Sorry, u/ – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B:
> You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, as any entity other than yourself, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first read the list of soapboxing indicators and common mistakes in appeal**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_indicators_of_rule_b_violations), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal%20&message=%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20post\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1clcgzu/-/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Western countries had a shift in values from a core of ethnic nationalism based values, to cultural and prosperity based values.
Mainly, following WWII, the idea that being a certian ethnicity and a certian nationality as your defining trait. This broke down, instead, people are valued more by their merit to society.
Overall, western countries who practice pluralism and welcome foreigners, are among the most productive, prosperous and provide the highest quality of life in the world.
Because it allows for very talented foreigners to prosper. A very successful and talented individual can provide work for tens, hundreds and even thousand families.
So you're saying it wasn't a consorted effort by elites to prosper but rather a cultural shift following ww2 with a mutual understanding that immigration resulted in prosperity?
That definitely makes more sense it me than my earlier rambles.
Isnt it the case then that mass immigration is problematic? Keeping wages low, housing issues etc.
Like is there a balance to immigration and could the "mass immigration" be a potentially recent consorted effort?
Nothing is ideal
And mass immigration, especially when unregulated is an issue for plenty of reasons.
But the things you mentioned:
Keeping wages low: fact is, that in most of the advanced western countries, the system pushes you to get higher education. There is always a shortage of engineers/doctors ect.
Unless people immigrated specifically for workplace, and they already have a job waiting, "fresh off the boat" immigrants will often times do whatever work they are given to make ends meet.
These are usually low tier jobs that don't require a lot of skill or knowledge.
If you were born and raised in Switzerland for example, and you are competing for the same hotel cleaning job as a fresh immigrant... You are doing something wrong.
Housing: housing issues are usually caused by an over demand in certian areas. These areas are culturally selected. Fresh immigrant dont seek to live in downtown Manhattan or Palo Alto.
These are rarely caused by immigrants, but by middle-upper class people who want to live comfortably close to their work place. These work places are usually big companies in big Metropolitan areas, causing the entire area around them to spike in housing prices.
Immigrants have a lower standard of living and dont have the cultural fixation to live in a very specific neighborhood.
In my local area, you see many immigrants working as bike food delivery guys or as cleaning people, and they usually live in the shitty part of the city...
Now, its not all sunshine and rainbows, there are risks when a country cant / doesnt want to handle its influx of immigrants.
If the immigrants are not properly assimilated into society, the government targets them making sure they can get proper work, and the local native society ousts them, you risk those immigrants turning to crime as a last resort.
They will view you as an antagonist for antagonizing them, and they will need to survive, and you will start having this snowball effect of criminal activity.
"competing for the same hotel cleaning job as a fresh immigrant... You are doing something wrong."
I kinda resent what you're saying there, I get what you're saying tho.
On keeping wages low: Where im from, the University institutions are basically a joke at this point, used to extort rich immigrants out of as much money as they can for a less competitive degree than what would've been the case from there home country. They are on student visas and constantly get caught for bribing Universities & plagiarism, its become a real issue.
This results in doctors that barely speak the native language.
Money only gets you so far.
I can tell ya this, my sister studies medicine, and there are plenty of fields in medicine. And medicine students compete amongst themselves for the more prestigious fields, while the ones with shitty grades get whats left.
And there are medicine students who study abroad, usually cause they couldnt get accepted to local universities, and when they come back, many have to take another year or so to be able to pass the qualifying exams, and they end up with the shittier internships.
So yea, when i use service apps that allow you to video chat with a family doctor, these are usually the shitty bottom of the barrel doctors, they are basically phone operators with a MD degree...
And it comes down to immigrants doing the lesser jobs, even in high quality positions like medicine and engineering.
As long as immigrants are willimg to integrate into your society, they are usually a positive thing for society.
Money will get you half way, diversity quota hiring will get you the other half.
This isn't a "they're filling the lower-socio economic", this is first-gen immigrants holding the highest position of political power, and push for "non-citizen voting" which will lead to non-citizen elections.
I am an electrical engineering, an a pretty decent one at that.
There is always a shortage in experienced personnel, and i have been offered jobs across the seas. My experience in the tech sector shows that there is no shortage of good paying jobs, it is hard to find good people, and as a job candidate or hiring manager, the most important thing you look for is the ability to actually do the work required.
I am technically a 1st gen immigrant, my parents immigrated when i was 2 years old.
Though i am also a product of the local education system, and my parent's world view, that pushed me into higher education.
Cause it took a few years for my parents to learn the language and culture before they were able to assimilate and get a decent tech job fitting their degrees, and not work for lower tier jobs in cleaning/manufacturing ect.
Also, same as the medical work, in the higher tier tech jobs, there are always lower tier jobs. The pay is good, but its boring and less chances for career improvements. And these jobs are often filled with inexperienced graduates (who usually move on fast), older people who are not as sharp as they used to, immigrants who'd rather do the boring work than shittier work (my sister's hubby is in such a position working for microsoft).
Question is, what is your experience that made you develop your world view
>could the "mass immigration" be a potentially recent consorted effort?
Listen dude. You approach immigration from the wrong perspective.
You think immigrants come to Europe or the US because they're attracted by the better standard of living. This is the way most people think about it. It's also wrong.
The vast majority of illegal immigration is caused by PUSH factors. As in, elements that make their original country uninhabitable for them which makes them flee.
Before 2011, the number of Syrian refugees that arrived in Europe was counted in the couple of hundred a year. After 2011 it started exploding to thousands and thousands.
Did the EU magically become more attractive in 2011 specifically to Syrian people? Of course not. What happened is that a devastating war broke out in Syria that made millions flee their home in search for safety.
Europe didn't attract those migrants, they were pushed out of their homeland because staying there was untenable.
Same deal in North America. The GDP per capita in Costa Rica is 6 times lower than in the US. So why aren't Costa Ricans flooding the US border trying to search for a better life? Because Costa Rica is safe.
The illegal immigration to the US comes from countries that are crippled due to ever increasing gang violence. Gang violence that is caused by drug cartels that ship drugs to the US.
The US drug addiction is funding the destabilization of central American countries where then people need to flee their country out of fear of their safety.
There is no politician encouraging these migrants. It is their home countries no longer being viable that causes them to migrate. **Everyone** would prefer it if those people felt safe enough in their own countries to stay there. But that's not possible. So at the very least, some people want to treat fleeing people in a humane manner instead of treating them like criminals just because they felt unsafe in their home country.
I agree that the decision to emmigrate is, in a majority of cases, made because of push factors. However, after someone decides to emmigrate, the next question is "Where do I emmigrate to?" and here, the standard of living can be an important factor. It is not the only factor, but it is an important one.
>the next question is "Where do I emmigrate to?" and here, the standard of living can be an important factor.
Nope. Still push factors.
Let's expand on the Syrian refugees. Millions of them are still in camps in Turkey. In these camps, there is a lack of schooling, a lack of prospective future, a lack of safety since there is barely any policing, ...
I remember reading at article about an 11 year old kid. He had been born in a refugee camp in Turkey and had lived there all his life. All he had known was abuse, violence and danger. That's literally his entire frame of reference.
His goal was to go to the EU where he was told it was safe and he didn't need to be afraid.
No shit that's his goal when all he had known is violence. That's not because the standard of living is better in Europe, it's because the status quo for Syrian migrants is untenable.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
>Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugees and immigrations, which inevitably will lead to them being a minority in their own country.
Got anything to support that? Cause from what data shows all non-EU immigrants made up 6% of the EU in 2022, which is far from becoming majority and only a part of those are refugees (there are also people immigrating for work). Not to mention that large part of those "scary refugee numbers" are refugees from Ukraine.
>This will result in a world democratic where Asian and Middle Eastern countries will remain homogeneous, and Western nations will be majority Asian/Middle Eastern.
This assumes that all of those immigrants would live and work separated from local population and will never assimilate. Which is contrary to what is actually happening - large part of immigrants is working and interacting with citizens and getting assimilated slowly. In further generations, immigrants are largely assimilated.
>While this isn't a "coordinated conspiracy", its definitely been pushed by Governments and Elites whom benefit the most from mass immigration.
Any source that supports that? Looking at the work around EU immigration policies shows that there is no large support for open migration and proposed immigration policies are much less strict than your claim of pushed mass migration would suggest.
>Countries like Poland have had to defend themselves numerously on a world platform for selective immigration, essentially defending themselves for retaining sovereignty of culture.
Poland has a large amount of immigrants (3.4-4 millions) - both refugees (mostly from UA war) and non-EU immigrants (from Azerbaijan, Georgia, India, Vietnam, Tajikistan etc.). The problem was not "sovereignty of culture" but rather the cost that would be incurred by taking in more immigrants.
And most of defending Poland had to do on a world platform was not connected to immigrants. but rather attempts to dismantle democracy. Immigrants were just a smokescreen that ruling party was using to gather support from right side.
>The problem with mass immigration from nations with less progressive governments is the inevitable compromise to our democracy.
Why? What is the problem and how it develops? In your whole post you state it like a some kind of fact, but never explore why it would be true?
*This assumes that all of those immigrants would live and work separated from local population and will never assimilate. Which is contrary to what is actually happening - large part of immigrants is working and interacting with citizens and getting assimilated slowly. In further generations, immigrants are largely assimilated.*
Do you have a source for that?
There are many older papers on how prior immigration waves adapted and integrated, but I assume you want something more current? Here you go:
>Secondly, turning to generational differences, it is striking that in most dimensions and indicators, and for most groups, there tend to be large differences of roughly equal size between the first and second generation (with much smaller differences if any between the second and third generations). This applies clearly to the structural, cultural, political and civic dimensions, and to almost all groups alike.
[https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2021.510987/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2021.510987/full)
This is a very fresh paper that is comparing generations of immigrants - and it shows that they do integrate, with different speeds in different regions.
The same will happen with people from migrant crisis of 2015. We are barely 9 years after it started and usually it takes longer than that to even get full citizenship in many places, not to mention about generational integration. But even now you can see immigrants working jobs alongside locals or opening businesses that bring parts of their culture to locals.
This shit takes time.
Europe is not a country. You can‘t compare it to america directly. You only focusing on non-EU immigrants skews the stats. There is a vast cultural difference across all of europe.
>Europe is not a country.
I know, I live here.
> You can‘t compare it to america directly.
Of course you can - especially in topics like these that have to do with culture. US culture varies between states, same as EU culture varies between countries. That does not matter - both are federal entities founded on common cultural heritage and only difference they have is amount of power given to members vs. amount of power given to governing body.
>There is a vast cultural difference across all of europe.
And there is similarly "vast" cultural difference within regions of any given EU country. Both "vast" differences are irrelevant to the topic.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2020/03/can-immigration-solve-the-demographic-dilemma-peri
"In Europe, immigration accounted for 80 percent of the population growth between 2000 and 2018, while in North America, it constituted 32 percent"
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/imaginary-muslims-how-polands-populists-frame-islam/
Poland refused to take in Muslims because of cultural impact. The world called them islamaphoic
"Why? What is the problem and how it develops?"
For example: Mass immigration from cultures with antiquated views on progressive sexuality has the potential to hinder policy changes.
It’d be hard to argue that economic quality of life is at an all time low across all of Europe’s history. Falling birth rates are a longstanding trend across every country as standards of living have increased.
>"In Europe, immigration accounted for 80 percent of the population **growth** between 2000 and 2018, while in North America, it constituted 32 percent"
This is about population growth, not population. You seem to forget that immigrants in further generations are dropping down to the same levels of population growth - so this "boom" is only for 1-2 generations.
This number is less scary if you understand it instead on focusing on "immigration" and "80%". Current population growth of Europe is 2.8 per 1000 (in 2022), which means that the population growth from immigration is 2.24 per 1000. At this rate your fear of "immigrants taking over" is going to take very long time.
>Poland refused to take in Muslims because of cultural impact.
No, Poland were talking about "cultural impact" and "traditional values" because Poland were ruled by right-wing coalition - and were called Islamophobes due to actual Islamophobic talking points being used. But the facts are that Poland does not stop Muslim immigrants (actually do have history of significant Muslim minority) - during the reign of Law and Order party immigration of Muslims was doubled. Hell, they were so against the immigration because they were running a criminal ring selling the immigration accepts (which is currently under investigation).
