But I want to help, so I’ll tell you what – there are tons of liberals on the Dope, and we’d be happy to help you learn what actual real-world liberals believe (hint: the vast majority of us don’t generalize about all members of any minority group, and the vast majority of us do not consider them all victims). Feel free to ask questions about what liberals believe, and we’ll be happy to answer them.
I’m afraid that if you keep insisting you know what I believe, you’ll inevitably be shown to be very foolish, as I would be if I claimed the gift of telepathy and said I knew what was in your mind.
One generalization that is accurate, and that is fueling a lot of the justifiable anger is that our immigration policy, as enforced and to some extent as written, is not designed to benefit America. It’s designed to benefit immigrants and prospective immigrants. Which makes political sense, since immigrants care more about immigration policy than the native born. It’s not the majority that gets what they want in politics, it’s whoever is most willing to vote on a single issue. But the situation has gotten so out of hand, with citizens basically being given the finger by the governments they elected that a backlash has resulted. Immigrant murdered your kid? Too bad, we’re not handing him over to federal authorities, that would be bad for his welfare.
I’m not sure what or who this is referring to. It’s entirely possible for reasonable people to disagree on whether current immigration policy and practice is beneficial or not for the country.
I can’t make heads or tails of your last three sentences. Who is advocating that murderers not be prosecuted or deported?
Wow, this is a level of self delusion that I’ve not often encountered.
You just did make a statement generalizing about “minorities”, that I was replying to. That was your word choice. What in your statement allowed for viewing “minorities” as individuals?
Sanctuary cities don’t want to deport even violent criminals. They protect them from federal authorities.
Reasonable people can disagree. That’s kinda my point. It’s not racist to favor an immigration policy that prioritizes the national interest. Something we do not have right now.
I thought you were saying that multi-culturalism was an impediment to assimilation into society. I’m saying, the Europeans have somehow managed to maintain their multi-culturalism and thrive on both fronts.
The more I study history, the less this argument resonates with me. The homeland of the French? Who are what, exactly? How you define French, how the French define French and how people in France defined French several hundred years back might be all quite different things. Ask a Breton today and one five hundred years ago what it means to be French. Ask what significance the term Dauphin had in 1200 vs. 1700. Europe is not static and never has been, especially at the edges. The nation-state is a modern invention.
I know the history too, and of course there are French people in neighboring countries and non-French in France itself, such as Basques. But the vast majority of France is made up of French people, with a common heritage, and they really don’t have anyplace to go if they give up their country to another people. Americans, if we ever became a minority in our own country, we’d just go to someplace America-like, like Canada or Australia, anyplace that believes in freedom and limited government. Where do the French go to be French if France is no longer theirs? They end up like Gypsys, or Basques, or Kurds, people without a nation.
I especially sympathize with the Japanese policy on immigration, which seems to pretty much amount to “no”. Japan is one of the safest, politest, most civilized societies on Earth if not THE most. Why would they ever want to mess that up by letting a lot of barbarians in? It wouldn’t take much immigration for Japan to basically stop being Japan.
They stay in the same place and the definition of what is French changes. Just as it has changed down through the millenia. There is nothing immutable or fixed about being French. All cultures change and stasis is a) impossible and b) nothing to strive for.
Perhaps now, but I think some elderly folks in Nanking (Naijing now) would probably dispute that, along with some American POWs… If it is a polite society now, it’s because it was beaten into them.
And Japan has a declining population and over 1/4 of the population older than 65 (and that number is increasing, not going down as deaths occur of the elderly. If this continues (aging of population, fewer births meaning fewer workers), Japan may yet rue the day it was so adamant about it’s ‘no immigrants’ policy.
Time will tell.
ETA: As for comment on the OP, adaher is not a racist; he has a set of principles, different from many on this board (including me), but none of them is racist per se, IMHO. YMMV.