my thoughts on immigration what about yours?

Post Reply New Topic

There are many things wrong with the capitalistic system. But chattel slavery is not one of them.

ruveyn

Saying that something is trite does not make it untrue. Do you really think that Jesus would refuse to help anyone who didn't speak the language? Shall we start prosecuting illiterates and mutes as well? Or would Jesus say that only native poor people deserved help, not foreigners. Whatever happened to the idea of LOVE thy neighbor? Our gates are not pearly white and we (American citizens) need to get over ourselves. We will never gain respect by disrespecting others.

And how do you know that Native Americans didn't have some sort of government and that they did not look at the "settlers" as immigrants? I believe they had the land settled just fine by their own standards. Most people who are very against immigrants are generally afraid that they will be the next generation of "Native Americans." All too often religious folks need to be reminded to do unto others...

There is a difference in helping someone and tolerating people EXPLOITING a situation.

Immigration laws exist to protect the overall integrity of a national economy. To let anyone come into your nation invites criminals to migrate into your borders (and become YOUR problem), it places a drain on government services because (factually) there isn't enough jobs for everyone who might want to be in your country and those who can't find work (or won't work) now become a burden to support, and if they won't make an effort to learn the predominant language, you have to spend money to provide people to translate for them. All of this extracts a cost that will destroy a nation.

God's law clearly prohibited the Jews from tolerating people within their borders who would not comply with the local laws. Anyone who wanted to join the Jews could join if they would follow the proscribed procedure laid out in the law. Jesus likened a foreign woman who asked for a miracle to a dog because she was not a Jew, but when she replied that even a dog survives off the crumbs from the master's table, Jesus was so moved BY HER FAITH that He gave her the miracle she sought.

America has no legal or moral duty to provide for anyone who wants to come here. That's why we have immigration laws. That's why EVERY NATION has immigration laws.



Simple. The settlers DID NOT live among the Native Americans. They had separate areas, cultures, governments, etc. What came next was essentially an invading force overcoming the current population. I'm not defending that as right, but it was not akin to immigration in any sense of the word. Because the Native Americans didn't hold regard about the ownership of land as Europeans did, they didn't see the threat until it was too late.

What you consider to be the “racist” side is in fact the primary legitimate concern (at least as far as the host majority should be concerned) since immigration is simply ethnic conquest by another name.



As Sam Francis once said, if your only concern with immigration is over whether it’s legal or not, why not just get rid of immigration laws altogether.



It was once understood in the West (as it is still understood elsewhere) that immigration laws should exist to protect the genetic and cultural integrity of the host population, and that the economy is a secondary consideration. This was the case in the United States until 1965.



That might have been true in around 1,000BC, but from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah the Jews clearly strove to preserve their racial distinctiveness by encouraging endogamy and discouraging out-marriage and conversion.

(“And it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the alien mixture” (Nehemiah 13:3) “And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves” (Nehemiah 13:25))

In UK. I don't see many immigrants that are begginit except maybe Jamaicans, commit gang crime or get rat'assed on the streets on friday night. I might occasionally see a Polish guy with is pants down to his knees or a Nigerian man who thinks he are da pimp dady, immegrents are more likely go to university then working class Brits.

but they do make debates interesting!

No it isn't. Let the West European employers cut the wages of the workers. If they can't, that is just too damned bad.

Labor is a commodity bought and sold in a market place.

ruveyn

You're a republican aren't you ruveyn who's never struggled with being unemployed?

Thought so....

I think it should be unrestricted for refugees from war or genocide, but only legal immigration for those who are here for economic opportunity or just want the American lifestyle.

That's an oversimplification. The citizens of a country require food, water, employment and security, and those citizens have a government that acts on their behalf to facilitate the management of a system that provides that for their benefit. That includes securing the country's borders against immigrants who might circumvent the contract between citizen and government for gain. If a government allows a situation to develop whereby cheap labour from the enormous pool of people in third world countries is given unrestricted access to its labour market then it has failed its people, and those people have every right to remove that government from office.

Ah....

Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth.

Socialism is the equal distribution of misery.

If the world did as you suggested, we'd all be lucky to enjoy a 2nd World country standard of living given the world's population.

@ zer0netgain

Wasn't there something like a quarter million people in the area we're talking about ranging from fullscale settlements to nomadic tribal societies. Also, I might be wrong but is it not the case that the Iroquois were built on a federal system with Roman Consul type military leaders being elected (as in the power of a sovereign being divided between two men who held the power of veto over the decisions of the other). I'm also pretty sure they got a little hostile when they realised the Europeans were doing jack squat to live and instead relied on the American Indians who were literally putting food into their mouths (most of the settlers were soldiers who were accustomed to not having to work [they came from a feudal system where this was standard] and the Indians treat them like demi-gods because of the realtively advanced technology (see the theory of subversion put forward by Stephen Greenblatt) to subjugate the American Indians.

I note nobody has mentioned the Santa Maria yet....

@ aspetta - well said, sir

Likely so, but the Native Americans didn't treat the Europeans as invaders. They tolerated them and when they felt they were taking too much, a "military" response resulted in the superior firepower of the Europeans taking what they wanted.

I'm not defending that as right, but it's not an "immigration" issue. The Europeans didn't come here to join the Native American culture.

true, they settled for extermination in the stead of assimilation

Again if 50 million Dutch whites and 50 million Swede whites immigrate to America today, there would be no problem integrating at all.

Even Muslims in Europe could be a racial not a religious problem.


Black Americans born in America, whose parents and grandparents and great grandparents have lived on this land for generations, it seems that no matter what they do , they are "foreign".


A Dutch white immigrating to America today might be more welcomed than a Black American born in America would be.


and the newly immigrated East Asians and South Asians and maybe Middle Easterners have a much stronger cultural identity than African Americans/even Africans , or Latinos do. Often comes with a different script.. or like "five thousand years of history" or something


( and no body really cares about the indigenous .. it's like whatever.. the indigenous Americans/Mexicans/Bolivians/Brazilians/Australians/Russians.. even the Spanish speaking Mexican Americans don't care about Nahuatl speaking Mexican Americans.. a trilingual English/Spanish/Nahuatl abogado catering to the need of nuhuatl-only Aztec-Americans ?? where could you find one in america .. even google translate couldn't find a corpus on Chukchi .. nor is anyone trying to record these most fascinating and counterintuitive languages as much as possible so in the future they could be revived .. indigenous should all have built a wall)

Last edited by cemil on 10 Jan 2019, 10:53 am, edited 1 time in total.