Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 12-28-2018, 01:44 PM
Isosleepy Isosleepy is offline
Friend of Cecil
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,363
The stupid in this thread burns so bad that even my biggest goggles do nothing. Current immigration policy is not eugenic by even the wildest definition. It is also not racist by the most typically used meaning of the word as in favoring whites. Most current legal immigrants are not white, unless (perhaps and maybe) you assume all Central Americans are white, and this thread implodes then anyway.
US immigration is restrictive. It is, however, the least restrictive of all countries sane people might want to emigrate too.
Getting a visa from Lithuania (as in -work-visa) is not in fact easy. It is demonstrably harder than getting one from Central America as evidenced by actual numbers of visa awarded by country.

If you want to argue all white people - bad! Then this is not the horse to ride. If you want to argue America -Bad! by using its immigration policy, which is objectively more open and allowing for diversity than any other country, then there must be easier venues available to you.

US immigration policies have flaws for sure - currently immigration almost requires you to have family already here. And some plans for immigration “reform” are repugnant and vile. There’s enough to argue right there.
  #52  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:00 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Batano View Post
But unfettered immigration is the exception in the world, and most people who live in those countries are not "white". I know that America is, was, and will be racist but not every policy decision is based on racism. In this case, the immigration policies of the United States are not (currently) racially biased. If they were, they are doing a shit job of it since most immigrants are not "white".

It is a perfectly reasonable position to believe that immigration should be regulated in some fashion.
There is a very big difference between "unfettered immigration" and the shift to "cultural protectionism" which really is a shift from the dis-taste with explicit racism of the first half if the 20th century.

In the early 1900's the Dillingham Commission wanted to stop immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe because they believed it posed a serious threat to American society and culture, and threatened a danger of "degeneration" to "lesser" races.

This Nordicism which was really Emergency Quota Act of 1921 was based on pseudoscientific racism believing that these Catholics, Finns and other groups would never assimilate and is still based on the same ignorance of the Know-Nothing Party from the 1840s.

Opposition the Catholic faith and lived in fear of immigrants from Eastern Europe is the same Nativism that is happening today and it is fully based on race.

Hart-Celler Act of 1965 claimed to avoid using national origin, race, and ancestry as basis for immigration but really didn't change those quotas much.

Even today, the claim is that muslims or hispanics are "lesser humans" and unable to integrate and thus are a threat to "culture". Basically as science matured enough to prove that there is no biological basis for race the same segments and fears of society just dropped the race part and kept the culture part.

But note how that culture that apparently needs to be protected directly maps to the earlier discredited race claims.

While some people will miss-apply Godwin's law and dismiss the direct connection and the export of American ideas as documented in books like The Passing of the Great Race this is not hyperbole but fact.

Oddly enough this nativism which lead to the current biased quotas and restrictions is quite similar to the reasons Japan and China weren't large colonial powers, and actually directly relates to the Muslim words decline in the sciences and Europes rise subsequent rise to the scientific revolution.

While it may be uncomfortable to talk about the reason nativists fear muslims and hispanics is that they think of them as inferior and unable to assimilate and they actually fear that "white culture" will be destroyed by these degenerate populations.

If one truly believed in European liberalism (not the right vs left but the belief that all people are created equal) it would be completely incompatible with regional and racial restrictions.

While not intellectually compatible with what many people even on the "conservative" side think that they believe in the reality is that "white identity" is so important to people that most of us cannot have honest discussions about race as people become very defensive.

The reality is that the Americas were colonized through genocide and the concept of "white", which never even willingly self applied to the Europeans who were part of the colonization of the "New World" until after that settlement happened, is so important to current residents that we will never have an honest conversation until we can be honest about our past.

An example, We can watch movies like "Mars Attacks" and recoil in horror when the Martians say they are coming in peace, only to slaughter humans. Yet this is exactly what Cortez did. As the anti-catholic sentiment decreased during the cold war, exactly why are "White Americans" so afraid of latinos or (actual) Indians? It is because of perceived "race" and the belief it is a biological trait.

How can one justify any regional proxy for skin color if one truly believes in the equality of humans? Why is a person from Central America less "human" than a European? How do these people justify their "culture" protections when Even the economies of Asia are quintessentially European capitalists and people from the South of us are Christians?

