3 ms·

Self-interest is a valid explanation. And the question you pose is a very valid statement. I am sure that immigration poses problems when it is at the scale of

Self-interest is a valid explanation. And the question you pose is a very valid statement. I am sure that immigration poses problems when it is at the scale of modern society. Not everyone shares the same values and beliefs but the optimist in me is the of the thinking that humanity is no longer the tribal, "us vs them", neanderthal who only sticks to persons who visually look like them. The United States of America was built on this idea and it thrives today. What I've noticed is that this issue of different-ness, seems only to surface when money or resources are scarce. The global rich are getting richer and richer, but counter-intuitively, this resource hoarding is not visible to the masses, who see a huge influx of new "different" people. These people will "potentially" take their jobs and their benefits, and then they "potentially" will bomb their buildings and rape their daughters and wives, because they are the boogeyman. What they don't see is that they are competing with those people not because those people are different, but because the people on top have figured out how to take everything and not share.

rdtsc 10y ago
> What they don't see is that they are competing with those people not because those people are different, but because the people on top have figured out how to take everything and not share. It is not either or. Why are there all of the sudden a lot of "different" people around, hmm strange? Is that correlated with wealth redistribution? Is there a causal relationship, or are they completely orthogonal phenomena that those who are wealthy just use to distract the masses? I agree with wealth disparity, but I am hesitant to buy the "racism" slant here (which I think I detect. i.e. people who don't want immigrant just hate people with a different skin). Countries and cultures still exist. Scots are different than Englishmen. They almost voted to leave as well. We don't and probably will never live as a one universal, global, happy country, all citizens of the earth, singing peace songs together, dreaming of exploring space and so on. Now, I wish it was that. Sort of a world wide cataclim or aliens invading, I don't see that happening. People have been and will be tribal. It is a pretty well ingrained instict. And people will want to preserve their tribe's identity, culture, language and so on. Perhaps many see immigrants eroding that. That doesn't have to be tied to skin color. Painting it as racism discredits and that make your argument a bit too superficial.
- guard-of-terra 10y ago
  Even if we are to fix ethnic crime, which I doubt we would: Why should I like the large influx of people of different culture into my country? After all, they take my voting power in the country. Maybe I would be content with 0,1% per year influx, but 1% per year is far into the pain zone. That's the amount of people who will try to influence culture, influence decisions and policies. And I was content with whatever we already have, thank you. I would much prefer to live in Russia than in Uzbekistan. Why let people in who would reproduce culture and politics and policy of Uzbekistan here? It's less viable, otherwise they won't desire to leave their homes for better life abroad. When you let significant minorities in the country, of course they would want to have their say. Who won't? But this means that my voting power dwindles.

rdtsc 10y ago

> What they don't see is that they are competing with those people not because those people are different, but because the people on top have figured out how to take everything and not share. It is not either or. Why are there all of the sudden a lot of "different" people around, hmm strange? Is that correlated with wealth redistribution? Is there a causal relationship, or are they completely orthogonal phenomena that those who are wealthy just use to distract the masses? I agree with wealth disparity, but I am hesitant to buy the "racism" slant here (which I think I detect. i.e. people who don't want immigrant just hate people with a different skin). Countries and cultures still exist. Scots are different than Englishmen. They almost voted to leave as well. We don't and probably will never live as a one universal, global, happy country, all citizens of the earth, singing peace songs together, dreaming of exploring space and so on. Now, I wish it was that. Sort of a world wide cataclim or aliens invading, I don't see that happening. People have been and will be tribal. It is a pretty well ingrained instict. And people will want to preserve their tribe's identity, culture, language and so on. Perhaps many see immigrants eroding that. That doesn't have to be tied to skin color. Painting it as racism discredits and that make your argument a bit too superficial.

guard-of-terra 10y ago
Even if we are to fix ethnic crime, which I doubt we would: Why should I like the large influx of people of different culture into my country? After all, they take my voting power in the country. Maybe I would be content with 0,1% per year influx, but 1% per year is far into the pain zone. That's the amount of people who will try to influence culture, influence decisions and policies. And I was content with whatever we already have, thank you. I would much prefer to live in Russia than in Uzbekistan. Why let people in who would reproduce culture and politics and policy of Uzbekistan here? It's less viable, otherwise they won't desire to leave their homes for better life abroad. When you let significant minorities in the country, of course they would want to have their say. Who won't? But this means that my voting power dwindles.