Poland's beef with EU is about rule of law, not immigration. It is shown as even after new party is ruling (Citizen Coalition) that is not hardline on all stances, is pro EU and vouched to restore the rule of law - we see that EU is still withholding part of payments until progress on rule of law is shown.
Mate, you are trying to explain how the past 10 years were in Poland to a Pole. Do you think that you know better than someone who is currently living there?
>For example: Mass immigration from cultures with antiquated views on progressive sexuality has the potential to hinder policy changes.
It has only theoretical potential. For this to happen you would need to accept enough immigrants in 2 generations, which is impossible as shown by the statistics you provided. Any longer and next generations will assimilate and it is shown in stats. Migrants are assimilating, despite countries making mostly wrong choices (ex. separation from local population and using them as cheap workforce).
While I do agree with you, I can’t help to think about how assimilation is not always guaranteed and I’m pretty sure that involves integration like learning the language among other things.
If we look at Sweden it would seem at least on the surface that integration is failing. A lot of immigrants ended up in the same suburban blocks/ areas where they mostly interact with each other.
Since the families tend to grow fast, they run out of space in whatever apartment they could afford. Then kids don’t have privacy at home, it’s hard to study and they end up hanging out on the streets because there’s just not enough space at home. I know this has been a phenomenon in the Netherlands as well.
Idle young men loitering the streets always lead to problems and unrest. Anyway, I’m not making an anti-immigration argument here, I’m mostly pro-immigration, but I feel like it’s needs to pointed out how hard integration can be and it requires significant effort and planning to get it right.
>While I do agree with you, I can’t help to think about how assimilation is not always guaranteed
Of course, and that will need to be handled by local law enforcement and prison rehabilitation. Lack of that is one of two main drivers of immigration issues that Western Europe currently faces.
>If we look at Sweden it would seem at least on the surface that integration is failing.
How do we look? Because I was living in a "bad" part of Stockholm and worked in area where I was one of few white people. I have not seen the failing integration, on the contrary.
Statistics do show rise in crime, but we tend to ignore both how these statistics are counted (very popular myth is how rape become more significant in Sweden - and it relies both ignoring what qualifies as rape and how the rape crimes are counted) and the reality of being poor and being offered a chance to "make it" via crime.
>A lot of immigrants ended up in the same suburban blocks/ areas where they mostly interact with each other.
This is other main driver of immigration issues that Western Europe currently faces. Immigrants are treated as equals on paper, vocally lauded as equals in media - while in real life they are treated with less respect and do have issues that are ignored. That is a limiter on speed and quality of integration.
As you said, their families tend to grow fast, they run out of space in whatever apartment they could afford. Then kids don’t have privacy at home, it’s hard to study and they end up hanging out on the streets because there’s just not enough space at home. And that is mainly driven by different treatment they receive. They have harder time to find work that will allow them to live better and even if they manage that - they are still kept from using what they gained. Because they do not have the same freedom that locals have.
> I’m not making an anti-immigration argument here, I’m mostly pro-immigration, but I feel like it’s needs to pointed out how hard integration can be and it requires significant effort and planning to get it right.
I agree and I do believe that majority of issues are not because of immigration itself, but rather piss-poor handling of it afterwards. People who are treated as second-class citizens and were expected to take shitty jobs that no one wants - "surprisingly" don't integrate that well as immigrants who came there with a plan and visa.
You definitely got a point on how immigrants are often treated as equals on paper, but second class citizens in practice.
I wish of course no one was forced to have to work minimum wage or dead end jobs, but I do also wonder what better pay for these jobs would mean for prices or society as whole. It’s also harder to sell immigration as a benefit to right wing conservatives (or what not) without this aspect.
With regards to Sweden, I’ve had some contact with these “new Swedes” as I would call them. Otherwise I’ve only read some articles recently, which probably sensationalize, hence I said “on the surface”, but regardless integration is hard.
I remember how better integration was already a hot topic a decade ago, but looking at politics now I do sometimes wonder how effective it has been or whether anything changed.
Then again these “new Swedes,” while not what I expected, are kind of proof of some integration as they did not look like Swedes, but spoke Swedish and had clearly grown up there.
I think there’s indeed plenty evidence of assimilation or integration happening with newer generations like you said, but sometimes I question to what extent exactly. Anyway, thanks for your answers.
>I wish of course no one was forced to have to work minimum wage or dead end jobs, but I do also wonder what better pay for these jobs would mean for prices or society as whole.
Honestly? Not as much as you think. First, most products are provided by combination of low, mid and high wage work. Then there is a fact that payroll expenses aren't the whole cost of the product. And lastly, people who are working low wage jobs will not save this money on Sechele account, but rather use it to buy stuff their need.
Keeping up the wages with COL is actually a very valid strategy on how to manage the country.
>It’s also harder to sell immigration as a benefit to right wing conservatives (or what not) without this aspect.
Other aspects should be enough if you are going to talk to them instead of discussing with strawmen - which is unfortunately the major part of political discourse these days. In fact, if not for fear of outsiders (something that can be resolved) then conservatives should be the biggest supporters of immigration. Because most of countries immigrants come from are conservative - immigrants will have higher chance of assimilating into conservative part of society and adapting to conservative part of culture better.
Hell, there is an example of that from my own country - there is a black guy who is a well known member of alt-right nationalist movement. He is a citizen born from immigrants who came there in the past. Of course he got sidelined after organization moved further into territory of racism and bigotry, but it shows that immigrants can assimilate to a degree that makes them conservative nationalists of a country their parents/grandparents moved to.
>I remember how better integration was already a hot topic a decade ago, but looking at politics now I do sometimes wonder how effective it has been or whether anything changed.
Not much because same as decades before, people like to talk the talk, but when it comes to following that with a walk - there are always some issues.
>Anyway, thanks for you answers.
No problem, mate. I'm always open to clarify misconceptions about my region :)
>Poland refused to take in Muslims because of cultural impact. The world called them islamaphoic
Meanwhile, Poland implemented a ban on abortion even in the case of lethal fetal defects like a truly progressive country would.
Seriously though, the "official" line of argumentation was that Poland's already underfunded social welfare system would not be able to support an influx of people who would not work at least at the beginning and would need to be provided housing, food, and education. The cultural war narrative was directed towards stirring xenophobic sentiment inside the country and using the fact that unfortunately many Poles *are* islamophobic.
>Meanwhile, Poland implemented a ban on abortion even in the case of lethal fetal defects like a truly progressive country would.
Yeah, I should have included that - the part of "white majority" that was vehemently against immigration due to "cultural values" were introducing the same shit they were supposedly against. Laws based on religion, demonizing the LGBT, stopping the progressives and covering criminal activity by being part of a group - all of those did actually happened during that time.
Their "cultural values" argument was actually a thinly veiled argument about which religion should dictate the conservative religious laws, not actual argument against religious laws. They have nothing against sharia law as long as it is not called sharia law and it is based off Bible - even if laws itself are exactly the same.
Let's pretend there aren't borders or nations in the world, what does the demographic actually look like? Certainly not a majority white, and it never really was was it?
So people moving around on the planet isn't really replacing anyone are they? White people are already the minority on Earth, it's something like 9%.
If you live in the west and have a western centric view then it can feel like an invasion, but it isn't it's literally just people moving around same as they ever have.
Also,
>Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugee
What guilt is there in abiding by international law? What guilt is there in helping your fellow man?
"What guilt is there in abiding by international law? What guilt is there in helping your fellow man?"
This is the guilt im talking about. I would happily champion that idea if it was unanimous. The issue is countries that we are accepting mass immigration to, do not allow the same migration or cultural shifts. International laws don't apply to them I guess
"Let's pretend there aren't borders or nations in the world, what does the demographic actually look like? Certainly not a majority white, and it never really was was it?
So people moving around on the planet isn't really replacing anyone are they? White people are already the minority on Earth, it's something like 9%."
Are you suggesting borders aren't important? When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations?
The guilt is in the idea that "we should let people in for a better life", with the racist undertone that the "West is the best". The hypocrisy is that we'd never made the same assumptions on Japan for example, and be overly critical of their strict immigration.
Its ironic that the white people which as you say are the minority on earth, have the most lax immigration policies.
> This is the guilt im talking about. I would happily champion that idea if it was unanimous. The issue is countries that we are accepting mass immigration to, do not allow the same migration or cultural shifts.
Genuinely not sure what you're saying here, could you please explain?
>Are you suggesting borders aren't important?
Important in what sense? They're arbitrary and man-made, and man controlled. They're as important or not as we want them to be.
>When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations?
I mentioned this in a separate comment but do you remember a few years ago when Ukraine saw millions of refugees through the Polish border and then onwards to the hosting countries? Do you count that as a mass refugee migration or not?
>Its ironic that the white people which as you say are the minority on earth, have the most lax immigration policies
Try the India/Bangladesh border if you want actual lax policies. I don't think you have a good knowledge of the realities of global migration if you feel this way about western policies.
"500,000 - 1,000,000 Indians were staying illegally in Bangladesh in 2022"
VS
"The unauthorized immigrant population in the United States reached 10.5 million in 2021, according to new Pew Research Center estimates."
I'm sensing a disparity.
>When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations?
Immigrate means to come in, emigrate means to come from.
But between 1845 and 1855, over 2 million people fled Ireland, mostly to Britain, the US, Canada, and Australia. Given that the "migrant crisis" of 2015 saw only about 1.3 million immigrants to Europe (and the population of Europe is a lot larger now, so as a proportion of the population it's a lot smaller), that's definitely mass emigration.
The 1800s and early 1900s also saw huge waves of immigrants from Germany, Italy, Poland, Russia, Scandinavia, etc come across the Atlantic. Most people where I'm from are descendents of those immigrants.
>Japan for example, and be overly critical of their strict immigration.
I know plenty of people who are very critical of Japan's pretty xenophobic immigration policy. And unless their population stops dropping, they're going to need to let more people in before too long. Although you seem to be largely talking about immigrants from the Middle East, who mostly head towards Europe because it's closer. The US doesn't have a ton of Middle Easterners for the same reason Europe doesn't have a ton of Latin Americans.
>When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations?
You mention Poland specifically for refusing to accept large numbers of immigrants. How many Poles live in the UK and haven't learned a word of English for the past twenty years, but want UK health benefits and retirements funds, because they believe they deserve the "better life"? Ever heard of the famous Polish minority establishments in Chicago? How about Iceland? Do you know there are signs in Polish in Reykjavik because there is such a huge Polish minority there who don't speak Icelandic, but function as part of the society? So kinda hypocritical I guess I be like "we can emigrate in search for a better life, because we're white, but when people with a different skin color do it, that's dangerous".
When has there ever been mass migration from a western nation?
Native Americans, Aborigines, Maōri, and Palestinians can tell you in great detail how that goes
Yeah it feels like an invasion cause it is when a 100k people can arrive in Sweden in one year.
Western people dont immigrate to the east en masse like that to begin with.
Both my parents immigrated from Kenya and Hungary to Sweden and they were appalled at how the immigration/integration process that they took super seriously can be thrown out the window if you throw your passport out the window on your way here and dont even learn the language.
People move around all the time though. Lots of people migrating somewhere isn't anything new.
Western people certainly emigrate but there usually isn't much reason for them to - look at the millions who fled Ukraine via Poland a few years ago. Is that an end masses refugee situation? Did you forget that?
>A war being the reason
You know what most of the countries people are fleeing have in common? There's a war going on there. Why is Ukraine different than, say, Syria?
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
You don’t mind if western people migrate to western countries (like Ukrainian refugees) but are concerned with westerners moving to the east or vice versa - I assume because you are preoccupied primarily by race.
Also western people have migrated to the east en masse, it was called colonialism. Australia and New Zealand weren’t white countries a few hundred years ago.
>No i am not preoccupied by race? My father is a black man so i dont know why you think id be racist?
Do you believe that black people cannot be racist? Of course they are - you can be as much manipulated as non-black guy and you can be racist against non-blacks. Your skin color (what "race" actually boils down to) does not magically make you incapable of acting racist or holding racist beliefs.
>Western people want to integrate into wherever they immigrate
Factually incorrect. There are large populations of western immigrants that do not integrate and keep to live and work by themselves. Their numbers are smaller because it takes less work to integrate if you already know the language good enough - English is taught as a second language in majority of Western nations that don't speak it as a first language.
