I'm upset about mass immigration in the US

Post Reply New Topic

lol, that's laughable, that they have the citizens best interests at heart....also though I bet they sure as hell don't have the best interests of the immigrant population either.



I do get some concern on how it can effect things economically, I mean in some sense a lot of them might be more willing to take under the table jobs or low pay jobs...so that might take away from other people getting those jobs and might cause government assistence to be stretched more thin...those are the two concerns that make sense to me. As for whether they assimilate or not....I guess I don't see that as important, its not like we have a rich defined culture here in the U.S to even assimilate to.

^this

Uhh didn't Columbus, allow for a bunch of natives to be killed...or called for it or something. I know the having them catch diseases over not being immune was not so intentional, more ignorance/lack of knowledge. But pretty sure the Europeans actively kind of annihilated their entire way of life, killed many intentionally ect...it wasn't all just a big accident.

And do tell what is our 'culture' here in the U.S?....and I think it would be funny to see a white person eating mexican food complaining about how those damn mexicans need to assimilate, so I can laugh my a** off.

Also one does not have to entirely reject/shed their initial culture to assimilate somewhat...even so what even is there to assimilate to that is a constant?...only think I can figure is learning english since that is the main language and makes communication more effective but aside from that we don't have a defined culture to assimilate to.

Hey Sweetleaf:

Of course Columbus did what he did.

I just wanted to highlight another truth.

I would say that our culture is mostly based on the better parts of the culture of many countries. Often times it has come together so much that many people may not even realize how different they are.

What we don't want is more or less isolated communities made up with people who want to completely retain the culture of their home countries (including the worst parts) and not adapt at all to being Americans. We have always had some and always will, but they at least, for the most part, are limited and do not pose a threat to this country.

They don't have a tradition of immigration because most Europeans never wanted immigration at all. The guest workers were not immigrants when they arrived, everyone expected them to go back when they were done working. They were not expected to assimilate because everyone assumed they would leave. The European countries were mostly set up as nation states, a state based on ethnicity. The headscarf ban is ridiculous, but I think we will see more of this type of nonsense as populist/nationalist anti-immigration anti-EU parties are growing larger.
But I think most of it is not race-based, but it's about religion (Islam). Most of the populist parties are very anti-Islam and anti-EU, the Europeans hate each other almost as much as they hate foreigners.

Many people who immigrate to the US seek to adopt a lot of parts of American culture while retaining their roots. If you think about it, many us-born citizens do that as well, but probably in a more complex way. I am "Irish-like whoa" with my family immigrating not that many generations back and am constantly seeking to find out more about my Irish heritage, it's actually really important to me. I think there are some things that I appreciate about that that others don't and obviously don't identify with. I'm also American and am aware that there are certainly some cultural things that differentiate me in that way from the rest of the world.
I'm ALSO from Boston, which has a distinct culture from Chicago or Miami or the whole of Vermont. New England is very culturally different from the midwest.

The truth is there are a few different cultural layers going on in the US- that is partly because of our long history of immigration but also because we are a large country with very different geographical characteristics. There are people in the US who have never seen snow and I have 7 foot walls of snow on either side of my sidewalks right now- weather helps to form culture.

I mean we talk about American culture, and how it may be diluted, but what is that really? That's not really a strong argument. America is constantly in flux whether we slow immigration or not- our country is highly susceptible and vulnerable to the changing global atmosphere in terms of identity in a lot of ways. It is almost defined in contrast to other countries. America is often compared to other countries to demonstrate what it is NOT [as seen in this thread].

We don't lose that because other peoples come in. I would argue in a lot of ways we actually retain it.
[to clarify that was more of a response to kind of add, not like... I'm totally arguing what you've said exactly]

That depends largely on how the U.S. government and various state governments choose to recognize federal and state constitutional rights as they apply to all people who are lawfully in the United States regardless of citizenship, or to recognize foreign laws which are sometimes at odds with U.S. law and culture.