We pretend like it isn't about race, but the restrictions and concerns are about "white identity" and race. And as the OP pointed out it is hypocritical considering how even politicians who are "liberal" in our current political labeling lump all Native populations into a cohesive group while ignoring their cultures and languages were far more diverse than Europe and yet we are still actively attempting to destroy those "cultures" in order to protect this manufactured "white identity"

I get the concerns, and being a white dude I am subject to the exact same implicit bias, but the fragile response to any of these discussions blocks forward movement.

If I was Inca, Aztec, Maya, Salish, Crow, Navajo, or Cherokee and saw "White Americans" being fearful of "White Genocide" it would seem very hypocritical and ignorant.

The “classical liberal” approach to human rights only seems to apply if you are white.
  #53  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:06 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isosleepy View Post
The stupid in this thread burns so bad that even my biggest goggles do nothing. Current immigration policy is not eugenic by even the wildest definition. It is also not racist by the most typically used meaning of the word as in favoring whites. Most current legal immigrants are not white, unless (perhaps and maybe) you assume all Central Americans are white, and this thread implodes then anyway.
US immigration is restrictive. It is, however, the least restrictive of all countries sane people might want to emigrate too.
Getting a visa from Lithuania (as in -work-visa) is not in fact easy. It is demonstrably harder than getting one from Central America as evidenced by actual numbers of visa awarded by country.

If you want to argue all white people - bad! Then this is not the horse to ride. If you want to argue America -Bad! by using its immigration policy, which is objectively more open and allowing for diversity than any other country, then there must be easier venues available to you.

US immigration policies have flaws for sure - currently immigration almost requires you to have family already here. And some plans for immigration “reform” are repugnant and vile. There’s enough to argue right there.
Note how your post was defensive and insulted others but didn't address the actual policies at all?

How about explaining how the preference system and per-country limits aren't "racist" or "culturalist" if you want to hide behind that thinly vailed claim.

"White people" aren't bad for being placed in a container called "white", what is bad is maintaining that artificial, racist power imbalance. Why are some humans more human than others?

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-28-2018 at 02:07 PM.
  #54  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:09 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,370
Note how this thread also drifted from the historical fact that we are living on stolen land.

It doesn't matter what color or arbitrary race resulted in that fact, the fact that people are so defensive about their "race" and can't admit that kind of proves the OPs point.

Why is it so hard to admit that? It isn't like you have to leave to admit the truth. Had Hitler been successful and exterminated the "undesirables", would you have a problem saying that Poland was "stolen"?

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-28-2018 at 02:11 PM.
  #55  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:30 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,370
To illustrate how racist this this, an immigrant from India with an Advanced Degree would have to wait for 150 years with the current backlog.

https://www.am22tech.com/eb2-india-predictions/

Yet attempts to remove country caps for these types of merit based immigration always fail.

https://www.am22tech.com/bill-to-rem...een-card-caps/

Note that this applies to even Canadian Citizens who were born in India, even if they were a perfect "cultural fit". If you don't think that our current policy is intended to protect "white identity" I would highly suggest you do some reading. Our country doesn't benefit by keeping people with advanced degrees out, yet it is still a problem because of "white genocide" fears.

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-28-2018 at 02:32 PM.
  #56  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:44 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Note how this thread also drifted from the historical fact that we are living on stolen land.

It doesn't matter what color or arbitrary race resulted in that fact, the fact that people are so defensive about their "race" and can't admit that kind of proves the OPs point.

Why is it so hard to admit that? It isn't like you have to leave to admit the truth. Had Hitler been successful and exterminated the "undesirables", would you have a problem saying that Poland was "stolen"?
It is conquered land, not stolen for the most part. Every country on the planet contains conquered land and the only thing that makes US/Canada/Australia different is that they came of age in an era where that became uncool to do.

