Is it racism to be against immigration?

Post Reply New Topic

Oh i get it. By "ghetto" you mean "where the minorities live"?

That hardly justifies "white flight." If anything, it shows how racism is responsible for the poverty in black neighborhoods.

No.

I mean:
- where the streets and buildings are poorly kept
-graffiti is not removed
-the crime rate is very high
-abandoned homes everywhere
-bums / prostitutes
-the city services are minimal because poor people can't afford to buy stuff

***You feel the poverty when you drive through these cities.***


Sure. However, I am just telling you how it is in Michigan, not trying to justify it.

There was a black guy on tv living in Southfield, MI complaining about poor black people were moving into abandoned homes near him -- they are ruining his area he said.

Interesting theory. Not what I mean but may be not far.

In libertarian society the state doesn't have power to coerce. But that is neither practical nor ideal in pure form. None of us can defend ourselves against China or Rusia or even motor bike gang. So to have any practical right, we need to form a cooperation with powerful beings. Basically we follow their rule and in return they protect us.

The sort of powerful beings in "the market" right now are countries and their governments. And part of their term, which I think is quite reasonable now, is that the majority of population must agree to the terms.

So every voter is like stock owners that have power be it legitimate or not to get a piece of the cake. Of course in real cooperation the stock owners simply vote to get dividend and that's it. In US they vote to get welfare and affirmative actions, and so on and son. Well, right or wrong, it's just what they want.

Now, is it racist to be against immigration. It is. So what?

It's your country. You are the stock owners. You decide. If you want only your own kind, why not? Of course you want your own interests. Other voters have their own interests that's far from you. Of course, not allowing productive immigrant from coming in will hurt your interests. But hei, it's something you consider based on your own interests.

Another case against totally free immigration is the following. Once the immigrant come they can vote too. That means they become stock holders too. What sort of company just redistribute stocks like that?

And finally, this is something I am very curious about european.

Why do you accept arab immigrant so much?

I mean chinese immigrant will probably demand end of affirmative action. Arab immigrants would demand that you obey their religion or death. Seems like chinese immigrants, and I know plenty want to move to europe, are much more benign. So why do european countries accept arab immigrants and b***h about it?

The fact is people that are too different will simply don't get along. If you don't like islam, don't emigrate there. If a muslim do not like secularism, don't emigrate to europe. But what about the pay difference? What about the fact that europeans earn more money than arab countries?

Well, I think it's about time we all learn that may be these white guys do something right. Combination of capitalism and democracy and secularism or what somehow, though imperfectly, make a quite stable prosperous society. I can see many weakness but overall it's fine. So many wants to go to europe than the other way around. Okay....

Couldn't they just import european ideology to their country? I mean it's not copyrighted right?

The asians are doing it well. Look at japan, south korea, taiwan, singapore. Even china is very westernized. You don't see japanese or chinese walking in confusian dress. We even dress like whites. Chinese american have american names. That'll work. Just import ideologies from the west.

Now there are fairness issues. For example, americans are full with immigrant. Kind of unfair if the same immigrants prevent other immigrants from coming. The fact is, americans do not do that. Americans accept immigrant more openly than other countries. So what to complain about? Not much.

Anti-immigration is implicitly racist, because every time the topic comes up, it's always about immigration from non-white countries (fear of a white minority).

For example, many Americans find it disturbing that Barack Obama is descended from African immigrants, yet nobody seems to care about his Irish immigrant ancestry.

I disagree, it isn't always about a "fear of a white minority at all." A great deal of the current dissatisfaction with UK immigration levels has nothing to do with immigration from non-white countries at all but is about ecconomic migrants from "white" countries within the European Union. Great Britain is a geographically small island and it simply cannot sustain the current levels of immigration, regardless of the colour of those migrants. A large proportion of the current population realise this fact, including those of so-called ethnic origins, and that dissatisfaction with current unchecked immigration levels, from within the EU, was at the root of the referendum decision to leave the European Union.

Humans are like any animals, you have a lot of food (or "goods" in human's case) and the animals will all flock towards the food. Europeans (N. America and Aussieland included) over the last 500 years have taken a whole bunch of stuff from other places and brought it home...now they're confused as to why they have immigration problems.

