An analysis piece in The Atlantic by Jerusalem Demsas puts forward a simple argument: whether there’s a migrant ‘crisis’ or not really depends on the political motivations of the people describing it as such. Why are 30,000 Ukrainian refugees assimilated into Chicago with ease, while 30,000 asylum seekers from other countries are represented as a crisis?

Shockingly, it turns out that there are political gains to be had in presenting migrants as a threat! And not everyone is arguing with sincere intentions! And it’s bad for Democrats to adopt the language of a migrant crisis! And yes, three sentences in a row with explanation points. That’s how important it is to get this right.

(Taken from an email sent to me by Never Again Action.)