Last edited by CarnalK; 12-28-2018 at 02:47 PM.
  #57  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:00 PM
Isosleepy Isosleepy is offline
Friend of Cecil
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Note how your post was defensive and insulted others but didn't address the actual policies at all?
Note how you misinterpret my post entirely or not adddress it at all? The notion that the current immigration policies are somehow designed to maintain a certain mythical racial profile is patently ridiculous because of the verifiable information on which immigrants the current policies allow in. Since you don’t want to be bothered by facts in mid-rant, don’t read this part:
Immigration to us by region, 2016
Americas 43, Asia 39, Africa 9.5 Europe 8
About 10 of those 43 Americas percentage points are Canadian, so at most 20% of immigration is possibly European or European descended whites.
  #58  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:12 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Batano View Post
It's hard to say wha the number should be, but I expect that economists and other academics could take a crack at it. It is useless to put a number to legal immigration if we just allow a steady stream of illegal immigrants from Latin America. I don't think an underclass of undocumented workers is good for anyone.
I don't either, which is why I advocate for pretty much the only policy that will make a dent in illegal immigration, and that is to increase legal immigration.
Quote:
I'm not sure what the answer is to immigration. Maybe we should wage war on the cartels close to home rather than worrying about the middle east. I imagine that many asylum seekers would rather live where they were born rather than emigrate here.
Maybe, but we should be careful about that. It is the consequences of our actions in Central America that are causing quite a bit of displacement. It's our mess, in both that we have a large part of the cuase of it on our hands, and because we declared with the Monroe Doctrine that this hemisphere is our responsibility. We kinda revoked the part of that doctrine that said we would stay on this hemisphere, but we still don't want foreign powers meddling in our back yard.

The other practical way to make a dent in illegal immigration is, as you infer, to improve the conditions where people are immigrating from. Waging wars on the cartels may not be the best way of doing that, but at least you are seeing that we have some work to do to clean up our mess, rather than just complain about the humanitarian crisis that we have created.
Quote:
I may be coming across as racist and anti-immigrant. I'm against open-borders, if for no other reason that it is a political non-starter. But I'd like to see a much greater number of legal immigration opportunities.
I'm against open borders too, I want to be able to know who is coming into our country, and what they are bringing; I want to know if they are healthy, and if they have had all their vaccines (though most Central American countries actually have a higher rate of vaccination than many US communities). I also would like to see many more opportunities for legal immigration, and I really do think that we can bump up our intake by orders of magnitude, and it will only make our country stronger, not weaker. Maybe a bit less white, but I personally consider that a feature, not a bug.

I'm also not a big fan of deporting criminals back to their home countries, as that is one of the things that we are doing that is causing these countries to have problems. We can produce far "better" criminals than most places, and then we send them back to where they have no way of dealing with them. I like the idea that we just keep them locked up here, while actually implementing real rehabilitation, and then maybe send their home country a bill for the services, pro-rated, of course, based on the country's ability to pay.

If we decriminalize a few non-violent crimes, we may find our prisons woefully empty, and taking on the prisoners of the world may make the investors in private prisons happy again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batano View Post
But unfettered immigration is the exception in the world, and most people who live in those countries are not "white". I know that America is, was, and will be racist but not every policy decision is based on racism. In this case, the immigration policies of the United States are not (currently) racially biased. If they were, they are doing a shit job of it since most immigrants are not "white".
Fettered immigration is the exception in history, and most people immigrated and settled in new countries with very little permission. It was emigration that was often more regulated, where feudal lords and such didn't want their population leaving them for a better lord.

The main reasons that immigration now is not very white is because of chain immigration. A US citizen can sponsor an immediate family member to get a visa, and maybe eventually become a citizen.

Chain immigration was originally created for racist reasons, with the idea that white people would be sponsoring other white people. That has changed, but that doesn't change that it was created for racist reasons.

What is one of the big things that Trump and his supporters want to shut down, chain immigration, because it is a policy that is no longer effectively racist enough for them.
Quote:
It is a perfectly reasonable position to believe that immigration should be regulated in some fashion.
Agreed, not sure why you think that this would be something that is not agreed upon by pretty much everyone. It is just the nature and manner of those regulations that we disagree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isosleepy View Post
Getting a visa from Lithuania (as in -work-visa) is not in fact easy. It is demonstrably harder than getting one from Central America as evidenced by actual numbers of visa awarded by country.
Did anyone say it was easy? No, we make our immigration process much more complicated and bureaucratic than necessary.

However, you have now made an interesting claim that it is easier to get one from Central America than from Lithuania. This is true if you have a US citizen as immediate family, and if you are from Central America, there is a higher chance that you have a US citizen as family as someone from Lithuania does, but that has nothing to do with it.

