What role does racism play in the American anti-immigration movement?

Great Debates
81

It seems that you have a specific dislike for a certain culture, irregardless of their immigration status. You’ve basically said yes to the question posed by the OP.

I imagine that South Texas would drive you crazy since it is full of Hispanics with ties to Old Mexico who have always been US citizens (in a good part of the past century they were 2nd class citizens because the people in political power felt like you and did something about it).

I’ve lived in NM and TX my whole life and have never seen some entrenched Mexican nationalist movement in politics except a minority of nutcases in South Texas. Both states are full of Hispanics, including “Mexicans.”

I don’t see how respecting one’s heritage, including county of origin, is an automatic disloyality oath to the country that one resides in. Even some big time players in this country have dual citizenships such as Karl Rove.

If we cease to tolerate different cultural aspects of the citizens of this country, we become less free. I see that certain aspects of my culture (gun ownership, hunting, trapping, rodeos, cock fights, horse races, etc.) are under fire and in danger by those that feel culturally superior to me. I couldn’t bring that fire and danger to another’s culture when that culture doesn’t take away any of my freedoms.

82

Why does immigration create “environmental” problems? I don’t understand the reasoning of the anti-immigration of the Sierra Club on this point either. It’s all one global ecosystem. If a person moves from country A to country B, that does not add to the net human burden on the environment.

83

Basically just a concentration of litter from water bottles and other supplies along commonly traveled routes. A pretty minor enviromental problem outside of an eyesore.

IMO the Sierra Club is big on implementing their cultural values that they feel are superior on others. I see their anti-immigrant angle as just another “I’m better than you, do as I say” move from them.

84

No, that’s not it at all. The argument is that when people from poor, subsistence Third World economies move to the United States, they start polluting like Americans. Since California’s population is currently increasing faster than that of Bangladesh, with almost all of it due to immigration, this is a significant environmental issue.

Although the Sierra Club has always been on the side of reducing pollution, one can object that preventing the world’s poor from polluting (i.e. consuming) at American levels is discriminatory, and I suppose it is. But if the entire human population polluted at American levels, we’d all be living at the bottom of a cesspool.

Also, the Sierra Club itself is officially opposed to restricting immigration, even though a substantial fraction of its membership wants restrictions. There are lawsuits claiming that the Sierra Club has violated its own bylaws in an attempt to suppress the restrictionist faction from competing for seats on the Sierra Club Board, with false claims, fake candidates, misuse of Sierra Club funds, etc. At the root of the problem is a billionaire open-borders zealot who has threatened to stop donating to the Sierra Club if they come out against immigration.

85

FWIW I was giving my asessment of the enviromental problem. They leave a lot of trash behind.

86

I missed this post last time I looked at this thread.

The OP was talking about race, not culture. They are usually related, but they don’t have to be, by any means. If I’ve ever held a person’s race against him, then shame on me.

So does Arnold Schwarzenegger. As far as both of them are concerned, if they don’t feel they are quite ready to declare their full allegiance to the United States, they should get the hell out of American politics.

It’s illegal to run a cockfight everywhere but Louisiana and parts of New Mexico, and in most places it’s illegal and even felonious to be a spectator at one. It ought to be illegal everywhere because it’s cruel and inhumane. I am not tolerant of cockfighting, and I want New Mexico and Louisiana to be less free, in the sense that you should not be free to run a cockfight. Also, all other things equal, I would consider a culture that prohibits cockfighting to be superior to one that permits it. So I guess I’m guilty as charged.

87

That pretty much cinches that you are cultural bigot who wants to impose your culture on those that you feel have a inferior culture.

88

Pretty much, with one caveat - I wouldn’t try to impose my culture on people in another country, except in an extreme case. But in my country, you’re fair game. For instance, Islamic law (as practiced in a number of countries) is full of immoral bullshit, but as long as it stays in Islamic countries, I won’t lose much sleep over it. However, if people tried to impose Islamic law in the United States, honor killings and the like, I would most certainly oppose it. Wouldn’t you? If the people pushing it were non-citizens, I would advocate that they be deported.

That’s not to say I think the United States is perfect. Far from it. But our vaguely representative government generally prevents the passing of laws that are too far outside the cultural norm.

89

Escape from religious persecution has been a constant theme of the American immigrant experience. Take a good look at this picture here and you will see nothing more than propaganda. Take a very good look at that picture. What do you see?

You won’t hear this from many Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs unless you really get to know them. A past girlfriend who is a Sikh told me that her religion imposes the keeping of long hair but she don’t care, she got it cut and styled. A good buddy of mine who is a Hindu was commenting on how today many Desis (American Indian youth) have become atheist or agnostic in America.

And not all Muslims follow strict Islamic law either. In Saudi Arabia, women are forbidden to wear red and guess what - many female Arab Americans wear red in direct defiance.

Hyperelatic, you realize that some members of SDMB are Muslims who immigrated to the US and they might answer your question by saying they would definitely oppose Islamic law in the US. Islamic law will stay in Islamic countries in the forseeable future. But I will not lose sleep over it either, knowing that immigrants from Islamic countries come to the United States, away from the horrible practices they are escaping.