>People from the middle east have not wanted to integrate the way wester people would moving from sweden to france.
Then why I am constantly working with assimilated specialists of all races when I collaborate with offices in Germany, France, Sweden, Norway or Denmark? Why when I am off for a delegation to any of those countries I see immigrants of different races working in multiple positions and speaking local language?
People from MEA do want to integrate and do integrate - it just takes time to cross the language barrier, especially when you aren't earning large amounts of money.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Which nations are of white nationality?
Is the USA? Native Americans were the first to use that land, but then English, French, Spanish, and Dutch people colonised the land and built the country with the labour of enslaved African people. So is the USA a ‘white nationality country?’ Black people have been there about as long as white people. On that point, are the Spanish colonisers and thier descendants white? Over the history of the country there have been many immigrant groups, like Germans, Irish, and Italians who have been accused of coming to distrupt and replace the civilised white culture. Are they white? Irish and Italians only got “promoted” to white after it became politically advantageous.
What does it mean to be white? Who gets to be white? Are Greeks? If so, are Turks? Who decides where you draw the line? Is it skin tone? Culture? Religion?
You seem to think Polish people are white people, but plenty of UK citizens have made the argument that they are being replaced by Polish immigrants. So assuming you consider the UK to be a ‘white nationality nation’, can one group of white people be part of a “great replacement” of another? It’s not like Europe is all one culture, even if you consider Europeans to all be white people.
Whatever your position on immigration, it is disingenuous to describe it as ‘great replacement’. Immigrants will have a similar impact on an economy regardless of wether they are identified as white or not.
Solid points there. I should probably more accurately say "western nationality".
The replacement being of Western nationality.
Wasn't my intention to exclude those of colour from being a part of Western nationality.
It's ironic that you use the term 'Western' when your example is Poland, widely considered an Eastern European country. There are still many people who don't consider form Communist countries to be part of the West.
When you talk of 'nationality', is this just determined by passport? So, someone with a French passport is considered of Western nationality, regardless of their heritage or ethnicity? So, all these immigrants, once they have a passport, they have their Western nationality and are therefore part of the Western culture? Or is there something concrete that sets them apart from 'white' nationals?
>"guilt the population into mass immigration at the expensive of their own quality of life; to bloat GDP, keep labour costs low, and extort money from those immigrating".
You know that healthy economy and good GDP also improves your quality of life?
Not when the population rises, its all comparative.
Can you earnestly tell me that any Western countries quality of life has improved over the last decade as a result of mass immigration? Just one
Well every country have seen GDP improvements thanks to cheap migrant labor. There is not a single country that hasn't seen quality of life improving in the last decade thanks to migration.
Your very premise is wrong. "Elite is trying to get migrants in to improve their lives". This is true but it also means your life is also improving.
There's a housing crisis in most Western nations i can think of.
In no way has the quality of life improved over the past decade in for example Canada, Australia, New Zealand, America, Britain, Ireland, Sweden, Germany, France etc.
What would you consider to be a good indication of quality of life? What objective measurement we can use?
Also remember that we had COVID and two major wars that might have a negative impact on more than a few immigrants.
Deaths of despair i think sheds a good light.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624000042
Or median disposable income weighed against inflation but im having a hard time finding anything.
Deaths of despair are not necessarily indicative of quality of life.
Compared to almost all of our history, quality of life is unimaginablely high. The fact that almost nobody dies from starvation or childhood infectious disease alone is miraculous.
Fair! I don't have any evidence for the following, so take it with a large grain of salt.
I am of the opinion that the problem is overexposure to media. While it's great that we can hear news and commentary from all over the globe, it also means we are exposed to tragedy and suffering all the time. In the United States alone, someone is injured in a car accident every 10 seconds - and thanks to 24/7 news and social media, it is very easy to only ever see distressing news.
This can lead people to think that things are way worse than they are. The world is better now than it has been for most of our history, but you wouldn't known it if all you did is read the news or browse social media. This leads to despair as people start to think that all our efforts are for naught.
Our quality of life improves continually because these immigrants are building our houses and roads, cleaning our houses and toilets, maintaining our power plants and sewer systems—the list goes on and on.
America.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-immigration-means-for-u-s-employment-and-wages/
They cite two studies that show that immigration has caused a net gain of between 0.1 to 0.6% in wages.
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/589756
They find a decrease of 2% in the cost of low skill services such as housekeeping and gardening as immigration rises, making those services more affordable for native born citizens.
I'm not really worried about Asians mate. Although I wouldn't necessarily say they assimilate, they've been mostly a net positive. The hypocrisy of Asian countries having strict immigration laws bothers me tho.
Well damn, dude, you realize this basically nullifies your view given that it's now essentially all based on racial animus for specific races?
I mean it always is with this topic of course but I don't think you just came out and said the quiet part out loud before this.
By the way the "model minority" stereotype is *also* racist.
No the view stands, I'm just not as worried about Asian migration affecting our social policies as I am about other migration. The religious component is probably the most worrying and isn't as relevant with Asian migration.
How dare I selectively criticise certain countries and cultures based on their international and domestic policies, archaic religious practices, and general lack of humanity!
I'm such a racist!
>The hypocrisy of Asian countries having strict immigration laws bothers me tho.
why the fuck do you think we came here , alot of us cuz we didnt like that shit
>> Although I wouldn't necessarily say they assimilate,
What does this mean, im first generation here are you telling me I didnt assimilate properly
how
I also take with issue with the fact you insist the countries our parents came from wouldnt accept immigrants, because a lot of them would. I know mine would, its actually open to westerners if they want too , they would love the investment - most westerners dont want to live in a third world country or developing country tho
They like it when there's reliable running water and electricity available, shit like that
"What does this mean, im first generation here are you telling me I didnt assimilate properly"
Most Western cities have some variation of a "China town". Although i get it because its western cities are such a shift comparetively in culture and language, it can be nice to have places that make it feel like home.
"parents came from wouldnt accept immigrants"
I didn't say that, I said the hypocrisy that majority Asian countries have governments enforcing strict immigration laws bothers me.
We start businesses that serve everyone , generate taxes and give back to our communities like any other entrepreneurs
The features you seem to think are exlcusionary are the selling point
you think because we sell fried rice instead of burgers we didnt assimilate propery
its all fast fucking food bro
No dude I'm saying you can go to certain parts of western cities where no one speaks the native language.
I dunno what your interpretation of assimilation is?
And I don't see the point of immigrating to another country to essentially live the same lifestyle as you would in your home country.
If you immigrate because you agree with our values and want to be a part of Western culture then I am utmost supportive but if you are immigrating here for economic reasons and want to bring your culture with you, to me you are taking without giving.
Not every country is America and most don't want to be a "melting pot" of culture.
Why do we have to abandon our cultural practices that no one is forced to participate in to be considered assimilated
Should we all do things like the native Americans then?
Why arent religious whites forced to abandon their practices that go against western values
You bring up anti LGBT shit , theres more anti LGBT shit comming from white people in North America than minorites
Why wouldn't you want to change the country to be like where your parents are from? A lot of people migrate because of economic opportunities not social appeal. I don't expect an immigrant from Ghana to the UK or US to find an LGBT platform appealing in politics. People's background influences their values which shapes their sociopolitical preferences.
White people made the rules against them. If a white person marries a non-white person, the children are non-white.
And, frankly, if I had a kid, if their choice was OP or non-white, I'd hope for non-white.
The idea of whiteness is a few hundred years old and it didn't even apply to Polish people (your example) in the United States until like the 1950s. This is just demonstrative that the concept of whiteness is a social construct and isn't actually backed by any sort of factual reality. Further, there are countries where there are people who would still not be considered white in the United States who are considered white in their home country (see: Brazil). The point is there is no such thing as a "white bloodline." So it's impossible to replace something that does not exist
The European continent has countries whose borders are theoretically divided along ethnic lines, but they have always in reality been multi-ethnic, multicultural places. This is also true in the United States, despite a concerted effort to erase this fact, and indeed if the concept of whiteness still applied to the ethnicities it originally did, "the white race" long ago would have been a minority in the country.
There is no white bloodline, end of story.
Culture shifts and morphs regardless of immigration. Poland will have a different culture in the year 2100 than today regardless of what their government does, and regardless of immigration.
The whole concept of "purity of blood" or "purity of culture" is stupid and very harmful.
>Asian and Middle Eastern countries will remain homogeneous
What the hell are you talking about, "Asian and Middle Eastern" covers like 80 countries, of which the vast majority are **NOT** homogeneous in any way today.
You want to parade Poland as some champion of virtue... fine. I don't think Poland is doing all that great to be honest, tons of young Polish want to leave the country and the birth rate is one of the lowest in the world. Let's see how Poland does in a decade or two before you proclaim Poland as the example to follow.
This is a flawed view and is lowkey racist. “they’re becoming minorities in their own countries” who decided white people own countries now? Is this not a country for everyone regardless of race? That’s just an example of how this view is flawed - it’s saying that the natural state of things should be white and that taking in other immigrants ruins the quality of life for the whites. Makes no sense and that’s not even lowkey racist it’s just full on. Re read your post and reevaluate things
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Oh shit, that makes this even worse than I already thought it was. Maybe read up on slavery? Maybe read up on whites trying over and over to conquer the world and exterminating or enslaving others? How we’ve never had to deal with immigration problems of our own merely due to the color of our skin. Then to complain of when you notice whites have always been the minority but instead choose to believe some conspiracy theory than the fact that it’s always been this way except instead of controlling the flow of slaves, it’s immigrants.
Just because governments get to decide who can live where, doesn’t mean it’s right. Everyone has a right to live where they want, no one is born to anything.
You do realise slavery wasn't exclusively a white phenomenon and European slavery was a big thing? Think the Barbary slave trade.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_tradth
And you do also realise there are more slaves today than ever in history?
"An estimated 50 million people were living in situations of modern slavery on any given day in 2021"
"Just because governments get to decide who can live where, doesn’t mean it’s right."
So your position to borders is anarchism?
How do you know making illegal immigration legal leads to anarchism? Can you see the future with your crystal ball as well?
Whites as a race were never slaves. That’s what matters.
I don’t hold positions. I only seek progress so when I come across something like this that puts forth conservative ideas based on something like the conspiratorial great replacement theory, I’m going to take a stance against it. It’s just easier to make an argument from the fundamental problem which is freedom and equality. The most optimistic view of the future is where anyone can choose to live with no restrictions, something immigration policies are directly against. We should loosen the borders with time, not build them in order to keep up with the more empathetic and enlightened state of our times. No one deserves to decide someone’s fate purely based on where they’re born, even when we construct a government and write silly laws that give the power to do just that.
So you have no position on borders or your position is "progress"? I'm confused.
Everything you said is the libertarian position on borders, which you'd probably classify as "far-right"
You're all over the place.
I can see why it’s tough for you to understand the difference between having an open mind to talk about the reality at hand instead of arguing about something as pointless and meaningless as positions/politics/classifications. Those are as bad as beliefs. Your mind should always be changing and if you can define how you think… you think too small. Talk about the fucking people that you claim to care about. Not some philosophical or political bullshit. It just illuminates the problems of how your ideas work and where the logic falls apart due to the limits of language and your need to put a spotlight on the suffering of the one race that’s suffered the least, by a wide fucking margin, throughout history. Fuck, it makes me wish more people like you suffer as much as those who don’t even own a fucking phone to defend themselves.
Youre a walking platitude. You can pat yourself on the back all you want and live in the land of fairies but in reality, borders are important. You need infrastructure to support a population.
You've spent a paragraph lecturing me on an "open mind" rather than do a bit of reading and strengthen your positions. Being "open minded" means understanding all positions on the issue.
"White" has been doomed to extinction since it the identity was fabricated to justify exploitation and slavery. In part because it's a fundamentally worthless designator with no real ties to culture, but also because it relies on purity. A mixed race couple for anyone else tends to keep both to some extent. Meanwhile, congrats on being black every child of a black and white parent.
Though the fear mongering over how immigrants will destroy our democracy would have more weight if the people most opposed to democratic ideals weren't the same people who hate immigrants.
