Anti-Immigration Support Thread
Does anyone here, similar to myself, oppose immigration? I wish politicians, especially the more "conservative" and "nationalist" ones, would stop letting people into the country.
Is this that same fuckhead troll? I can’t keep up anymore.. someone email his college admissions counselor
Lol good luck, I was accepted to ASU's honors college on a scholarship, I'm going go rush pike and fuck delta zeta broads
Lol, cry me a river pussy.
I am always open to different views but let's break your comments down. Does this apply to all forms of immigration or a selection of it? Then, my second question is how did you arrive on the shores of the Americas?
Not all forms of immigration, immigrants from "peer countries" (economically, culturally, socially and linguistically) should be able to immigrate, due to cultural and socioeconomic synergy. People from Africa, the Middle East or India should not, due to differences in social status, socioeconomic status and vast differences in languages and religion.
My ancestors landed upon these shores, took the natives by the throat, established an overwhelming military presence and claimed these soil ours.
So Latino immigrants should be allowed since the Spanish conquered the Aztecs and the Incas?
And you are proud of your last sentence? I see some flaws in your response to the original question. Not every one from the say G7 countries are equal socially, economically so what you saying just does not add up.
You do realize this country was founded by immigrants
A foreign, hostile force from a superior country whose sole purpose is conquest is vastly different than a groveling mass begging for welfare and our benefits from a desert.
That is the thing I do not understand about his argument, even the original Indians immigrated to the Americas.
We need more talent and consumers to keep our economy booming.
Sometimes what is morally, culturally and socially right takes priority over a slight economic boost.
Where do you draw the line? New Mexico is much more like many parts of Mexico than Vermont, but you’d likely be okay with someone from New Mexico moving to Vermont now and then? Why the difference? Is it purely nationality? If so, then why allow people to cross the huge culture gulf between New Mexico and Vermont if culture is that important? Can a poor man of European descent come into the country? What if he doesn’t speak English? Can a man of indigenous and Latino heritage come in from Guatemala? What if he speaks English well? There’s no official language, and disparate European groups like the Dutch, Germans, English, Irish, French, and Spanish all came here and spoke their languages, so who can really tell whom what language they should speak?
My Algonquin and Mandan are getting rusty. Is that a problem? I’m a hillbilly who lives in NYC. Is that an issue? I left because the grass was greener, at least as it pertains to my career in Finance. How is that rationale different than most immigrants? Was I wrong in moving? The allocative power of markets requires motion; it requires action. If everybody stays in one spot, how do I get the farmers here and the computer programmers there? How do we elevate people to their God-given potential if they won’t even move where different opportunities are? Even a slime mold moves around for food. Can’t we do more than that?
So what you're saying is that we should allow those with "god-given" talents to come to our country, leaving the third world regions desolate and inferior, while undercutting the labour of our own denizens with less than god-given talents?
My prior post said many things, so this is a thing I have said, not what I am saying.
Feigning concern for emigrants’ countries of origin, are we? When the brains drain out of these countries, do you think they forget of their homelands. For decades, much of Western Union’s business (and still to this day) was immigrant repatriations to their countries of origin. Now this is largely done over WhatsApp. You earn funds in a high PPP jurisdiction and send money back to low PPP jurisdictions, which helps out the people in the country of origin. These immigrants don’t leave their countrymen destitute; they’re often a vital lifeline. There is not only the matter of more and less talented, but differently talented. If newcomers are talented at something else, then power to them. No use in allocating domestic people to do jobs that could be better done by immigrants who have the talents to do so, right? It’s division of labor and allowing people to do the things at which they’re best. You’ve opened up Schrodinger’s Immigrant: the man who is simultaneously so talented that he disenfranchises the labor pool in the country of his destination and leaves his home country destitute, while simultaneously having so few talents that he is a drain on society and a parasite. These are mutually exclusive.
EDIT: I find your “less than God-given” comment repugnant
You trollin? Wtf how far have the standards fallen here?
I posted on here but the post disappeared.
It is super weird thing to be anti immigrant in the US, a country known for welcoming new people. Without the extra diversity, the US might be kind of boring. Also, immigrants contribute in very important industries in the US such as technology and medicine. Unfortunately, the insurance industry has made becoming a physician less appealing than it was decades ago. Without immigrants, we probably would have a shortage of doctors. Also, immigrants take low level jobs that US citizens do not want to do.