If you are not related to anyone in the US, then you simply cannot get a work visa if you are from most Central American countries. If you are from Lithuania, you can.
Quote:
If you want to argue all white people - bad! Then this is not the horse to ride. If you want to argue America -Bad! by using its immigration policy, which is objectively more open and allowing for diversity than any other country, then there must be easier venues available to you.
It is a good thing that those are not in any way, shape or form, reflective of the arguments made.
Quote:
US immigration policies have flaws for sure - currently immigration almost requires you to have family already here. And some plans for immigration “reform” are repugnant and vile. There’s enough to argue right there.
That is what we are arguing, and you are ignoring that, and accusing us of arguing that "all white people - bad!" or "America -Bad!". I did not say either of these things, but due to simply having the gall to criticize our immigration policies, and point out that they are in fact, based on trying to keep non-white people out, you immediately leap to making those inaccurate and almost disingenuous accusations as to the nature and reasoning for the argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Note how this thread also drifted from the historical fact that we are living on stolen land.

It doesn't matter what color or arbitrary race resulted in that fact, the fact that people are so defensive about their "race" and can't admit that kind of proves the OPs point.

Why is it so hard to admit that? It isn't like you have to leave to admit the truth. Had Hitler been successful and exterminated the "undesirables", would you have a problem saying that Poland was "stolen"?
Depends, are we the Nazis in this hypothetical? If we are Nazis that have taken over Poland, and we are Nazis that oppress the Polish people (who are left), then we would probably say that we have the right to the land, it was not stolen, it was "liberated" or some such.

Anyone that is not a Nazi would probably quibble with that, though.
  #59  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:16 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isosleepy View Post
Note how you misinterpret my post entirely or not adddress it at all? The notion that the current immigration policies are somehow designed to maintain a certain mythical racial profile is patently ridiculous because of the verifiable information on which immigrants the current policies allow in. Since you don’t want to be bothered by facts in mid-rant, don’t read this part:
Immigration to us by region, 2016
Americas 43, Asia 39, Africa 9.5 Europe 8
About 10 of those 43 Americas percentage points are Canadian, so at most 20% of immigration is possibly European or European descended whites.
Does it make a difference to you at all that there is much higher demand to come from other countries?

Many people in Europe are pretty happy with what they have going on. They don't want to immigrate here, we don't even have healthcare.

There are two types of people that primarily immigrate to the US. People from poorer countries who are looking for a better life, and wealthy people from wealthy countries that are looking to expand their wealth. Middle class people in Germany or Norway have absolutely no impetus to come here.
  #60  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:16 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
It is conquered land, not stolen for the most part. Every country on the planet contains conquered land and the only thing that makes US/Canada/South Africa different is that they came of age in an era where that became uncool to do.
So you admit you would have been fine had Nazi Germany won, or ? Or you are just uncomfortable with the term "stolen" which is accurate despite you above post trying to make it seem justified.

Plus how certain are you? Note the same issue as in other threads where all "Indians" are the same to you?

There are hundreds of treaties and Nations and situations, and while it may make you feel better to not admit the truth, in many cases it was theft too, and even our countries courts agree in some cases.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smith...ice-180970741/

I can find 100s more examples but I also bet if I broke into your home and forced you out with violence you would call it theft, why is it so painful to admit that it is what it is? Luckily I hope to learn from our past and not repeat that type of action so don't worry.

The US/Canada/South Africa are very different. As an example Velázquez had revoked Cortés's charter before he went to take over the Aztec Empire. He was rogue and not much different than modern ISL leaders. Would you be so accepting if ISL invaded England, killing the Queen under a false premise of coming in peace? Or is it just because you are on the victors side, gain benefit and dont' want to acknowledge the past misdeeds by your predecessors?

Especially when those misdeeds are still going on today.

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-28-2018 at 03:16 PM.
  #61  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:28 PM
Isosleepy Isosleepy is offline
Friend of Cecil
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Does it make a difference to you at all that there is much higher demand to come from other countries?

Many people in Europe are pretty happy with what they have going on. They don't want to immigrate here, we don't even have healthcare.