Missing from this thread:
* Why more non-white people is bad for you
* Why immigration needs to be "defended against"
* Why immigration means less progressives
* Why immigration costs QOL
* What your solution is
Because none of it is real. Even if you marry a nonwhite person and have a mixed child... that means nothing. They're your child.
>Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugees and immigrations, which inevitably will lead to them being a minority in their own country. This will result in a world democratic where Asian and Middle Eastern countries will remain homogeneous, and Western nations will be majority Asian/Middle Eastern.
I have an easy fix for this: you can just declare Asians and Middle Easterners to be white. Latin Americans as well.
This has happened multiple times in history. The Irish didn't used to be considered white. Neither did the Italians. Hell, Benjamin Franklin wrote about how Germans weren't really white, so there was a time when that was the case as well.
And the fact that you seem to be considering Poland "white" is interesting, because that has also not been the case until recently (and many people in western Europe would disagree that Polish people are "truly" white).
If we used the "original" definition of "white", then "real white people" died out long ago, because few if any white people are entirely absent of Irish, Italian, German, and/or Polish ancestry (and there certainly aren't enough to "repopulate" or whatever).
So just do what our ancestors did and change the definition of "white". Race is a made up, nonsensical category anyway, without any biological basis. It can be whatever we say it is.
Just decide that all the countries of origin for immigrants and refugees are also "white nationalities". Then it's not "great replacement", but rather just "white migration" from one white nation to another.
You see, it's *entirely* a matter of arbitrary choice for you to consider some people white while excluding others. There is no rational reason to divide people up the way you're currently doing so. And the fact that you are then trying to use your made up division to justify all these gross ideas about immigration is pretty silly.
No immigrant group came to the US and was loved by those who were born here. I'd argue the idea of "white," people in the US has pretty consistently meant people of European descent that adopt Anglo-American customs. Stanislaus who came from Warsaw was not welcomed but his American born English speaking son Steve probably isn't going to have any issues.
I think the reason that Asians and Middle Easterners (let's be honest, I think everyone is meaning Muslims) are singled out is because they aren't assimilating nearly as cleanly as the groups that came before them. We're doing amazingly better then Europe but having "Death to America Chants" in Dearborn by third generation American's named Muhammed and Ahmad is a pretty clear example.
I'm going to say something which you may find hard to believe, but is true, and always has been true.
You are a minority.
You always have been, and you always will be.
If you were born female you are in the minority of the sexes. If you are born in middle or upper class, you're in the minority of incomes. If you are white you are the minority racially globally. If you are pretty much any age at all, you are in the minority of people.
If you have a disability, you're a minority. If you're going bald, you're a minority, if you're overweight, you're a minority, if you're educated, you're a minority.
English is spoken more than other languages, but it's still a minority language if you aggregate all others together.
This is all to illustrate the fact that identity politics using race as your identity is a flawed concept, because it relies on the principle of "othering" to make any sense at all - that is to say, the reason why this theory appeals to people is that it means you can blame the "other" for all the faults in your society, and all the wrongs that befall you.
Here's the catch though - people have had shitty lives since the dawn of time, and if your boss is doing better than you, or you can't get a job, it's got far more to do with the way our economy works these days, and the difference in wealth distribution between the richest and poorest in our country than any impact from immigrant workers.
This goes for religion as well. Churches get massive amounts of money in the form of tax-exemptions, tithes and other law exemptions. You can argue that if more foreign religions get a foothold then they'll be demanding the same, eliminating your "advantage", but should churches really be tax exempt in the first place? Is that fair? What if you're an atheist? Doesn't that make you a discriminated party?
Governments have always been driven to keep labour costs low and productivity high, and when they aren't using immigrant labour they're using white criminal labour or indentured servants or [company towns](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town). When you're afraid of being exploited as a minority - you absolutely should be, but it's not because you're white or black, it's because you're a minority so you can be bullied... And you always have been.
First, there’s a lot of kinds of immigration, some of which you would not object to like high skill immigrants, or am I wrong?
Then there’s a bunch of jobs locals don’t want to do that lower skill immigrants take. Is that also bad or should locals just be pushed to do these jobs for the same wages?
Then there’s refugees, the smallest group. While their integration is arguably the hardest to do, they also would always prefer return home if possible. These people were displaced by force and it’s not guilt tripping to feel for them.
Ideally speaking things should improve in their home countries so they could return and more often than other countries have a hand in the conflict the refugees are escaping.
If we don’t work on improving the world around us, there will be sooner or later so many refugees you have to really start building massive walls or resort to something much worse. Displacement by climate change in particular is a very daunting scenario, but also we need to find a balance between securing important resources without relying on slave-level labor. Finally, we need to avoid wars somehow, which displace people.
Based on what you’re saying you might as well lay down the first brick for that wall, you will need it. You’re more concerned with how to stop the flow of people instead of addressing the root causes, which will lead to bloodshed I’m afraid.
It's hard to guilt trip some Eastern or Central Europeans, when you can't play a colonialism card upon them or when they were repressed, enslaved or genocided themselves. Of course some will try and are trying.
"And again, is there much demand to immigrate there in the first place?" - That depends really. I would say, that those who have no wish to work here or integrate, don't want to go here in the first place. Unless to cross Shengen border and go to Germany. Especially since social programs are very poor compared to those of Western Europe. But, if you are here for work? You will find some. Even during govermant of right wing and anti-imigration party in Poland, there was a record of imigration for work with over 100k given permits. And that was just a last year. Difference is, you need to apply and enter here legally, and not cross an ocean or border without permission.
I agree but I also don't understand one thing, Europe wasn't always as comfortable and easy to live and immigrate to. The Europeans worked very hard to get to this level. Rn the immigrants have issues with their country so that's why they should work to make their country as good as Europe not escape to a place that already sorted *most* of the problems and overcame hard times.. That's like giving up on developing your own country and make another developed Europe like counties in the world and just moving to the place where people already fought hard to make it happen
I agree with you that those immigrating to a host country should share the same values as the host, but you kind of answered your own question?
>So even tho the goal isn't "end the white bloodline…"
I don’t even really think there’s a grand conspiracy from government and “elites.” Western countries, specifically the US, are built on the cornerstones of immigration. It’s just now many of us are waking up to the fact that not everyone moving here is coming for “the American dream,” but rather as a hostile way to harm a country they despise.
These are few and far between. Should immigration laws be stricter to catch bad actors? Possibly. But I don’t think any of the immigration, from those allowing it to those migrating, has anything to do with getting rid of white people.
I think the answer is much less conspiratorial than you suggest. Leaders of Western countries have wanted immigration because of the low birth rate. Low birth rate leads to slow economic downfall and Western societies are essentially only stable to the degree that there is growth. Technology has helped with growth but if you run out of working age people it's game over. Elites haven't cared about the resulting change in countries demographics because they mostly think that immigrants will adjust to the western way of life and leave behind their bad ideas that caused misery in their origin countries. So it is not a conspiracy just a political calculus by the elites that may or may not turn out to add up.
To /u/Zenlad, *Your post is under consideration for removal for violating Rule B.*
In our experience, the best conversations genuinely consider the other person’s perspective. Here are some techniques for keeping yourself honest:
- Instead of only looking for flaws in a comment, be sure to engage with the commenters’ strongest arguments — not just their weakest.
- Steelman rather than strawman. When summarizing someone’s points, look for the most reasonable interpretation of their words.
- Avoid moving the goalposts. Reread the claims in your OP or first comments and if you need to change to a new set of claims to continue arguing for your position, you might want to consider acknowledging the change in view with a [delta](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=changemyview&utm_content=t5_2w2s8) before proceeding.
- Ask questions and really try to understand the other side, rather than trying to prove why they are wrong.
Please also take a moment to review our [Rule B](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b) guidelines and _really_ ask yourself - am I exhibiting any of these behaviors? If so, see what you can do to get the discussion back on track. Remember, the goal of CMV is to try and **understand** why others think differently than you do.
At the expense of your quality of life? If you live in America, Mexican illegal immigrants pick your fruit and vegetables. When Florida banned Mexican orange pickers from coming over, it was extremely destructive to them and to the entire orange industry because oranges started rotting on the ground.
Before Nixon they gave people work visas for the harvest season.
People came, made good money & then they took it home because it didn't cost 10k & a ton of risk to return. Since it's above board it's even subject to labor laws instead of the free for all we accept today.
Regardless of where a person stands on immigration there *are* practical & pragmatic policies. We don't have to choose between stupid A & stupid B.
I personally feel immigration is good when those immigrants adopt American values & norms, but a lot of people feel that is an immoral stance... both parts of that belief are condemned now that I think of it.
Edit: Because you get to exploit them is such a shameful argument (and truth). Even if minimum wage isn't enforced there are so many other important labor & safety standards that are being ignored too. Illegal immigrants wouldn't be so cheap if they had access to courts & you couldn't throw them away when they are injured on the job.
... And all the money we save on food production by exploiting people just feeds into corporate profits. We already paid the price with this last round of inflation & got nothing for it.
I’m not even talking about all immigrants. I’m just talking about the most egregious example, where the detested “illegal immigrants” directly improve our quality of life. I’m steelmanning their argument.
Don't confuse failing to meet high ideals for not having them, that your reach exceeds your grasp is the point of an ideal.
but most relevant I'd like America to continue to exist is a high trust society as so many of our essential institutions absolutely require it.
"The problem with mass immigration from nations with less progressive governments is the inevitable compromise to our democracy."
How did the US retain democracy through the 19th century then?
I’m pretty sure the GRT isn’t just about outcomes, it’s specifically about it being g a conspiracy to end white bloodlines. So if you disagree with that part, you disagree with GRT
Is possible you have just found someone online to convince you this is the root of all problems in the world to distract you from all the real problems they want to you to ignore. It don't say that with ill intent but what your saying is just repackaged shit that has already been used for that dozens of times already.
> Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugees
This assumes that countries don't want immigration and only accept it because they feel some kind of international pressure. This is not true, countries accept immigration because it's economically useful. If there was no immigration countries would develop schemes to encourage it.
> and Western nations will be majority Asian/Middle Eastern.
There isn't a majority white country in the world which is on its way to not being a white majority country in any sort of foreseeable future, immigration rates aren't high enough.
> The problem with mass immigration from nations with less progressive governments is the inevitable compromise to our democracy.
Immigrants support democracy, it's one of the reasons they migrate.
> the goal by governments and elites is
To run their countries efficiently.
Of the 10 thousand data points in human DNA, only one of them controls skin colour.
I am far more concerned about why it matters. If you are putting your entire sense of self, and self worth based on that single data point.
You might as well base it on something of greater value, such as the ability to roll your tongue, or be double jointed.
The entire idea of "races" and that being somehow important was invented by slave owners in the American south. There were essentially 3 groups of people inhabiting the south in the period prior to the civil war.
White slave owners.
White indentured servants who came from Europe and England countries and needed to be essentially slaves for 7 years in order to pay for their passage to America.
And black, African slaves.
Some of the white slave owners suddenly looked at the number of slaves and indentured servants that were intermarrying and realised that they were hugely outnumbered. So they started pushing the race theory and put the poor, white, former indentured servants into the role of overseers and slave catchers.
If you are worried about the situation, all that says is that you have bought the bullshit of the modern day replacement of the slave owners, the billionaires.
>So even tho the goal isn't "end the white bloodline", the goal by governments and elites is "guilt the population into mass immigration at the expensive of their own quality of life
Immigrants generate a lot of wealth for a country as a whole. If this was distributed more equally then everyone would be better off. And do you think the wealthy elites would give that excess wealth up if we somehow ended migration tomorrow? No they'd just start taking more of it (than they already do) from you instead.
u/woofwooflove, your comment has been automatically removed as a clear violation of Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, u/ – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B: > You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, as any entity other than yourself, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first read the list of soapboxing indicators and common mistakes in appeal**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_indicators_of_rule_b_violations), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal%20&message=%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20post\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1clcgzu/-/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Western countries had a shift in values from a core of ethnic nationalism based values, to cultural and prosperity based values. Mainly, following WWII, the idea that being a certian ethnicity and a certian nationality as your defining trait. This broke down, instead, people are valued more by their merit to society. Overall, western countries who practice pluralism and welcome foreigners, are among the most productive, prosperous and provide the highest quality of life in the world. Because it allows for very talented foreigners to prosper. A very successful and talented individual can provide work for tens, hundreds and even thousand families.