As I've explained in my previous post the immigration "problem" in the UK is centered on immigration from within Europe, not from former dominion or commonwealth countries.

in an ideal world, everybody would be able to relocate to any other place on earth, and maybe someday that will be possible. but it would require some sort of worldwide state, which, despite the ongoing globalization trend, we're still a very long way from (and it's obvious that the world isn't really moving in a linear progression towards that scenario. it's possible that it will never happen)

i think each country should be free to decide their immigration policies, and even "no immigration allowed at all" isn't necessarily wrong. or "immigration only from similar cultures", or "immigration only within certain social/professional classes". i think none of that is fundamentally wrong. but then the problem is that there is a lot of inconsistency. and in some cases, immigration happens no matter what, because it's too difficult to control, and people naturally want a better life for themselves and their families, and they will often migrate if they believe it will help them achieve that. it's just human nature

it's when it's taken personally that it starts to go downhill. people on the other side often don't stop to think that they would have done the same if it were them in the shoes of those immigrants. i don't see anything wrong with people wanting to preserve their culture or, obviously, their place in the economy, but then the blame game gets problematic. the rational thing to do would be to look at the circumstances that are leading to uncontrolled migration, and then work on realistic ways to change those circumstances. but things tend to get complicated and much less rational when people fear for their livelihood. without some mediating voice to put them at ease, it tends to get worse

i think one aspect of the immigration phenomenon in general which is often overlooked is the two-way nature of it. mass immigration to wealthier nations is largely a result of the influence that those nations have over the rest of the world, which is one of the bases of their economic success. as the central nations in the global economy expand their reach in search for larger markets and cheaper resources (promoting cultural values worldwide that tend to gradually override previous local values in the process), people from elsewhere start to want new things that they don't have at home, and they become dissatisfied when maybe they weren't before. that causes a range of very complex feedback loops, with immigration being one of the resulting effects

on the other hand, nowadays there also seems to be a growing trend that, for some reason or a number of different reasons, some countries (or significantly large segments of the population of those countries) want to show a sort of international goodwill by welcoming immigrants with no clear benefit to the welcoming country. so far so good, that's not necessarily a problem either, sometimes it's a good thing to take a chance to buy some karma. but there don't seem to be actual policies in place, and that's a problem for everyone. because then you're just creating a new class of disenfranchised people, as if you're doing them a favor (be it in good faith or not)

simply being allowed to cross a border doesn't automatically make anyone's life better, but many people (on both sides) seem to assume that it does. that's a serious misconception with serious consequences

Yes, you've taken from other Europeans as well, good for you-- now they're here to collect their stuff back.

The UK has taken from Poland, Bulgaria, Romania etc? That's news to me. Why don't they all, Britains included, flock to italy then? Because the Romans took from the lot of them.

By the way, its isn't "good for me" as I'm actually Irish.

I couldn't care less about if he's half African - Obama also has a white Mama (from my state no less). People seem to forget that part. I sure am not going to vote for a President because of his race like several Americans did.

Last edited by nurseangela on 08 Oct 2016, 3:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thank you very much! Someone that speaks sense for a change. And I don't know if anyone heard in the news about a week ago, but Mexico is getting a flood of illegal immigrants and they said and I quote "We will have to send them back from where they came from." Smart countries that want to survive are going to have to "send back" any illegal aliens because countries won't be able to support it. Some Americans seem to thing that we have an endless amount of money to spend, but we all already in the shitter $20 TRILLION dollars that we will never be able to pay. Use some common sense for once. There are LEGAL ways to get into a country.

I don't think it's about realising a fact. It's more about people fearing what they don't understand. Anti-migration sentiments are highest in the areas where there is no migration.

There are serious questions about how the country would cope without current levels of migration. On a simple level, we simply wouldn't have enough medical staff and the NHS would be in much bigger trouble. We'd also lose all the taxes that the immigrants provide and the money they spend in the economy.

The problem isn't the huge population growth. The problem is the system which necessitates high population growth. Increased automation might be the solution. After that, we need to make it less attractive to live in Britain by helping make other countries more attractive to live in, through trade, aid, and cooperation.

I take offence at this statement... "I don't think it's about realising a fact. It's more about people fearing what they don't understand." That's a typically elitist derogatory remark that implies that anyone who protests about immigration levels is ill educated.

Most of the non British NHS staff come from outside of the EU. The EU migrants tend to be seasonal low income workers. Their spending does not benefit the British economy because most of their disposable earnings are sent to their home countries to support their families. The money that they do spend it often spent in Polish food stores and the like, so much of that money never finds it's way into the British ecconomy either. As minimum wage earners many of these seasonal EU workers don't pay income tax at all, because their earnings fall below the tax threshold.

The problem is population growth. In rural areas, like east Anglia, where many EU migrant workers come to pick crops they put a strain on the local services, which are geared towards the low level permanent population and are unable to properly cope with the seasonal influx. When some of those migrants do decide to settle and bring their families with them, that necessitates the need for additional school places and NHS resources. It puts pressure on housing and transport too.

Great Britain is a small island and there simply isn't room here for the continued high level of immigration to continue unabated, unless we want to see the entire countryside swallowed by housing developments. A pint bottle won't hold two pints of water.

While it was common knowledge that Obama would be making history as the first African American President, I think it's been greatly exaggerated that that was a the primary motivation for most of his supporters.