Disclaimer: I am not in Europe. Everything I know about the migrant crisis, I learned online. I am not well informed, so my thoughts on this topic are meritless, and my opinions are not solid.

I have been thinking about the people who choose to accept refugees. I wonder what they think about when making their decisions.

Does each individual country decide to accept refugees?

Does every member of the European Union have to take in a minimum number of refugees? And if so, how was that decided?

I read that migrant crime has been high in Sweden for some decades. According to some sources, the migrant crime rate in Sweden has "skyrocketed" since the migrant crisis.

What are the Swedish decision makers thinking? According to a based Redditor:

They're thinking, "It's intolerant to acknowledge that immigrants commit more crimes than others, so we won't do it." They're thinking, "If we hide the truth from people long enough and call anybody who opposes unfiltered mass migration names, we can keep our jobs." They're thinking, "The public is too stupid to know what's good for it so I will decide for them."

It's worth significant consideration that many of the events described in this BBC article we are commenting on, specifically the physical attacks on migrants by the right-wing gang, never happened. A single far left Swedish media outlet made the claim migrants were attack, then immediately was cited as source by the mainstream Swedish news sources, which then were cited by the BBC (an institution which has presented a bias view on the migrant crisis from day one). Yesterday a Stockholm police report was released to the general public which revealed that not a single person reported being attacked by the gang other than a police officer who tried to arrest one of its members. They reported only "disturbing the peace" and "handing out leaflets".

http://newobserveronline.com/stockholm-attack-invented-by-controlled-media/[1]

These people are lying, covering up their incompetence, and manipulating the public with fabricated scare-stories. People are getting incredibly angry with their governments all across Europe and I do not see this situation lightening unless politicians stop ignoring what people want and start listening to them.

I believe it is a plausible theory.

When I picture this happening, I think that the decision makers are aware of the high violent crime rate of the migrant population. Given those facts, they still decide that it is good to allow those people in to the country. They could calculate the number of violent crimes that will be commited by the new migrant population, and then decide that it is low enough as to be acceptable.

What if the public were presented with estimates of future crime rates; based on varying numbers of incoming migrants, and then allowed to vote on the number of migrants to accept? Should this type of decision be allowed to go to a vote?

Conspiracy time: What if increased violent migrant crime is the goal? Who would benefit from that and how? Did they manufacture the entire migrant crisis? If so, how?

I am so uninformed that I couldn't begin to answer those questions. I don't know the history of the Syrian conflict, so I will go read about that next.