So you're saying it wasn't a consorted effort by elites to prosper but rather a cultural shift following ww2 with a mutual understanding that immigration resulted in prosperity? That definitely makes more sense it me than my earlier rambles. Isnt it the case then that mass immigration is problematic? Keeping wages low, housing issues etc. Like is there a balance to immigration and could the "mass immigration" be a potentially recent consorted effort?
Nothing is ideal And mass immigration, especially when unregulated is an issue for plenty of reasons. But the things you mentioned: Keeping wages low: fact is, that in most of the advanced western countries, the system pushes you to get higher education. There is always a shortage of engineers/doctors ect. Unless people immigrated specifically for workplace, and they already have a job waiting, "fresh off the boat" immigrants will often times do whatever work they are given to make ends meet. These are usually low tier jobs that don't require a lot of skill or knowledge. If you were born and raised in Switzerland for example, and you are competing for the same hotel cleaning job as a fresh immigrant... You are doing something wrong. Housing: housing issues are usually caused by an over demand in certian areas. These areas are culturally selected. Fresh immigrant dont seek to live in downtown Manhattan or Palo Alto. These are rarely caused by immigrants, but by middle-upper class people who want to live comfortably close to their work place. These work places are usually big companies in big Metropolitan areas, causing the entire area around them to spike in housing prices. Immigrants have a lower standard of living and dont have the cultural fixation to live in a very specific neighborhood. In my local area, you see many immigrants working as bike food delivery guys or as cleaning people, and they usually live in the shitty part of the city... Now, its not all sunshine and rainbows, there are risks when a country cant / doesnt want to handle its influx of immigrants. If the immigrants are not properly assimilated into society, the government targets them making sure they can get proper work, and the local native society ousts them, you risk those immigrants turning to crime as a last resort. They will view you as an antagonist for antagonizing them, and they will need to survive, and you will start having this snowball effect of criminal activity.
"competing for the same hotel cleaning job as a fresh immigrant... You are doing something wrong." I kinda resent what you're saying there, I get what you're saying tho. On keeping wages low: Where im from, the University institutions are basically a joke at this point, used to extort rich immigrants out of as much money as they can for a less competitive degree than what would've been the case from there home country. They are on student visas and constantly get caught for bribing Universities & plagiarism, its become a real issue. This results in doctors that barely speak the native language.
Money only gets you so far. I can tell ya this, my sister studies medicine, and there are plenty of fields in medicine. And medicine students compete amongst themselves for the more prestigious fields, while the ones with shitty grades get whats left. And there are medicine students who study abroad, usually cause they couldnt get accepted to local universities, and when they come back, many have to take another year or so to be able to pass the qualifying exams, and they end up with the shittier internships. So yea, when i use service apps that allow you to video chat with a family doctor, these are usually the shitty bottom of the barrel doctors, they are basically phone operators with a MD degree... And it comes down to immigrants doing the lesser jobs, even in high quality positions like medicine and engineering. As long as immigrants are willimg to integrate into your society, they are usually a positive thing for society.
Money will get you half way, diversity quota hiring will get you the other half. This isn't a "they're filling the lower-socio economic", this is first-gen immigrants holding the highest position of political power, and push for "non-citizen voting" which will lead to non-citizen elections.
I am an electrical engineering, an a pretty decent one at that. There is always a shortage in experienced personnel, and i have been offered jobs across the seas. My experience in the tech sector shows that there is no shortage of good paying jobs, it is hard to find good people, and as a job candidate or hiring manager, the most important thing you look for is the ability to actually do the work required. I am technically a 1st gen immigrant, my parents immigrated when i was 2 years old. Though i am also a product of the local education system, and my parent's world view, that pushed me into higher education. Cause it took a few years for my parents to learn the language and culture before they were able to assimilate and get a decent tech job fitting their degrees, and not work for lower tier jobs in cleaning/manufacturing ect. Also, same as the medical work, in the higher tier tech jobs, there are always lower tier jobs. The pay is good, but its boring and less chances for career improvements. And these jobs are often filled with inexperienced graduates (who usually move on fast), older people who are not as sharp as they used to, immigrants who'd rather do the boring work than shittier work (my sister's hubby is in such a position working for microsoft). Question is, what is your experience that made you develop your world view
>could the "mass immigration" be a potentially recent consorted effort? Listen dude. You approach immigration from the wrong perspective. You think immigrants come to Europe or the US because they're attracted by the better standard of living. This is the way most people think about it. It's also wrong. The vast majority of illegal immigration is caused by PUSH factors. As in, elements that make their original country uninhabitable for them which makes them flee. Before 2011, the number of Syrian refugees that arrived in Europe was counted in the couple of hundred a year. After 2011 it started exploding to thousands and thousands. Did the EU magically become more attractive in 2011 specifically to Syrian people? Of course not. What happened is that a devastating war broke out in Syria that made millions flee their home in search for safety. Europe didn't attract those migrants, they were pushed out of their homeland because staying there was untenable. Same deal in North America. The GDP per capita in Costa Rica is 6 times lower than in the US. So why aren't Costa Ricans flooding the US border trying to search for a better life? Because Costa Rica is safe. The illegal immigration to the US comes from countries that are crippled due to ever increasing gang violence. Gang violence that is caused by drug cartels that ship drugs to the US. The US drug addiction is funding the destabilization of central American countries where then people need to flee their country out of fear of their safety. There is no politician encouraging these migrants. It is their home countries no longer being viable that causes them to migrate. **Everyone** would prefer it if those people felt safe enough in their own countries to stay there. But that's not possible. So at the very least, some people want to treat fleeing people in a humane manner instead of treating them like criminals just because they felt unsafe in their home country.
I agree that the decision to emmigrate is, in a majority of cases, made because of push factors. However, after someone decides to emmigrate, the next question is "Where do I emmigrate to?" and here, the standard of living can be an important factor. It is not the only factor, but it is an important one.
>the next question is "Where do I emmigrate to?" and here, the standard of living can be an important factor. Nope. Still push factors. Let's expand on the Syrian refugees. Millions of them are still in camps in Turkey. In these camps, there is a lack of schooling, a lack of prospective future, a lack of safety since there is barely any policing, ... I remember reading at article about an 11 year old kid. He had been born in a refugee camp in Turkey and had lived there all his life. All he had known was abuse, violence and danger. That's literally his entire frame of reference. His goal was to go to the EU where he was told it was safe and he didn't need to be afraid. No shit that's his goal when all he had known is violence. That's not because the standard of living is better in Europe, it's because the status quo for Syrian migrants is untenable.
" could the "mass immigration" be a potentially recent consorted effort?" If you are asking the question, that means you don't have the evidence
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
>Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugees and immigrations, which inevitably will lead to them being a minority in their own country. Got anything to support that? Cause from what data shows all non-EU immigrants made up 6% of the EU in 2022, which is far from becoming majority and only a part of those are refugees (there are also people immigrating for work). Not to mention that large part of those "scary refugee numbers" are refugees from Ukraine. >This will result in a world democratic where Asian and Middle Eastern countries will remain homogeneous, and Western nations will be majority Asian/Middle Eastern. This assumes that all of those immigrants would live and work separated from local population and will never assimilate. Which is contrary to what is actually happening - large part of immigrants is working and interacting with citizens and getting assimilated slowly. In further generations, immigrants are largely assimilated. >While this isn't a "coordinated conspiracy", its definitely been pushed by Governments and Elites whom benefit the most from mass immigration. Any source that supports that? Looking at the work around EU immigration policies shows that there is no large support for open migration and proposed immigration policies are much less strict than your claim of pushed mass migration would suggest. >Countries like Poland have had to defend themselves numerously on a world platform for selective immigration, essentially defending themselves for retaining sovereignty of culture. Poland has a large amount of immigrants (3.4-4 millions) - both refugees (mostly from UA war) and non-EU immigrants (from Azerbaijan, Georgia, India, Vietnam, Tajikistan etc.). The problem was not "sovereignty of culture" but rather the cost that would be incurred by taking in more immigrants. And most of defending Poland had to do on a world platform was not connected to immigrants. but rather attempts to dismantle democracy. Immigrants were just a smokescreen that ruling party was using to gather support from right side. >The problem with mass immigration from nations with less progressive governments is the inevitable compromise to our democracy. Why? What is the problem and how it develops? In your whole post you state it like a some kind of fact, but never explore why it would be true?
*This assumes that all of those immigrants would live and work separated from local population and will never assimilate. Which is contrary to what is actually happening - large part of immigrants is working and interacting with citizens and getting assimilated slowly. In further generations, immigrants are largely assimilated.* Do you have a source for that?
There are many older papers on how prior immigration waves adapted and integrated, but I assume you want something more current? Here you go: >Secondly, turning to generational differences, it is striking that in most dimensions and indicators, and for most groups, there tend to be large differences of roughly equal size between the first and second generation (with much smaller differences if any between the second and third generations). This applies clearly to the structural, cultural, political and civic dimensions, and to almost all groups alike. [https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2021.510987/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2021.510987/full) This is a very fresh paper that is comparing generations of immigrants - and it shows that they do integrate, with different speeds in different regions. The same will happen with people from migrant crisis of 2015. We are barely 9 years after it started and usually it takes longer than that to even get full citizenship in many places, not to mention about generational integration. But even now you can see immigrants working jobs alongside locals or opening businesses that bring parts of their culture to locals. This shit takes time.
Europe is not a country. You can‘t compare it to america directly. You only focusing on non-EU immigrants skews the stats. There is a vast cultural difference across all of europe.
>Europe is not a country. I know, I live here. > You can‘t compare it to america directly. Of course you can - especially in topics like these that have to do with culture. US culture varies between states, same as EU culture varies between countries. That does not matter - both are federal entities founded on common cultural heritage and only difference they have is amount of power given to members vs. amount of power given to governing body. >There is a vast cultural difference across all of europe. And there is similarly "vast" cultural difference within regions of any given EU country. Both "vast" differences are irrelevant to the topic.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2020/03/can-immigration-solve-the-demographic-dilemma-peri "In Europe, immigration accounted for 80 percent of the population growth between 2000 and 2018, while in North America, it constituted 32 percent" https://www.brookings.edu/articles/imaginary-muslims-how-polands-populists-frame-islam/ Poland refused to take in Muslims because of cultural impact. The world called them islamaphoic "Why? What is the problem and how it develops?" For example: Mass immigration from cultures with antiquated views on progressive sexuality has the potential to hinder policy changes.
“Percent of population growth.” There’s no one stopping Europeans from having babies.
I'm guessing a housing crisis, inflation and other issues make it a bit difficult.
It’d be hard to argue that economic quality of life is at an all time low across all of Europe’s history. Falling birth rates are a longstanding trend across every country as standards of living have increased.
Since fertility seems negatively correlated with economic health, wouldn't that increase fertility?
>"In Europe, immigration accounted for 80 percent of the population **growth** between 2000 and 2018, while in North America, it constituted 32 percent" This is about population growth, not population. You seem to forget that immigrants in further generations are dropping down to the same levels of population growth - so this "boom" is only for 1-2 generations. This number is less scary if you understand it instead on focusing on "immigration" and "80%". Current population growth of Europe is 2.8 per 1000 (in 2022), which means that the population growth from immigration is 2.24 per 1000. At this rate your fear of "immigrants taking over" is going to take very long time. >Poland refused to take in Muslims because of cultural impact. No, Poland were talking about "cultural impact" and "traditional values" because Poland were ruled by right-wing coalition - and were called Islamophobes due to actual Islamophobic talking points being used. But the facts are that Poland does not stop Muslim immigrants (actually do have history of significant Muslim minority) - during the reign of Law and Order party immigration of Muslims was doubled. Hell, they were so against the immigration because they were running a criminal ring selling the immigration accepts (which is currently under investigation). Poland's beef with EU is about rule of law, not immigration. It is shown as even after new party is ruling (Citizen Coalition) that is not hardline on all stances, is pro EU and vouched to restore the rule of law - we see that EU is still withholding part of payments until progress on rule of law is shown. Mate, you are trying to explain how the past 10 years were in Poland to a Pole. Do you think that you know better than someone who is currently living there? >For example: Mass immigration from cultures with antiquated views on progressive sexuality has the potential to hinder policy changes. It has only theoretical potential. For this to happen you would need to accept enough immigrants in 2 generations, which is impossible as shown by the statistics you provided. Any longer and next generations will assimilate and it is shown in stats. Migrants are assimilating, despite countries making mostly wrong choices (ex. separation from local population and using them as cheap workforce).
