There are examples of that kind of population explosion in places that are nice to live. For instance, Tahoe used to be a relaxing mountain lake, but now it’s so jam packed with people that it feels like rush hour all the time. You used to have trails all to yourself, but now the trails are packed and you have to park a mile away from the trailhead. That kind of population explosion is great for businesses, realtors, home builders, etc., but it drastically changes the cultural environment. That kind of change has happened everywhere from mountain towns, ski areas, island communities, etc. It’s even worse now with social media influencers flocking to areas to create content. Any nice place is being ruined by mobs of people. If places like New Zealand want to preserve their natural beauty and community, they need to have strict immigration limits. That may mean that the businesses don’t make as much money and the house prices don’t shoot up exponentially, but the population might prefer to keep things the way they are.
I certainly don’t claim that racism and classism are not interrelated factors but ISTM that more prime driver is perceived economic insecurity. People increasingly stressed about paying their rent and affording a home, worried about moving down the SES ladder, are easily sold on seeing new others as a reason and a threat, it seems like a common sense argument, and hard to convince with … data … that over time the new others are of overall benefit to them.
It’s a pretty strong correlation:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167268123002147
individuals exposed to higher levels of economic insecurity are more responsive to nativist beliefs.
Results show that anti-immigrant sentiments increased in countries where perceptions of economic insecurity also increased. Anti-immigrant sentiments decreased in countries where perceptions of economic insecurity declined. In contrast, changes in objective economic conditions (i.e. unemployment rates) during the same period of time did not display the expected effects in a similarly robust way.
Politically I suspect selling the rational argument based on the data won’t win the day. Calling those who respond to the argument appealing to their economic insecurity racist will only backfire.
OTOH I suspect having a different factor to blame, a more accurate one, the oligarchs for whom the … taking from us without consent … metaphor is actually more on point … may work better.
ETA are there some whose prime anti immigrant motivation is fear of cultural replacement? Sure. But I see no reason to see that as the major driver, and it is the least modifiable factor.
That definitely happens. However, I think it happens primarily when two things conjoin:
-
Movement is within-nation, i.e., there’s close to zero governmental bureaucracy involved in moving; and
-
The movement is leisure-motivated, i.e., wealthy people with significant disposable income move there for ornament or recreation.
I’m curious about instances where the movement was across national borders, and motivated by looking for better means of supporting families, and resulted in a “suddenly 70 % increase in their population.”
Since the Native Americans were here first, technically it would be the “white mainstream culture” that immigrated.
As I understand it, that is a major concern in much of Europe. People immigrating from other countries that don’t share the culture or values of the place they are moving to. Often they will self-segregate into communities where they never learn the language or customs of their new country.
So yeah, I think that can be a legitimate concern for any culture.
It is interesting that the colonizing cultures are most concerned over others doing to their culture as they have done to others. Again, I don’t actually think it is a prime driver, but interesting.
Does China allow Emigration to Taiwan or unlimited to anywhere? I had heard that China had stopped issuing exit visas to individuals wanting to visit Taiwan?
But do that many Americans really want to move to NZ?
I mean yes, many small nations could be overwhelmed if huge numbers of people from more populated nations wanted to move there. But does that really happen? Currently NZ seems to actively encourage immigration from the USA, mostly for skilled workers of course.
Exactly.
Great points.
Many small nations seem to want more immigration, as they have emigration issues.
And we have to remember “Schrödinger’s Mexican- at the same time coming here to steal all the good jobs- and also being too lazy to work.” 
Palestine in the 1920’s could come close. Britain’s Balfour declaration led to an influx of Jewish Immigrants returning to what had been their homeland 2500 years ago. They were hoping to get away from prejudice but there were extreme cultural differences with the current residents. Many immigrants were coming with the intent of taking over.
The (understandable?) xenophobic response led the British to put some limits on that immigration. It really backfired on them a little later when people fleeing Nazi persecution were turned away.
