forgotten our responsibility to refugees who are fleeing persecution.

Just over a month ago, Michigan's Governor Rick Snyder, who I think has served our state well, said he was working with the federal government to figure out the best process for Michigan to accept refugees from Syria. Of course, he made the caveat that these refugees would have to be carefully screened to assure they were not security threats and that makes complete sense. I am very disappointed, however, that today Governor Snyder, like several other governors, has done a complete 180 on Michigan's policy toward these Syrian refugees.

Efforts to bring Syrian refugees to Michigan have now been delayed following Friday's terrorist attacks in Paris. Governor Snyder has continued to say that Michigan is a welcoming state is proud of its rich history of immigration, but as of now he is unwilling to welcome in the hopeless refugees from the Middle East.

While this might sound like the most cogent policy in order to ensure the security of Michigan, I'm not convinced it's the right policy. In fact, it's the same excuse the U.S. government used in the 1940s when our country could have provided a safe refuge to the thousands of Jewish men, women and children fleeing Hitler's Europe. It certainly isn't the right moral choice and I would think that Governor Snyder would know better. We cannot allow Islamic State's threat of terrorism to prevent us from doing the right thing, which is participating in potential Syrian refugee resettlement efforts and serving as a safe haven for Syrian refugees. Governor Synder: Michigan's better than that!