In my opinion, there was no retention of U.S. law or culture when a New Jersey judge deferred to Islamic Sharia law in a 2008 case for a restraining order based on repeated spousal rape within the marriage of a Moroccan couple who had moved to the United States http://www.volokh.com/2010/07/23/cultur ... -on-appeal . Luckily, the court opinion was reversed on appeal by the New Jersey Superior Court of Appeal http://www.americanthinker.com/articles ... haria.html which based its opinion on several U.S. Supreme Court precedents.

This is an example of the cultural and legal shifting that many in Europe and the United States consider risky to long-established norms and precedents that I intended in my post about the Disney-fication of Paris, New York and Hollywood.

Point taken but I guess it depends on how you look at it- deferring to religious tenants is in no way a new practice in the US. This particular religion may be, but that bit has changed over time again and again. However, as you said, it was overturned. So I guess it depends on what part of the situation one wants to look at really. There is not one way to look at it. I don't participate in one culture. America is not one state. On and on and on.

All in all, in my experience (and I have lots of experience knowing immigrants. My wife is an immigrant), I believe most immigrants to the US want to better themselves, and to better their families down where they originated, as well as those who come with them to the United States.

While it might "take money away from Americans," I believe these immigrants are pragmatic and practical people, rather than a drain upon our economy.

There are some "bad apples" among the immigrants, just like there were "bad apples" during the "golden age of immigration" (circa 1880 to 1924, when quite restrictive immigration legislation was passed).

But there are "bad apples" amongst every ethnic group.

There are "bad apples" among people who have been American for generations.

In truth, the whole premise of the United States, in essence, is that it is a refuge away from places which stymie human progress.

Indeed. But, with our current federal immigration laws (or lack thereof), how might we distinguish between the apples, good and bad? Finding out later wasn't an option in the Ellis Island years, and I suggest it isn't an option now with our nation in the economic position it is in currently. The reason that immigration laws are restricted for some years and unrestricted for some other years has been historically due to the periodic necessity of more or less immigrant citizens in the national economy. When jobs are less available to everyone, increasing the number of immigrants would cause even fewer employed workers, and make matters worse. Between 1880 and 1924, there were about a dozen economic recessions that cause some unemployment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... ted_States .

I believe that the economic influence of remitting more than $30 billion annually to residents of other nations is a net negative to the U.S. economy because, once that cash is transferred off-shore, its recipients have few chances to return much if any of it to U.S. businesses, even if they were so inclined. So, it is, by default, a revenue vacuum that further implodes our economy. There is a reason economists refer to the amount of free-flowing cash as "revenue." It is expected to remain within the economic pool, not jump to another pool where it becomes a net gain for its recipient nations.

I get what you mean....the money could be used for our poor citizens.

I guess I'm too much of an Internationalist at heart! My wife, who is not originally American, also believes I'm too much of an Internationalist.

I understand the moral argument for unrestricted immigration and open borders especially considering the history of this country but we owe to our citizenry not to enact policies that negatively effect their quality of life. When it comes to jobs and government services, given how limited resources already are how can we support adding even more needy people? Just because it is supposedly a net positive to the country(Wall Street) doesn't mean it is a positive to everyone in the country, poor people are too often hung out to dry by the elites in the country. What is in the best interest of the 99% isn't the same as the 1% and who do you think has more influence on policy?

Assimilation is important because I don't believe you can have two or however many populations live amongst each other than can't speak the same language, that don't share the same values, and most important segregate themselves from each other without there being significant tension and civil strife. We need to all be able to live with each other and see each other as Americans first rather than whatever color or cultural grouping you are. That's not to say we're all the same, we are all individuals obvious be just being to communicate with each other and not see each other as foreign I think is a big deal. It wasn't that long ago that Irish and Italians weren't seen as American, things change and I do think this is possible with our Hispanic population. As mentioned something like 50% of them identify as white, I don't really care so much about maintaining whiteness as I am knocking down walls between us.

Relax. White men will still control the overwhelming majority of wealth in the country. Therefore, whites will still be the majority (practically speaking) even though they are outnumbered numerically. Money speaks in America. A surprisingly small number of people control the country.

I'm white and I control nothing.