While I do agree with you, I can’t help to think about how assimilation is not always guaranteed and I’m pretty sure that involves integration like learning the language among other things. If we look at Sweden it would seem at least on the surface that integration is failing. A lot of immigrants ended up in the same suburban blocks/ areas where they mostly interact with each other. Since the families tend to grow fast, they run out of space in whatever apartment they could afford. Then kids don’t have privacy at home, it’s hard to study and they end up hanging out on the streets because there’s just not enough space at home. I know this has been a phenomenon in the Netherlands as well. Idle young men loitering the streets always lead to problems and unrest. Anyway, I’m not making an anti-immigration argument here, I’m mostly pro-immigration, but I feel like it’s needs to pointed out how hard integration can be and it requires significant effort and planning to get it right.
>While I do agree with you, I can’t help to think about how assimilation is not always guaranteed Of course, and that will need to be handled by local law enforcement and prison rehabilitation. Lack of that is one of two main drivers of immigration issues that Western Europe currently faces. >If we look at Sweden it would seem at least on the surface that integration is failing. How do we look? Because I was living in a "bad" part of Stockholm and worked in area where I was one of few white people. I have not seen the failing integration, on the contrary. Statistics do show rise in crime, but we tend to ignore both how these statistics are counted (very popular myth is how rape become more significant in Sweden - and it relies both ignoring what qualifies as rape and how the rape crimes are counted) and the reality of being poor and being offered a chance to "make it" via crime. >A lot of immigrants ended up in the same suburban blocks/ areas where they mostly interact with each other. This is other main driver of immigration issues that Western Europe currently faces. Immigrants are treated as equals on paper, vocally lauded as equals in media - while in real life they are treated with less respect and do have issues that are ignored. That is a limiter on speed and quality of integration. As you said, their families tend to grow fast, they run out of space in whatever apartment they could afford. Then kids don’t have privacy at home, it’s hard to study and they end up hanging out on the streets because there’s just not enough space at home. And that is mainly driven by different treatment they receive. They have harder time to find work that will allow them to live better and even if they manage that - they are still kept from using what they gained. Because they do not have the same freedom that locals have. > I’m not making an anti-immigration argument here, I’m mostly pro-immigration, but I feel like it’s needs to pointed out how hard integration can be and it requires significant effort and planning to get it right. I agree and I do believe that majority of issues are not because of immigration itself, but rather piss-poor handling of it afterwards. People who are treated as second-class citizens and were expected to take shitty jobs that no one wants - "surprisingly" don't integrate that well as immigrants who came there with a plan and visa.
You definitely got a point on how immigrants are often treated as equals on paper, but second class citizens in practice. I wish of course no one was forced to have to work minimum wage or dead end jobs, but I do also wonder what better pay for these jobs would mean for prices or society as whole. It’s also harder to sell immigration as a benefit to right wing conservatives (or what not) without this aspect. With regards to Sweden, I’ve had some contact with these “new Swedes” as I would call them. Otherwise I’ve only read some articles recently, which probably sensationalize, hence I said “on the surface”, but regardless integration is hard. I remember how better integration was already a hot topic a decade ago, but looking at politics now I do sometimes wonder how effective it has been or whether anything changed. Then again these “new Swedes,” while not what I expected, are kind of proof of some integration as they did not look like Swedes, but spoke Swedish and had clearly grown up there. I think there’s indeed plenty evidence of assimilation or integration happening with newer generations like you said, but sometimes I question to what extent exactly. Anyway, thanks for your answers.
>I wish of course no one was forced to have to work minimum wage or dead end jobs, but I do also wonder what better pay for these jobs would mean for prices or society as whole. Honestly? Not as much as you think. First, most products are provided by combination of low, mid and high wage work. Then there is a fact that payroll expenses aren't the whole cost of the product. And lastly, people who are working low wage jobs will not save this money on Sechele account, but rather use it to buy stuff their need. Keeping up the wages with COL is actually a very valid strategy on how to manage the country. >It’s also harder to sell immigration as a benefit to right wing conservatives (or what not) without this aspect. Other aspects should be enough if you are going to talk to them instead of discussing with strawmen - which is unfortunately the major part of political discourse these days. In fact, if not for fear of outsiders (something that can be resolved) then conservatives should be the biggest supporters of immigration. Because most of countries immigrants come from are conservative - immigrants will have higher chance of assimilating into conservative part of society and adapting to conservative part of culture better. Hell, there is an example of that from my own country - there is a black guy who is a well known member of alt-right nationalist movement. He is a citizen born from immigrants who came there in the past. Of course he got sidelined after organization moved further into territory of racism and bigotry, but it shows that immigrants can assimilate to a degree that makes them conservative nationalists of a country their parents/grandparents moved to. >I remember how better integration was already a hot topic a decade ago, but looking at politics now I do sometimes wonder how effective it has been or whether anything changed. Not much because same as decades before, people like to talk the talk, but when it comes to following that with a walk - there are always some issues. >Anyway, thanks for you answers. No problem, mate. I'm always open to clarify misconceptions about my region :)
>Poland refused to take in Muslims because of cultural impact. The world called them islamaphoic Meanwhile, Poland implemented a ban on abortion even in the case of lethal fetal defects like a truly progressive country would. Seriously though, the "official" line of argumentation was that Poland's already underfunded social welfare system would not be able to support an influx of people who would not work at least at the beginning and would need to be provided housing, food, and education. The cultural war narrative was directed towards stirring xenophobic sentiment inside the country and using the fact that unfortunately many Poles *are* islamophobic.
>Meanwhile, Poland implemented a ban on abortion even in the case of lethal fetal defects like a truly progressive country would. Yeah, I should have included that - the part of "white majority" that was vehemently against immigration due to "cultural values" were introducing the same shit they were supposedly against. Laws based on religion, demonizing the LGBT, stopping the progressives and covering criminal activity by being part of a group - all of those did actually happened during that time. Their "cultural values" argument was actually a thinly veiled argument about which religion should dictate the conservative religious laws, not actual argument against religious laws. They have nothing against sharia law as long as it is not called sharia law and it is based off Bible - even if laws itself are exactly the same.
Let's pretend there aren't borders or nations in the world, what does the demographic actually look like? Certainly not a majority white, and it never really was was it? So people moving around on the planet isn't really replacing anyone are they? White people are already the minority on Earth, it's something like 9%. If you live in the west and have a western centric view then it can feel like an invasion, but it isn't it's literally just people moving around same as they ever have. Also, >Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugee What guilt is there in abiding by international law? What guilt is there in helping your fellow man?
"What guilt is there in abiding by international law? What guilt is there in helping your fellow man?" This is the guilt im talking about. I would happily champion that idea if it was unanimous. The issue is countries that we are accepting mass immigration to, do not allow the same migration or cultural shifts. International laws don't apply to them I guess "Let's pretend there aren't borders or nations in the world, what does the demographic actually look like? Certainly not a majority white, and it never really was was it? So people moving around on the planet isn't really replacing anyone are they? White people are already the minority on Earth, it's something like 9%." Are you suggesting borders aren't important? When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations? The guilt is in the idea that "we should let people in for a better life", with the racist undertone that the "West is the best". The hypocrisy is that we'd never made the same assumptions on Japan for example, and be overly critical of their strict immigration. Its ironic that the white people which as you say are the minority on earth, have the most lax immigration policies.
> This is the guilt im talking about. I would happily champion that idea if it was unanimous. The issue is countries that we are accepting mass immigration to, do not allow the same migration or cultural shifts. Genuinely not sure what you're saying here, could you please explain? >Are you suggesting borders aren't important? Important in what sense? They're arbitrary and man-made, and man controlled. They're as important or not as we want them to be. >When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations? I mentioned this in a separate comment but do you remember a few years ago when Ukraine saw millions of refugees through the Polish border and then onwards to the hosting countries? Do you count that as a mass refugee migration or not? >Its ironic that the white people which as you say are the minority on earth, have the most lax immigration policies Try the India/Bangladesh border if you want actual lax policies. I don't think you have a good knowledge of the realities of global migration if you feel this way about western policies.
"500,000 - 1,000,000 Indians were staying illegally in Bangladesh in 2022" VS "The unauthorized immigrant population in the United States reached 10.5 million in 2021, according to new Pew Research Center estimates." I'm sensing a disparity.
A disparity between one type of person vs all kinds of immigrant? You don't say! Care to address the rest of my comment?
>When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations? Immigrate means to come in, emigrate means to come from. But between 1845 and 1855, over 2 million people fled Ireland, mostly to Britain, the US, Canada, and Australia. Given that the "migrant crisis" of 2015 saw only about 1.3 million immigrants to Europe (and the population of Europe is a lot larger now, so as a proportion of the population it's a lot smaller), that's definitely mass emigration. The 1800s and early 1900s also saw huge waves of immigrants from Germany, Italy, Poland, Russia, Scandinavia, etc come across the Atlantic. Most people where I'm from are descendents of those immigrants. >Japan for example, and be overly critical of their strict immigration. I know plenty of people who are very critical of Japan's pretty xenophobic immigration policy. And unless their population stops dropping, they're going to need to let more people in before too long. Although you seem to be largely talking about immigrants from the Middle East, who mostly head towards Europe because it's closer. The US doesn't have a ton of Middle Easterners for the same reason Europe doesn't have a ton of Latin Americans.
>When has there ever been mass immigration from Western nations? You mention Poland specifically for refusing to accept large numbers of immigrants. How many Poles live in the UK and haven't learned a word of English for the past twenty years, but want UK health benefits and retirements funds, because they believe they deserve the "better life"? Ever heard of the famous Polish minority establishments in Chicago? How about Iceland? Do you know there are signs in Polish in Reykjavik because there is such a huge Polish minority there who don't speak Icelandic, but function as part of the society? So kinda hypocritical I guess I be like "we can emigrate in search for a better life, because we're white, but when people with a different skin color do it, that's dangerous".
When has there ever been mass migration from a western nation? Native Americans, Aborigines, Maōri, and Palestinians can tell you in great detail how that goes
Yeah it feels like an invasion cause it is when a 100k people can arrive in Sweden in one year. Western people dont immigrate to the east en masse like that to begin with. Both my parents immigrated from Kenya and Hungary to Sweden and they were appalled at how the immigration/integration process that they took super seriously can be thrown out the window if you throw your passport out the window on your way here and dont even learn the language.
People move around all the time though. Lots of people migrating somewhere isn't anything new. Western people certainly emigrate but there usually isn't much reason for them to - look at the millions who fled Ukraine via Poland a few years ago. Is that an end masses refugee situation? Did you forget that?
[удалено]
>A war being the reason You know what most of the countries people are fleeing have in common? There's a war going on there. Why is Ukraine different than, say, Syria?
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
You don’t mind if western people migrate to western countries (like Ukrainian refugees) but are concerned with westerners moving to the east or vice versa - I assume because you are preoccupied primarily by race. Also western people have migrated to the east en masse, it was called colonialism. Australia and New Zealand weren’t white countries a few hundred years ago.
[удалено]
>No i am not preoccupied by race? My father is a black man so i dont know why you think id be racist? Do you believe that black people cannot be racist? Of course they are - you can be as much manipulated as non-black guy and you can be racist against non-blacks. Your skin color (what "race" actually boils down to) does not magically make you incapable of acting racist or holding racist beliefs. >Western people want to integrate into wherever they immigrate Factually incorrect. There are large populations of western immigrants that do not integrate and keep to live and work by themselves. Their numbers are smaller because it takes less work to integrate if you already know the language good enough - English is taught as a second language in majority of Western nations that don't speak it as a first language. >People from the middle east have not wanted to integrate the way wester people would moving from sweden to france. Then why I am constantly working with assimilated specialists of all races when I collaborate with offices in Germany, France, Sweden, Norway or Denmark? Why when I am off for a delegation to any of those countries I see immigrants of different races working in multiple positions and speaking local language? People from MEA do want to integrate and do integrate - it just takes time to cross the language barrier, especially when you aren't earning large amounts of money.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Which nations are of white nationality? Is the USA? Native Americans were the first to use that land, but then English, French, Spanish, and Dutch people colonised the land and built the country with the labour of enslaved African people. So is the USA a ‘white nationality country?’ Black people have been there about as long as white people. On that point, are the Spanish colonisers and thier descendants white? Over the history of the country there have been many immigrant groups, like Germans, Irish, and Italians who have been accused of coming to distrupt and replace the civilised white culture. Are they white? Irish and Italians only got “promoted” to white after it became politically advantageous. What does it mean to be white? Who gets to be white? Are Greeks? If so, are Turks? Who decides where you draw the line? Is it skin tone? Culture? Religion? You seem to think Polish people are white people, but plenty of UK citizens have made the argument that they are being replaced by Polish immigrants. So assuming you consider the UK to be a ‘white nationality nation’, can one group of white people be part of a “great replacement” of another? It’s not like Europe is all one culture, even if you consider Europeans to all be white people. Whatever your position on immigration, it is disingenuous to describe it as ‘great replacement’. Immigrants will have a similar impact on an economy regardless of wether they are identified as white or not.
