Considering the immigrant crisis, one sees the dichotomy between accepting them – inviting them and sharing our inheritance with them vs. not letting them in, claiming that what I have is my own and there is not a reason for giving it to others for free.
Are we really owners of the property we are entrusted? What if Europeans considered themselves merely as administrators of the property? Have our ancestors worked so hard just for us to dissipate it, or make the best use of it, divide it among others it it does good? It is obvious, that one does not like to hear about giving out “his own” among those coming from one does not know where. In Czech republic, the immigrant crisis is more than anything seen as a threat. For Czechs, the knowledge of the East is so little, so distant, that any immigrant is seen primarily as an unknown threat to our system, this stems from the belief that what is remote and unknown is usually seen as something dangerous, one may even venture to use Freud´s term uncanny. Once the knowledge is dissolved and the unknown is turned to what is known, canny, understood, it is no more dangerous. This is what we need to uphold – understanding the problem, educating people, and not feeding the natural threat of the unknown. The way out of this problem is not destroying the natural human preocupation with safety, but on the other hand, show that our safety is not endangered with the income those in need.