The place has been in a state of off and on war ever since.
Yeah, ain’t death a bitch. Now their children and grandchildren… well, turns out never isn’t a very long length of time.
Did this statement make sense to you when you wrote it?
That’s exactly my point. So many Europeans immigrated that the original cultures here were drowned in the flood. Even if they hadn’t also committed mass murder and violated a shitload of treaty agreements, it’s still kind of understandable that someone might regret the loss of viable culture and tradition.
I don’t argue against immigration. I’m saying it is reasonable to restrict it to the point that foreign-born people do not outnumber those who were born here (the latter category would include 2nd generation folks whose parents immigrated). I have a t-shirt that says we should keep the immigrants, legal or otherwise, and deport ICE. I agree with people who say immigrants have come here largely because we went there and exploited and despoiled other lands. I’m just shy of saying we should not have borders and be keeping anyone out who wants to come in.
FWIW, it makes complete sense to me now.
The immigrants themselves are generally adults who never learn (much of) the new language, much less culture. Their children are generally born in the USA and end up with one foot in each camp. They learn English and US culture at school and from their own friends, meanwhile their parents, older relatives, and parent’s friends still speak the old language, eat the old food, etc., so those first generation kids learn that too.
But the next generation of kids generally are not exposed hardly at all to the culture of their grandparents. They are (nearly) as American as you or me. By the next generation, not much is left of their old culture except maybe a surname or ethnic appearance.
The myth of the never-assimilating eternal downline of immigrants is just that: a myth.
The only reason we think of the mass of Irish-derived people as ordinary Americans is that they’ve been here 3+ generations. They sure weren’t thought of as Americans when they first arrived. Despised foreign invaders more like.
Right now the bulk of e.g. Colombian-derived people are still in gen 1 or 2. They (or their kids) will be ordinary Americans in another 30 years unless the Fascists succeed in redefining what “American” means.
Funnily enough, the same people who complain about never-assimilating immigrants generally have no problem at all with the Amish or Haredi Jews continuing to live in isolated communities.
Quite.
I don’t know if it’s a myth in parts of Europe. In the US, immigrants largely assimilate as you said. The children largely adopt American culture. What I had heard was in places like France and other countries they have these enclaves in the outskirts of major cities that effectively become segregated communities of immigrants.
Well like it or not, white supremacist fascists are eventually going to find themselves a minority demographically in the United States.
My theory is that’s why demographic questions asking “race” include “non-Hispanic white”. They need to “promote” another demographic to “white” just like the Irish and Italians to maintain a majority!
Shit, given my Jewish, Irish, Italian background I could probably get away with using the N-word!
Good lord
Yes, that’s why there’s still a “Little Italy” (among many other ethnic enclaves of nationalities that are on their 4th and 5th generations at least) in many US states.
Umm, as someone with German roots (third generation) I am a “non-Hispanic white”. You are aware that there are Hispanic whites that can trace their roots to Spain (among other countries in Europe), making them as European as I am.
Yes, we are all aware of ze German’s racial heritage.
What I meant was “Hispanic” on application forms is often considered an “ethnicity” while “race” would be “Whiite”, “Black”, “Asian”.
It does seem odd though how humans pick such arbitrary physical traits to categories people. Like why isn’t there a similar emphasis on preserving a race of gingers or Chinese girls with green eyes or some other such random shit?
In America the immigrants assimilate you! (Said in Russian accent.)
But very seriously. We are a nation of immigrants and we together assimilate in a diverse yet still cohesive whole. For the most part.
I think they do.
Invasion isn’t immigration. Not “technically” and not actually.
How do you clearly differentiate the terms?
If “invasion” is determined by against the wishes of the current inhabitants then I fear you play into the harmful rhetoric of the Right characterization of undocumented immigrants as an “invasion” …
I’d have an easier time differentiating “colonization” from “immigration” FWIW.