The idea of America as an immigrant nation is a post-60s liberal creation. Up until the passing of the Hart-Celler immigration Act America was understood as a European settler state. The passing of that law was hugely controversial and its sponsors swore that it wouldn't have a meaningful impact on American demography. A high-IQ ethnostate is the ideal nation - think Japan or certain Western European countries. And by ideal I don't mean ideal for rapidly accumulating wealth for the rootless oligarch class (America is easily #1 for that, and immigration is clearly beneficial on that front). Ethnostates foster civic unity and social trust, which supports better functioning institutions.
But America, obviously, is far past that point. We're not a proper nation and haven't been for a while now. We're a free trade zone with a flag. So given the reality we face, insofar as we have immigrants they should be carefully filtered, highly skilled, high IQ immigrants. We don't need low IQ immigrants (typically illegals, lottery immigrants, refugees). The "doing jobs US citizens won't do" line is garbage. That just means that the wages offered aren't appealing to Americans. Cut off the endless supply of cheap third world labor and wages would rise to clear the market. All of this is even more important given that the dominant leftist ideology in America is hyperfocused on hammering wedges between groups.
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I do not think there should be some strict standard for admittance. That is not who we are as a nation. Where do you draw the line? Why don't we just limit the immigrants to white people with blond hair who come from developed countries with high standards of living? Should we have a religion test as well? The system we have works pretty well.
Ethnic diversity is a weakness (I say this as someone who's a minority). Don't get me wrong, I love living in the U.S. and the opportunities that affords but that is from a personal standpoint. From the perspective of a government / nation state that is looking to maximize its economic wealth & longencity, greater diversity (religion / ethnicity) promotes divisiveness -- ties back into our primitive brains that have tens of millennial of years of tribalism (a very useful trait in hunter gatherer times, less so now) inside us. Especially in an era where technological progress and the pace of change is accelerating, greater divineness & massively slowing down decision making can destroy a country more quickly than in the past. Contrast this a country like China which can shift fairly quickly as you have 1 man who is holding vast majority of power (i.e. Nio is going to be the dominant EV of Asia, China biotech is massively inflecting -- all massively encouraged & pushed by the gov). China also far surpassed the U.S. already in terms of number of papers published in AI, with sr officials in the U.S. stating the China has won the war on the AI arms race.
Even Japan is very careful on immigration as they grapple with a shrinking pop. Instead of taking people from Africa, they limit immigration only to other Asian countries like Vietnam / Cambodia / etc where though the cultures are definitely different, there is enough common ground to assimilate these groups with the core Japanese group in an easier manner. This is why Eastern European countries, despite pop declines, rightly refuse to support mass immigration from non-European countries. This is why Nordic countries are doing so well (in addition to the benefits of being small which makes governance easier), they are homogenous populations where trust in institutions & EACH OTHER is very high which maximizes quality of life.
Diversity of thought is important, but when you bring diversity in religion / ethnicity it destroys unity & erodes trust when taken too far. This is exactly what's happening now to the U.S. which is on its way to becoming a failed state. Don't misunderstand, we are likely far away from this as the U.S. has so, so many structural advantages that it will likely take a very long time (i.e. massive oceans on either side with a friendly state to the north and weak, fragmented states to the south / ownership of most of the key military bases globally - trophies from WW2 when we took them uncontested as the rest of the world was a wasteland / plenty of natural resources / rich farmland / etc).
Make no mistake though, this is where we are heading. The very foundation of a democracy is trust, and this trust has all but disappeared. No one loved Congress even pre-2000 but today there is even a lack of trust in the courts! If there was ever any 1 institution that while people might gripe about they still trusted as being fairly non-partisan & doing the right thing it was the courts. You can clearly see charts showing political affiliations in 1980 vs. today where both Dems and Republicans, which used to have a big crossover are now massively polarizing (see below). Over 40% of the country mistrusts the gov to its very core, while the remaining 60% are more divided than ever. These conversations on 'being woke' continue to set people against each other & also detract from more important issues for a nation state (economic / foreign policy). These are all objective facts -- alt left doesn't want to hear any of this as it goes against their agenda but we are in decline. Much like the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, it won't happen suddenly but it is happening. While diversity isn't THE cause, it jams the rest of the engine & will contribute to America's slow death
Delectus ut labore quas nemo voluptas id. Eum eos et non autem ipsam quas eum.
Architecto facere molestiae et esse aliquid. Aut doloribus accusamus similique numquam temporibus quis impedit nobis. Officiis quibusdam saepe eum perspiciatis aut. Rerum debitis nisi quia voluptatem sint.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
At quos est sed earum eaque sit sed. Quo libero aliquam illo.
Inventore ea delectus debitis eos porro id id culpa. Vel quo possimus mollitia dolorum quia optio. Quaerat qui nihil quisquam quia incidunt consequatur. In amet eligendi libero veniam ab aperiam cupiditate.