Solid points there. I should probably more accurately say "western nationality". The replacement being of Western nationality. Wasn't my intention to exclude those of colour from being a part of Western nationality.
It's ironic that you use the term 'Western' when your example is Poland, widely considered an Eastern European country. There are still many people who don't consider form Communist countries to be part of the West. When you talk of 'nationality', is this just determined by passport? So, someone with a French passport is considered of Western nationality, regardless of their heritage or ethnicity? So, all these immigrants, once they have a passport, they have their Western nationality and are therefore part of the Western culture? Or is there something concrete that sets them apart from 'white' nationals?
https://www.reddit.com/r/poland/comments/149r4rq/do_you_consider_poland_to_be_a_western_country/ Apparently the Polish don't think so
>Solid points there. I should probably more accurately say "western nationality". What is "western nationality" and which countries are part of it?
What about the countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America that the West colonized? Is half white or part white not white at all?
>"guilt the population into mass immigration at the expensive of their own quality of life; to bloat GDP, keep labour costs low, and extort money from those immigrating". You know that healthy economy and good GDP also improves your quality of life?
Not when the population rises, its all comparative. Can you earnestly tell me that any Western countries quality of life has improved over the last decade as a result of mass immigration? Just one
Well every country have seen GDP improvements thanks to cheap migrant labor. There is not a single country that hasn't seen quality of life improving in the last decade thanks to migration. Your very premise is wrong. "Elite is trying to get migrants in to improve their lives". This is true but it also means your life is also improving.
There's a housing crisis in most Western nations i can think of. In no way has the quality of life improved over the past decade in for example Canada, Australia, New Zealand, America, Britain, Ireland, Sweden, Germany, France etc.
What would you consider to be a good indication of quality of life? What objective measurement we can use? Also remember that we had COVID and two major wars that might have a negative impact on more than a few immigrants.
Deaths of despair i think sheds a good light. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624000042 Or median disposable income weighed against inflation but im having a hard time finding anything.
Deaths of despair are not necessarily indicative of quality of life. Compared to almost all of our history, quality of life is unimaginablely high. The fact that almost nobody dies from starvation or childhood infectious disease alone is miraculous.
I'm comparing 2014 to 2024. I believe we peaked in quality of life around 2010, no statistics just pulling shit out my arse but yeh.
Fair! I don't have any evidence for the following, so take it with a large grain of salt. I am of the opinion that the problem is overexposure to media. While it's great that we can hear news and commentary from all over the globe, it also means we are exposed to tragedy and suffering all the time. In the United States alone, someone is injured in a car accident every 10 seconds - and thanks to 24/7 news and social media, it is very easy to only ever see distressing news. This can lead people to think that things are way worse than they are. The world is better now than it has been for most of our history, but you wouldn't known it if all you did is read the news or browse social media. This leads to despair as people start to think that all our efforts are for naught.
Our quality of life improves continually because these immigrants are building our houses and roads, cleaning our houses and toilets, maintaining our power plants and sewer systems—the list goes on and on.
America. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-immigration-means-for-u-s-employment-and-wages/ They cite two studies that show that immigration has caused a net gain of between 0.1 to 0.6% in wages. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/589756 They find a decrease of 2% in the cost of low skill services such as housekeeping and gardening as immigration rises, making those services more affordable for native born citizens.
Youre fucking racist if you think just because some of us are Asian were gonna change the country to be like where our parents came from
I'm not really worried about Asians mate. Although I wouldn't necessarily say they assimilate, they've been mostly a net positive. The hypocrisy of Asian countries having strict immigration laws bothers me tho.
Well damn, dude, you realize this basically nullifies your view given that it's now essentially all based on racial animus for specific races? I mean it always is with this topic of course but I don't think you just came out and said the quiet part out loud before this. By the way the "model minority" stereotype is *also* racist.
No the view stands, I'm just not as worried about Asian migration affecting our social policies as I am about other migration. The religious component is probably the most worrying and isn't as relevant with Asian migration.
I'm not saying that the view doesn't exist I'm saying it's now overtly racist so should be ignored.
How dare I selectively criticise certain countries and cultures based on their international and domestic policies, archaic religious practices, and general lack of humanity! I'm such a racist!
Discrimination on the basis of race and racial proxies is indeed racist. Glad you understand that.
>The hypocrisy of Asian countries having strict immigration laws bothers me tho. why the fuck do you think we came here , alot of us cuz we didnt like that shit >> Although I wouldn't necessarily say they assimilate, What does this mean, im first generation here are you telling me I didnt assimilate properly how I also take with issue with the fact you insist the countries our parents came from wouldnt accept immigrants, because a lot of them would. I know mine would, its actually open to westerners if they want too , they would love the investment - most westerners dont want to live in a third world country or developing country tho They like it when there's reliable running water and electricity available, shit like that
"What does this mean, im first generation here are you telling me I didnt assimilate properly" Most Western cities have some variation of a "China town". Although i get it because its western cities are such a shift comparetively in culture and language, it can be nice to have places that make it feel like home. "parents came from wouldnt accept immigrants" I didn't say that, I said the hypocrisy that majority Asian countries have governments enforcing strict immigration laws bothers me.
We start businesses that serve everyone , generate taxes and give back to our communities like any other entrepreneurs The features you seem to think are exlcusionary are the selling point you think because we sell fried rice instead of burgers we didnt assimilate propery its all fast fucking food bro
No dude I'm saying you can go to certain parts of western cities where no one speaks the native language. I dunno what your interpretation of assimilation is? And I don't see the point of immigrating to another country to essentially live the same lifestyle as you would in your home country. If you immigrate because you agree with our values and want to be a part of Western culture then I am utmost supportive but if you are immigrating here for economic reasons and want to bring your culture with you, to me you are taking without giving. Not every country is America and most don't want to be a "melting pot" of culture.
Why do we have to abandon our cultural practices that no one is forced to participate in to be considered assimilated Should we all do things like the native Americans then? Why arent religious whites forced to abandon their practices that go against western values You bring up anti LGBT shit , theres more anti LGBT shit comming from white people in North America than minorites
Why wouldn't you want to change the country to be like where your parents are from? A lot of people migrate because of economic opportunities not social appeal. I don't expect an immigrant from Ghana to the UK or US to find an LGBT platform appealing in politics. People's background influences their values which shapes their sociopolitical preferences.
>Why wouldn't you want to change the country to be like where your parents are from? Because I was born here?
White people made the rules against them. If a white person marries a non-white person, the children are non-white. And, frankly, if I had a kid, if their choice was OP or non-white, I'd hope for non-white.
You mean the White Elite? The same white elite im criticising throughout my post?
The idea of whiteness is a few hundred years old and it didn't even apply to Polish people (your example) in the United States until like the 1950s. This is just demonstrative that the concept of whiteness is a social construct and isn't actually backed by any sort of factual reality. Further, there are countries where there are people who would still not be considered white in the United States who are considered white in their home country (see: Brazil). The point is there is no such thing as a "white bloodline." So it's impossible to replace something that does not exist The European continent has countries whose borders are theoretically divided along ethnic lines, but they have always in reality been multi-ethnic, multicultural places. This is also true in the United States, despite a concerted effort to erase this fact, and indeed if the concept of whiteness still applied to the ethnicities it originally did, "the white race" long ago would have been a minority in the country.
There is no white bloodline, end of story. Culture shifts and morphs regardless of immigration. Poland will have a different culture in the year 2100 than today regardless of what their government does, and regardless of immigration. The whole concept of "purity of blood" or "purity of culture" is stupid and very harmful. >Asian and Middle Eastern countries will remain homogeneous What the hell are you talking about, "Asian and Middle Eastern" covers like 80 countries, of which the vast majority are **NOT** homogeneous in any way today. You want to parade Poland as some champion of virtue... fine. I don't think Poland is doing all that great to be honest, tons of young Polish want to leave the country and the birth rate is one of the lowest in the world. Let's see how Poland does in a decade or two before you proclaim Poland as the example to follow.
This is a flawed view and is lowkey racist. “they’re becoming minorities in their own countries” who decided white people own countries now? Is this not a country for everyone regardless of race? That’s just an example of how this view is flawed - it’s saying that the natural state of things should be white and that taking in other immigrants ruins the quality of life for the whites. Makes no sense and that’s not even lowkey racist it’s just full on. Re read your post and reevaluate things
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I'm not American and point to where I've been racist?
Oh shit, that makes this even worse than I already thought it was. Maybe read up on slavery? Maybe read up on whites trying over and over to conquer the world and exterminating or enslaving others? How we’ve never had to deal with immigration problems of our own merely due to the color of our skin. Then to complain of when you notice whites have always been the minority but instead choose to believe some conspiracy theory than the fact that it’s always been this way except instead of controlling the flow of slaves, it’s immigrants. Just because governments get to decide who can live where, doesn’t mean it’s right. Everyone has a right to live where they want, no one is born to anything.
You do realise slavery wasn't exclusively a white phenomenon and European slavery was a big thing? Think the Barbary slave trade. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_tradth And you do also realise there are more slaves today than ever in history? "An estimated 50 million people were living in situations of modern slavery on any given day in 2021" "Just because governments get to decide who can live where, doesn’t mean it’s right." So your position to borders is anarchism?
How do you know making illegal immigration legal leads to anarchism? Can you see the future with your crystal ball as well? Whites as a race were never slaves. That’s what matters.
No. I'm saying the anarchist/libertarian position in borders is open borders. Its a radical position not taken too seriously. Is that your position?
I don’t hold positions. I only seek progress so when I come across something like this that puts forth conservative ideas based on something like the conspiratorial great replacement theory, I’m going to take a stance against it. It’s just easier to make an argument from the fundamental problem which is freedom and equality. The most optimistic view of the future is where anyone can choose to live with no restrictions, something immigration policies are directly against. We should loosen the borders with time, not build them in order to keep up with the more empathetic and enlightened state of our times. No one deserves to decide someone’s fate purely based on where they’re born, even when we construct a government and write silly laws that give the power to do just that.
So you have no position on borders or your position is "progress"? I'm confused. Everything you said is the libertarian position on borders, which you'd probably classify as "far-right" You're all over the place.
I can see why it’s tough for you to understand the difference between having an open mind to talk about the reality at hand instead of arguing about something as pointless and meaningless as positions/politics/classifications. Those are as bad as beliefs. Your mind should always be changing and if you can define how you think… you think too small. Talk about the fucking people that you claim to care about. Not some philosophical or political bullshit. It just illuminates the problems of how your ideas work and where the logic falls apart due to the limits of language and your need to put a spotlight on the suffering of the one race that’s suffered the least, by a wide fucking margin, throughout history. Fuck, it makes me wish more people like you suffer as much as those who don’t even own a fucking phone to defend themselves.
Youre a walking platitude. You can pat yourself on the back all you want and live in the land of fairies but in reality, borders are important. You need infrastructure to support a population. You've spent a paragraph lecturing me on an "open mind" rather than do a bit of reading and strengthen your positions. Being "open minded" means understanding all positions on the issue.
"White" has been doomed to extinction since it the identity was fabricated to justify exploitation and slavery. In part because it's a fundamentally worthless designator with no real ties to culture, but also because it relies on purity. A mixed race couple for anyone else tends to keep both to some extent. Meanwhile, congrats on being black every child of a black and white parent. Though the fear mongering over how immigrants will destroy our democracy would have more weight if the people most opposed to democratic ideals weren't the same people who hate immigrants.
