Fascism in the UK

[kyrobo]

Originally Posted by America [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It ain't about race.

I hadn't ever heard anyone say they were opposed to multiculturalism until pretty recently. I was pretty shocked. I had always just accepted multiculturalism as part of what makes America the tits. I still more or less think that way, but I also think I get the gist of your position, and if I'm right it's really not the un-American sentiment I first assumed.

So my understanding is:
- Y'all want the melting pot America, not the salad bowl. If immigrants can't integrate with the general culture then you believe we're weaker as a country. We cease to have shared values 'n stuff.
- You're fine with limited, legal immigration. We can't take on just anyone though, and people who come here illegally and abuse our sympathies to illicitly gain from our system should be punished.

That about right?

[America]

Originally Posted by kyrobo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I hadn't ever heard anyone say they were opposed to multiculturalism until pretty recently. I was pretty shocked. I had always just accepted multiculturalism as part of what makes America the tits. I still more or less think that way, but I also think I get the gist of your position, and if I'm right it's really not the un-American sentiment I first assumed.

So my understanding is:
- Y'all want the melting pot America, not the salad bowl. If immigrants can't integrate with the general culture then you believe we're weaker as a country. We cease to have shared values 'n stuff.
- You're fine with limited, legal immigration. We can't take on just anyone though, and people who come here illegally and abuse our sympathies to illicitly gain from our system should be punished.

That about right?

This is correct but the second bullet-point seems a little too interested in vengeful thinking. I'm less about punishing and more about limiting the incidence of violation. For instance, by taking in highly skilled immigrants of backgrounds that are not super-duper conservative (like Catholic Mexicans and Islamic fundies). Also by taking in people who can demonstrate a history of entrepreneurship etc. People who are technology-literate. A little closer to an interview for admittance than an arbitrary entitlement grounded solely in humanitarian arguments.

In other words, to resurrect a selfish primary bent to our immigration system rather than using what I would argue is the current humanitarian one.

I don't really understand economics and would be very happy (& grateful to any educators who step up) to gain deeper insight than I have here. But it seems common-sense to me that bringing in smart people is better for us than bringing in dumbs.

[kyrobo]

Originally Posted by America [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

...For instance, by taking in highly skilled immigrants of backgrounds that are not super-duper conservative (like Catholic Mexicans and Islamic fundies).

I agree with you on basically everything except that. Race/ethnicity/nationality/religion should not be considerations in immigration policy. That is most def. not American.

[maskedmelon]

also, ain't no strength in salad. it rots, the colors fade, the scents wither and your left with a stinking pile of brown refuse. alloys on the other hand are better than their sums.

[kyrobo]

Oh, the first bit is fine. Bringing in people who can do stuff is a good idea. Just chopped the quote in a weird spot.

[America]

Originally Posted by kyrobo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh, the first bit is fine. Bringing in people who can do stuff is a good idea. Just chopped the quote in a weird spot.

I think you might be right.

However, beyond the economic argument, I think some consideration must be makeable in situations where there is a severe cultural mismatch. For instance, I don't want Muslim fundamentalists being taken in in number even if they meet other thresholds.

If there were a hypothetical culture where 95% of transplants wind up isolated from society permanently upon entry, I think we would need a mechanism to deal with that huge obvious trend. Know what I mean?

I'll ruminate on this! Would love to hear your thoughts.

[America]

I think you might be right.

However, beyond the economic argument, I think some consideration must be makeable in situations where there is a severe cultural mismatch. For instance, I don't want Muslim fundamentalists being taken in in number even if they meet other thresholds. This is because speaking generally they vote for things that would oppress me.

If there were a hypothetical culture where 95% of transplants wind up isolated from society permanently upon entry, I think we would need a mechanism to deal with that huge obvious trend. Know what I mean?

I'll ruminate on this! Would love to hear your thoughts.

^^^^^^^
edit with lil more clarity ^_^

[Wonkie]

if you bring in high-skill migrants, low-skill natives have more masters to service

[kyrobo]

Originally Posted by America [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If there were a hypothetical culture where 95% of transplants wind up isolated from society permanently upon entry, I think we would need a mechanism to deal with that huge obvious trend. Know what I mean?

I feel ya. It's tricky. I think such a mechanism might be unconstitutional, though. I'm not anything close to a legal scholar but as far as I can tell it would probably run afoul of both establishment and free exercise.

[kyrobo]

I at least agree with the sentiment that allowing the formation of large enclaves divorced from societal norms is probably not desirable.