Just think of how far we have come. The irony of the Pilgrims having puritanical regimes imposed on them. You know, from the big perspective Europeans and even Americans once burned people. Thomas Jefferson became the model for liberty and freedom of religion.We have come a long way but I hope that we can continue with tolerance for others in the future. There is a lot of horrible things in religious practices in other countries and I don’t even want to think about. But I can take heart that they are coming to America.

There are two groups that, for lack of a better term, ruin it for everyone. There are the racists and bigots who either aren’t informed or don’t want immigrants from those countries. There are also the religious fanatics and extremists who want to have control and power. They are both Christian and Muslim, both groups have their racists and their religous fanatics. Caught in between is the young immigrants who just want to to start a life and a family in America.

90

Stepping back from any official government doubletalk, and just looking at it on the personal level, there usually seem to be three trains of thought among the anti-immigration people who are the most outspoken.

There is the “I got mine, screw you” group. Easy immigration was OK for them when “their people” were coming here - I’ve seen it among Irish, Italian, and other groups. Each group, once they become firmly established, do not want any competition from some new group.

1. They're taking our jobs
2. They're moving into our neighborhood
Etcetera.

Then there are the ones who don’t want “them” here because they are not “christians”, as if they will be holding human sacrifices in the streets, or resurrecting Sauron, or something. Then too, they have to be the “right kind” of Christian. WASPs didn’t want Catholics, Catholics didn’t want Protestants, many didn’t want Jews, and now it’s those scary eeeeevull Muslims and more of those damn Catholics from Mexico.

Finally, there are those who are blatantly racist. The R word. They sometimes come right out and say:
No gooks
No spics
No towel heads
No wops
No micks
Now, it’s mostly no wetbacks
In other words, nobody who isn’t “just like us”. Each new wave of innigrants gives them another Flavor Of The Week to hate.

Because, everyone knows, its those damn foreigners who do all the crime, steal all the jobs, drive down property values, and plot to overthrow the government :eek:

People come to this country, looking for something better. They come for better job opportunities, political or religious freedom, sometimes just to be able to live at all. Somehow, they all came here, brought their own foods, music, other bits of culture, and yet did not destroy the country.
If they want a better life are willing to work for it, and want to take their place among us, then who are we to tell them no? What if someone had done that to the rest of us?

My people came here from Sicily around 1900. Nobody wanted “those greaseballs” because “everybody knows” they are all thieves and gangsters :smiley:

91

What is your point? :slight_smile:

92

It’s suppsed to be a secret :wink:

93

Sure, but there are also prominent Muslim immigrants who want sharia right here in America. What do you think we ought to do about that? Require immigrants to affirm that they endorse freedom of religion, the way we (used to?) require them to disavow anarchy? Reject naturalization petitions from people who have publicly called for an Islamic state or supported groups that have? Draft special laws to create extra penalties for religiously-inspired lawbreaking, like we do with “hate” crimes? Or sit around until one day secularized Muslim women in Dearborn are getting shot down like dogs and nobody will cooperate with the cops to find the assailants, like what is happening now in Germany?

94

Immigration has never been as easy as it is today.

Your arguments have a certain appeal to anyone who thinks of himself as a friend to humanity. But it all comes down to numbers. How many immigrants do you think the United States should admit in a year? A million? Ten million? Whoever can get here?

I’ve asked this question numerous times and nobody ever answers it. So I’ll float my own answer - I think about 250,000 a year would be fine, provided we could shut down illegal immigration, preferably by employer sanctions.

95

Sorry, but I don’t have a number to answer you with. Any number I could come up with would be arbitrary and completely made up.

96

I know I don’t have to remind you that what happens ‘over there’, will unfortunately effect what happens here. Having the extremists here in the America is obviously not good but it won’t do any good either for them to be over there. If there is no immigration from Islamic nations then there will be future generations who will continue to be led to extremism and terrorism.

We need to keep the criminals and terrorists out while allowing the good law-abiding immigrants who are productive members of society to become citizens. I think we can do that.

How do we keep out the bad while admitting the good? I admit I have no answer. Is there anything to indicate that it can be done?

97

By definition, cruelty to animals implies inferiority.

98

Cruelty to animals really depends on how your culture views a specific animal treatment. Everyone probably sees how kicking a dog just for the heck of it is cruel, but when you look at long and popularly held religous, entertainment, and animal husbandry type treatments of animals based on culture and tradition, there should be leeway amongst open minded people that respect other cultures as long as they are harming people or taking away their freedom.

99

Your complaints about Islamic law concerns the treatments of human beings, most of which would concern non-consensual behaviour.

I would point out that our disagreement about one the worlds oldest sports and still an extremely popular world sport has a rich history in the US. Honest Abe Lincoln got his “Honest” nickname from being a referee in the sport and numerouse different breeds of fowl were created in the US and are still maintained because of the sport. I’ve been to around 20 cockfighting derbies and watched maybe a 1000 or more fights because I wanted to see them before they were made illegal. There are men, women, and children from all socio-economic, racial and ethnic, and political backgrounds their with the sport being part of a shared culture onto itself. They are always very private affairs that and no human being is harmed nor are any freedoms taken from another human being.

100

So (as I understand it), as long as there are bets made on the roosters for entertainment purposes and not just for cruelty sakes, it’s cool.

Does the winning rooster get a cut, or is he kicked to the curb? (pun intended)