There are two types of people that primarily immigrate to the US. People from poorer countries who are looking for a better life, and wealthy people from wealthy countries that are looking to expand their wealth. Middle class people in Germany or Norway have absolutely no impetus to come here.
Goalpost moving much? So now we have to factor in the desire of the prospective immigrants to show that the overwhelmingly non-white stream is somehow white? The fact is, immigration to the US is largely non-white. Something I am entirely fine with, btw, what bothers me is the counter factual assertion that it isn’t.
And by the way, having been one, I can assure you that there is, in fact, strong desire in at least some middle class Europeans to move to or work in the US.
Again, if you want to argue that the US acts in ways to keep some white power structure in place, Immigration is not the example to make the point.
  #62  
Old 12-28-2018, 03:37 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isosleepy View Post
Goalpost moving much? So now we have to factor in the desire of the prospective immigrants to show that the overwhelmingly non-white stream is somehow white? The fact is, immigration to the US is largely non-white. Something I am entirely fine with, btw, what bothers me is the counter factual assertion that it isn’t.
And by the way, having been one, I can assure you that there is, in fact, strong desire in at least some middle class Europeans to move to or work in the US.
Again, if you want to argue that the US acts in ways to keep some white power structure in place, Immigration is not the example to make the point.
Why, when it is exactly the desires to protect the "white race" that the laws were even put in place to begin with?

https://books.google.com/books?id=_x...edness&f=false


It may not be as obvious now that what is "white" has expanded, but besides handwaving this away what do you have to support your above claim?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ka...caricature.png

The actual impetus behind these laws was directly related to protecting the "white identity". Race has always been the primary reason behind immigration laws, not pure number restrictions.

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-28-2018 at 03:40 PM.
  #63  
Old 12-28-2018, 04:09 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isosleepy View Post
Goalpost moving much?
No, not at all. We are talking about the difficulties of an individual who decides that they want to come to the US. You keep going on about how it must be easier, because there are more from Central America than from Europe. I am pointing out where you are wrong. Goal posts have not been moved an inch.
Quote:
So now we have to factor in the desire of the prospective immigrants to show that the overwhelmingly non-white stream is somehow white?
No, you are now moving the goalposts to the numbers of people who come here from other countries. I set them specifically at the relative difficulty of an individual who wants to come here.
Quote:
The fact is, immigration to the US is largely non-white. Something I am entirely fine with, btw, what bothers me is the counter factual assertion that it isn’t.
Then go complain to someone who has made that claim. Maybe out in a field somewhere, keeping the crows at bay, you will find your interlocutor with this assertion.
Quote:
And by the way, having been one, I can assure you that there is, in fact, strong desire in at least some middle class Europeans to move to or work in the US.
Anecdotal evidence that is backed by my anecdotal evidence of knowing a number of Lithuanians who immigrated here.

Still, they had a *desire* to come here. They could have stayed where they were, and lived okay lives. They came here because they wanted to live better lives.

This is different from many Central American refugees, who are not living okay lives, and they are coming here because they don't think that they or their families will survive staying. That's not a desire, that's desperation.
Quote:
Again, if you want to argue that the US acts in ways to keep some white power structure in place, Immigration is not the example to make the point.
It actually is, when you look at the changes to policies that Trump and his supporters are supporting. Many of our immigration policies were created with racist intent, and the fact that they no longer have as racist effect doesn't change the intent when they were created. It also doesn't change the fact that they want to change the policies to have a more racist outcome.

Do you somehow deny that Trump's rhetoric about ending chain migration, and changing the merit system to have more of a focus on English than on actual skills, and even his desire to end birthright citizenship are not ways of acting to keep the white power structure in place?

Last edited by k9bfriender; 12-28-2018 at 04:10 PM.
  #64  
Old 12-28-2018, 11:07 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
So you admit you would have been fine had Nazi Germany won, or ? Or you are just uncomfortable with the term "stolen" which is accurate despite you above post trying to make it seem justified.
Germany invaded Poland approximately 30 years before I was born. I made no comments on what is "fine with me" nor what is "justified". But it's a fact that modern England, France, Germany and Italy didn't become nations because everyone loved each other so much they decided to form a country.
Quote:
Plus how certain are you? Note the same issue as in other threads where all "Indians" are the same to you?
I never said anything remotely like that, you full of shit mental patient.

Last edited by CarnalK; 12-28-2018 at 11:12 PM.
  #65  
Old 12-29-2018, 09:59 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 24,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Batano View Post
Are Saudi Arabia, Japan, China, Korea, Vietnam, and Norway colonialist countries?
Not that I know of, Yes, Yes, Not that I know of. Yes, and Yes.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017