Inkata, I've spent a lot of time recently trying to establish why not.
I think, and this is empirical observation and research, that on one hand it is extremely difficult for many people to think independently about the refugee/migrant issue.
They have been brought up to ascribe emotional responses to such situations, and those who do the most public hand-wringing and blaming the government, the West, the class system, financial inequality etc, get the loudest cheers.
If you watch TV or listen to radio debates, there is always applause when someone calls out an opponent for racism, xenophobia, elitism, uncaring, prejudice etc.
There is sadly often booing for the speakers who make practical suggestions or allude to difficult cultural issues; much easier to decry them (see above) than go against the group think.
I can see why; it is intimidating even if you have been trained and educated to think independently. Sadly for many, that option has never been there and the topic of critical thinking and the national curriculum was discussed intelligently in an earlier thread.
I was not brought up here; my education was at very liberal international schools all over the world. My parents were free thinkers and I was lucky to be present for many difficult debates, round our table.
We grew up with all kinds of viewpoints; Jewish, Lebanese, French West Indian, you name it.
The most important thing I learned was to listen and to assume you will be heard in turn.
I have seen that on these threads, sadly elsewhere on this wonderful forum there is still the smug, emotive impractical invective.
But if we can still keep debating here, let's do it.
If we allow the discussion to be driven underground because someone thinks we shouldn't have it, then we are back to square one.