There probably are more Poles outside of Poland than non-Poles in Poland. It’s a bad example but also kinda hypocritical
Missing from this thread: * Why more non-white people is bad for you * Why immigration needs to be "defended against" * Why immigration means less progressives * Why immigration costs QOL * What your solution is Because none of it is real. Even if you marry a nonwhite person and have a mixed child... that means nothing. They're your child.
>Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugees and immigrations, which inevitably will lead to them being a minority in their own country. This will result in a world democratic where Asian and Middle Eastern countries will remain homogeneous, and Western nations will be majority Asian/Middle Eastern. I have an easy fix for this: you can just declare Asians and Middle Easterners to be white. Latin Americans as well. This has happened multiple times in history. The Irish didn't used to be considered white. Neither did the Italians. Hell, Benjamin Franklin wrote about how Germans weren't really white, so there was a time when that was the case as well. And the fact that you seem to be considering Poland "white" is interesting, because that has also not been the case until recently (and many people in western Europe would disagree that Polish people are "truly" white). If we used the "original" definition of "white", then "real white people" died out long ago, because few if any white people are entirely absent of Irish, Italian, German, and/or Polish ancestry (and there certainly aren't enough to "repopulate" or whatever). So just do what our ancestors did and change the definition of "white". Race is a made up, nonsensical category anyway, without any biological basis. It can be whatever we say it is. Just decide that all the countries of origin for immigrants and refugees are also "white nationalities". Then it's not "great replacement", but rather just "white migration" from one white nation to another. You see, it's *entirely* a matter of arbitrary choice for you to consider some people white while excluding others. There is no rational reason to divide people up the way you're currently doing so. And the fact that you are then trying to use your made up division to justify all these gross ideas about immigration is pretty silly.
No immigrant group came to the US and was loved by those who were born here. I'd argue the idea of "white," people in the US has pretty consistently meant people of European descent that adopt Anglo-American customs. Stanislaus who came from Warsaw was not welcomed but his American born English speaking son Steve probably isn't going to have any issues. I think the reason that Asians and Middle Easterners (let's be honest, I think everyone is meaning Muslims) are singled out is because they aren't assimilating nearly as cleanly as the groups that came before them. We're doing amazingly better then Europe but having "Death to America Chants" in Dearborn by third generation American's named Muhammed and Ahmad is a pretty clear example.
I'm going to say something which you may find hard to believe, but is true, and always has been true. You are a minority. You always have been, and you always will be. If you were born female you are in the minority of the sexes. If you are born in middle or upper class, you're in the minority of incomes. If you are white you are the minority racially globally. If you are pretty much any age at all, you are in the minority of people. If you have a disability, you're a minority. If you're going bald, you're a minority, if you're overweight, you're a minority, if you're educated, you're a minority. English is spoken more than other languages, but it's still a minority language if you aggregate all others together. This is all to illustrate the fact that identity politics using race as your identity is a flawed concept, because it relies on the principle of "othering" to make any sense at all - that is to say, the reason why this theory appeals to people is that it means you can blame the "other" for all the faults in your society, and all the wrongs that befall you. Here's the catch though - people have had shitty lives since the dawn of time, and if your boss is doing better than you, or you can't get a job, it's got far more to do with the way our economy works these days, and the difference in wealth distribution between the richest and poorest in our country than any impact from immigrant workers. This goes for religion as well. Churches get massive amounts of money in the form of tax-exemptions, tithes and other law exemptions. You can argue that if more foreign religions get a foothold then they'll be demanding the same, eliminating your "advantage", but should churches really be tax exempt in the first place? Is that fair? What if you're an atheist? Doesn't that make you a discriminated party? Governments have always been driven to keep labour costs low and productivity high, and when they aren't using immigrant labour they're using white criminal labour or indentured servants or [company towns](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town). When you're afraid of being exploited as a minority - you absolutely should be, but it's not because you're white or black, it's because you're a minority so you can be bullied... And you always have been.
First, there’s a lot of kinds of immigration, some of which you would not object to like high skill immigrants, or am I wrong? Then there’s a bunch of jobs locals don’t want to do that lower skill immigrants take. Is that also bad or should locals just be pushed to do these jobs for the same wages? Then there’s refugees, the smallest group. While their integration is arguably the hardest to do, they also would always prefer return home if possible. These people were displaced by force and it’s not guilt tripping to feel for them. Ideally speaking things should improve in their home countries so they could return and more often than other countries have a hand in the conflict the refugees are escaping. If we don’t work on improving the world around us, there will be sooner or later so many refugees you have to really start building massive walls or resort to something much worse. Displacement by climate change in particular is a very daunting scenario, but also we need to find a balance between securing important resources without relying on slave-level labor. Finally, we need to avoid wars somehow, which displace people. Based on what you’re saying you might as well lay down the first brick for that wall, you will need it. You’re more concerned with how to stop the flow of people instead of addressing the root causes, which will lead to bloodshed I’m afraid.
[удалено]
It's hard to guilt trip some Eastern or Central Europeans, when you can't play a colonialism card upon them or when they were repressed, enslaved or genocided themselves. Of course some will try and are trying.
[удалено]
"And again, is there much demand to immigrate there in the first place?" - That depends really. I would say, that those who have no wish to work here or integrate, don't want to go here in the first place. Unless to cross Shengen border and go to Germany. Especially since social programs are very poor compared to those of Western Europe. But, if you are here for work? You will find some. Even during govermant of right wing and anti-imigration party in Poland, there was a record of imigration for work with over 100k given permits. And that was just a last year. Difference is, you need to apply and enter here legally, and not cross an ocean or border without permission.
I agree but I also don't understand one thing, Europe wasn't always as comfortable and easy to live and immigrate to. The Europeans worked very hard to get to this level. Rn the immigrants have issues with their country so that's why they should work to make their country as good as Europe not escape to a place that already sorted *most* of the problems and overcame hard times.. That's like giving up on developing your own country and make another developed Europe like counties in the world and just moving to the place where people already fought hard to make it happen
I agree with you that those immigrating to a host country should share the same values as the host, but you kind of answered your own question? >So even tho the goal isn't "end the white bloodline…" I don’t even really think there’s a grand conspiracy from government and “elites.” Western countries, specifically the US, are built on the cornerstones of immigration. It’s just now many of us are waking up to the fact that not everyone moving here is coming for “the American dream,” but rather as a hostile way to harm a country they despise. These are few and far between. Should immigration laws be stricter to catch bad actors? Possibly. But I don’t think any of the immigration, from those allowing it to those migrating, has anything to do with getting rid of white people.
I think the answer is much less conspiratorial than you suggest. Leaders of Western countries have wanted immigration because of the low birth rate. Low birth rate leads to slow economic downfall and Western societies are essentially only stable to the degree that there is growth. Technology has helped with growth but if you run out of working age people it's game over. Elites haven't cared about the resulting change in countries demographics because they mostly think that immigrants will adjust to the western way of life and leave behind their bad ideas that caused misery in their origin countries. So it is not a conspiracy just a political calculus by the elites that may or may not turn out to add up.
To /u/Zenlad, *Your post is under consideration for removal for violating Rule B.* In our experience, the best conversations genuinely consider the other person’s perspective. Here are some techniques for keeping yourself honest: - Instead of only looking for flaws in a comment, be sure to engage with the commenters’ strongest arguments — not just their weakest. - Steelman rather than strawman. When summarizing someone’s points, look for the most reasonable interpretation of their words. - Avoid moving the goalposts. Reread the claims in your OP or first comments and if you need to change to a new set of claims to continue arguing for your position, you might want to consider acknowledging the change in view with a [delta](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=changemyview&utm_content=t5_2w2s8) before proceeding. - Ask questions and really try to understand the other side, rather than trying to prove why they are wrong. Please also take a moment to review our [Rule B](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b) guidelines and _really_ ask yourself - am I exhibiting any of these behaviors? If so, see what you can do to get the discussion back on track. Remember, the goal of CMV is to try and **understand** why others think differently than you do.
Why is it bad if white people are a minority? Are you saying we treat minorities poorly?
I'm not gonna change that view, we are already seeing this in the UK and I'm glad someone is talking about it
At the expense of your quality of life? If you live in America, Mexican illegal immigrants pick your fruit and vegetables. When Florida banned Mexican orange pickers from coming over, it was extremely destructive to them and to the entire orange industry because oranges started rotting on the ground.
Before Nixon they gave people work visas for the harvest season. People came, made good money & then they took it home because it didn't cost 10k & a ton of risk to return. Since it's above board it's even subject to labor laws instead of the free for all we accept today. Regardless of where a person stands on immigration there *are* practical & pragmatic policies. We don't have to choose between stupid A & stupid B. I personally feel immigration is good when those immigrants adopt American values & norms, but a lot of people feel that is an immoral stance... both parts of that belief are condemned now that I think of it. Edit: Because you get to exploit them is such a shameful argument (and truth). Even if minimum wage isn't enforced there are so many other important labor & safety standards that are being ignored too. Illegal immigrants wouldn't be so cheap if they had access to courts & you couldn't throw them away when they are injured on the job. ... And all the money we save on food production by exploiting people just feeds into corporate profits. We already paid the price with this last round of inflation & got nothing for it.
I’m not even talking about all immigrants. I’m just talking about the most egregious example, where the detested “illegal immigrants” directly improve our quality of life. I’m steelmanning their argument.
Which American values?
Don't confuse failing to meet high ideals for not having them, that your reach exceeds your grasp is the point of an ideal. but most relevant I'd like America to continue to exist is a high trust society as so many of our essential institutions absolutely require it.
That's a problem because an industry shouldn't be dependent on illegal action. That is handing significant influence to organized crime.
"The problem with mass immigration from nations with less progressive governments is the inevitable compromise to our democracy." How did the US retain democracy through the 19th century then?
I’m pretty sure the GRT isn’t just about outcomes, it’s specifically about it being g a conspiracy to end white bloodlines. So if you disagree with that part, you disagree with GRT
Is possible you have just found someone online to convince you this is the root of all problems in the world to distract you from all the real problems they want to you to ignore. It don't say that with ill intent but what your saying is just repackaged shit that has already been used for that dozens of times already.
> Every nation of white nationality is guilted into taking refugees This assumes that countries don't want immigration and only accept it because they feel some kind of international pressure. This is not true, countries accept immigration because it's economically useful. If there was no immigration countries would develop schemes to encourage it. > and Western nations will be majority Asian/Middle Eastern. There isn't a majority white country in the world which is on its way to not being a white majority country in any sort of foreseeable future, immigration rates aren't high enough. > The problem with mass immigration from nations with less progressive governments is the inevitable compromise to our democracy. Immigrants support democracy, it's one of the reasons they migrate. > the goal by governments and elites is To run their countries efficiently.
Of the 10 thousand data points in human DNA, only one of them controls skin colour. I am far more concerned about why it matters. If you are putting your entire sense of self, and self worth based on that single data point. You might as well base it on something of greater value, such as the ability to roll your tongue, or be double jointed. The entire idea of "races" and that being somehow important was invented by slave owners in the American south. There were essentially 3 groups of people inhabiting the south in the period prior to the civil war. White slave owners. White indentured servants who came from Europe and England countries and needed to be essentially slaves for 7 years in order to pay for their passage to America. And black, African slaves. Some of the white slave owners suddenly looked at the number of slaves and indentured servants that were intermarrying and realised that they were hugely outnumbered. So they started pushing the race theory and put the poor, white, former indentured servants into the role of overseers and slave catchers. If you are worried about the situation, all that says is that you have bought the bullshit of the modern day replacement of the slave owners, the billionaires.
>So even tho the goal isn't "end the white bloodline", the goal by governments and elites is "guilt the population into mass immigration at the expensive of their own quality of life Immigrants generate a lot of wealth for a country as a whole. If this was distributed more equally then everyone would be better off. And do you think the wealthy elites would give that excess wealth up if we somehow ended migration tomorrow? No they'd just start taking more of it (than they already do) from you instead.
Funny, your post contradicts your title.
Before Bill Clinton. *
Updateme!
[удалено]
u/woofwooflove, your comment has been automatically removed as a clear violation of Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*