The world is facing the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War. Over 300,000 are dead in Syria, and one and half million are either injured or disabled. Four and a half million people are trying to flee the country. And Syria is just one of a growing number of failed or failing states in the Middle East and North Africa. How should developed nations respond to human suffering on this mass scale? Do the prosperous societies of the West, including Canada and the U.S., have a moral imperative to assist as many refugees as they reasonably and responsibly can? Or, is this a time for vigilance and restraint in the face of a wave of mass migration that risks upending the tolerance and openness of the West?The eighteenth semi-annual Munk Debate, which was held on April 1, 2016, pits former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour and leading historian Simon Schama against leader of the UK Independence Party Nigel Farage and bestselling author Mark Steyn to debate the West’s response to the global refugee crisis.

The world is facing the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War. Over 300,000 are dead in Syria, and one and half million are either injured or disabled. Four and a half million people are trying to flee the country. And Syria is just one of a growing number of failed or failing states in the Middle East and North Africa. How should developed nations respond to human suffering on this mass scale? Do the prosperous societies of the West, including Canada and the U.S., have a moral imperative to assist as many refugees as they reasonably and responsibly can? Or, is this a time for vigilance and restraint in the face of a wave of mass migration that risks upending the tolerance and openness of the West? The eighteenth semi-annual Munk Debate, which was held on April 1, 2016, pits former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour and leading historian Simon Schama against leader of the UK Independence Party Nigel Farage and bestselling author Mark Steyn to debate the West’s response to the global refugee crisis.

The world is facing the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War. Over 300,000 are dead in Syria, and one and half million are either injured or disabled. Four and a half million people are trying to flee the country. And Syria is just one of a growing number of failed or failing states in the Middle East and North Africa. How should developed nations respond to human suffering on this mass scale? Do the prosperous societies of the West, including Canada and the U.S., have a moral imperative to assist as many refugees as they reasonably and responsibly can? Or, is this a time for vigilance and restraint in the face of a wave of mass migration that risks upending the tolerance and openness of the West? The eighteenth semi-annual Munk Debate, which was held on April 1, 2016, pits former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour and leading historian Simon Schama against leader of the UK Independence Party Nigel Farage and bestselling author Mark Steyn to debate the West's response to the global refugee crisis.

More than half of the world's 25.9 million refugees are children. Some die during their journey to find safety, while others remain in makeshift refugee camps for several years. Global conflict continues to swell the number of refugees, but domestic disagreements stymie response. How Should Society Respond to the Refugee Crisis? describes realistic accounts of refugees' circumstances and summarizes current policy debates and experts' suggestions about how to alleviate the global refugee crisis.

In 2018 the number of people displaced worldwide by violence, persecution, or natural disaster had reached 68.5 million. The United Nations Refugee Agency estimates that one person is displaced every two seconds. The world faces an unprecedented crisis as people flee their homes, seeking safety, peace, and a better future for themselves and their families. Refugees set off, often on foot or by boat, on dangerous journeys to cross international borders where they can apply for asylum, or protection, in a new country. Once there, they may spend years in crowded refugee camps or other inadequate housing while they wait for their claims to be processed. While many countries welcome refugees and other asylum seekers, others do not. They worry that high numbers of refugees are an economic burden. They have concerns about security and fear the changes that new populations bring to a culture. Yet refugees also boost economies and save dying towns. They introduce valuable new skills and meaningful perspectives. What are the solutions to the crisis? Do we have the resources--and the will--to provide hope and a future for all the world's citizens? Meet refugees from around the world and hear what experts have to say. Make an informed judgment and find ways to be part of a solution.

The twenty-second Munk Debate pits acclaimed journalist, professor, and ordained minister Michael Eric Dyson and New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg against renowned actor and writer Stephen Fry and University of Toronto professor and author Jordan Peterson to debate the implications of political correctness and freedom of speech. Is political correctness an enemy of free speech, open debate, and the free exchange of ideas? Or, by confronting head-on the dominant power relationships and social norms that exclude marginalized groups are we creating a more equitable and just society? For some the argument is clear. Political correctness is stifling the free and open debate that fuels our democracy. It is also needlessly dividing one group from another and promoting social conflict. Others insist that creating public spaces and norms that give voice to previously marginalized groups broadens the scope of free speech. The drive towards inclusion over exclusion is essential to creating healthy, diverse societies in an era of rapid social change.

Will Donald J. Trump be America’s next president? For some, his brash, politically incorrect campaign is the panacea for the Washington and Wall Street elites that have saddled the country with endless wars, an anemic economy, and growing racial division. Trump’s boosters believe he will usher in a Reagan-like era of domestic prosperity at home, and free America from a destructive global web of counterproductive trade agreements and military entanglements abroad. Trump’s critics are having none of this. They see not a president in waiting, but a dangerously unstable and inexperienced demagogue — one who threatens U.S. democracy and global peace and security. Rather than being a harbinger of the country’s renewal, Trump’s candidacy is supposedly destroying the social fabric of America by demonizing minorities, denigrating women, and exacerbating racial differences. To engage with the controversy of the moment, the Fall 2016 Munk Debate will move the motion: Be it resolved, Donald Trump can make America great again...