7 ms·

>What's worrisome about the immigration trends? Places like the US and Denmark are incredibly non-corrupt, while places like Russia, Brazil, and Nigeria are hi

>What's worrisome about the immigration trends? Places like the US and Denmark are incredibly non-corrupt, while places like Russia, Brazil, and Nigeria are highly corrupt. Why some places are corrupt and others aren't is poorly understood magic of some sort. One fairly decent guess is something like "cultural factors" - Danish bureaucrats aren't corrupt because they expect that other non-corrupt Danes would punish them for it. If there's a clear plan and proven successes on acculturating immigrants, I'm much less worried about opening up borders. Without that, though, we may be risking a highly nebulous yet incredibly important shared resource - the cultural norms that make our communities excellent places to live.

surfmike 10y ago
I would consider the US a proven success on acculturating immigrants. Over 200 years of importing people from broken corrupt and broken regimes, creating a prosperous and relatively uncorrupt society.
- patricius 10y ago
  But those 200 years have been far from peaceful.
  - surfmike 10y ago
    Internally they have been peaceful. The major exception being the civil war which can hardly be blamed on immigration.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - legodt 10y ago
    Yeah but that wasn't the immigrant's fault. Quite the opposite actually. Ruling white people are a major source of the history of violence.
    - FreedomToCreate 10y ago
      Do you even read what you write. I see comments like this all over the internet and it amazes me how the irony of your statement completely eludes you. You basic argument is that immigrant culture has no effect on violence but the culture of another group(the white people) does. Ok, so in that case, nations completely ruled by the culture the immigrants comes from, must inherently be free of major violence. Hmmm does that sound correct. If anything, the west post world war 2 bred a new culture that gave birth to true liberty. The democracies formed in this period shaped the freedoms we have today, and pushed for human rights and equality. There is still progress to make, but targeting groups of people is no solution. Btw I am Indian, and if you want to argue that ruling whites are a source of major violence, just go and read the history of India from 1000-1800. No white people, lots and lots of violence. All races are the same.
      - legodt 10y ago
        I was replying to specifically the last 200 years in America. As you right as you are it has nothing to do with what the comment was about. Also how is pointing out that the ruling class/race is responsible for violence "singling" them out? White people aren't some specific out-group here. Who fought to keep slaves? White people. Who only wanted to free the slaves to put moral pressure on other countries during they eqyptian cotton crisis? White people. Who roamed the country side after slaves were free to Lynch free men for the color of their skin. White people. Who imported crack to the inner cities? Who started the devastating war on drugs? Who defunded public welfare and health programs for the poor? Us every time. This goes on too. Concentration camps for asian-americans, constant abuses of Native American populations, the constant harassment of immigrant cultures- none of this was imported with immigrants, it's the product of a society they desperately wants to remain homogenous
        10y ago
jacobolus 10y ago
These “cultural factors” have to do with strong social and economic institutions like public schools and libraries, reasonably fair and legitimate court systems, a free press and freedom of association, a somewhat accountable and accessible political system, stable and reasonably clearly defined property rights, highly functioning distribution networks for basic goods and services, a fluid job market with protection of labor rights, a wide distribution of political and economic power across many regions and industries, a taxation system which leaves everyone feeling they have “skin in the game”, and so on. There’s no evidence that immigrants (documented or undocumented) cause any more corruption or crime than native born residents. Indeed, the evidence we have in the USA generally suggests that first and second generation immigrants are less likely to break the law than other residents. Nativist anti-immigrant rhetoric today in the USA about Muslims or Latin Americans or Chinese is nearly identical in content and structure to anti-immigrant rhetoric about Germans, Irish, Italians, Eastern Europeans, Catholics, Jews, etc. in the past. There’s no reason to believe that undocumented Guatemalans or Syrian refugees immigrating to the US today will be any different than my Irish ancestors were 150 years ago, w/r/t assimilation.
- reddytowns 10y ago
  Legitimate court systems, accountable political system, protection of labor rights, they are all examples of things not being corrupt. So the reason for less corruption can't be less corruption. You're talking in circles here.
  - jacobolus 10y ago
    You’re missing my point, which is that the “cultural factors” are not about individual people being inherently “corrupt”, but more about institutional strength and power distribution in the whole society. The US has a long history of integrating immigrants from a variety of cultural backgrounds, historically including large numbers of rural peasants from quasi-feudal societies, and plenty of people from places dominated by local “corruption”.
    - reddytowns 10y ago
legodt 10y ago
"the cultural norms that make our communities excellent places to live" In case anybody didn't know already, this is what dog whistle racism looks like
- welanes 10y ago
  As someone who originated from a developing country and now resides in a developed one, there's much truth and not a lot of racism in that sentence. It's not about race, it's about values, i.e. culture. Speak to an immigrant, they'd tell you this. My Aunts say it all the time - "I do miss home but we have such bad leaders....yes the food is terrible but life is so much simpler here.....people here are so trusting and kind". Cultural norms are important and fascinating. Let's not hijack the opportunity for interesting conversation with accusations of racism.
  - makomk 10y ago
    It's treading close to the line though. It's assuming that corruption is a result of some kind of internal pro-corruption tendency in the people of those countries, rather than structural issues within the countries that would be left behind when they left. For example, one of the problems with Brazil right now seems to be that allegations of corruption and corruption investigations are themselves untrustworthy, tools used by corrupt individuals to get rid of others who might investigate them.
  - legodt 10y ago
    Because you missed it, let me help you out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics Parent comment was using a series of phrases that are repeated to reinforce the idea of importance of cultural homogeneity and keeping out groups out in the name of traditionalism and "values."
    - welanes 10y ago
      I don't see it. I think you may be projecting your own interpretation on to the parent comment.

surfmike 10y ago

I would consider the US a proven success on acculturating immigrants. Over 200 years of importing people from broken corrupt and broken regimes, creating a prosperous and relatively uncorrupt society.

patricius 10y ago
But those 200 years have been far from peaceful.
- surfmike 10y ago
  Internally they have been peaceful. The major exception being the civil war which can hardly be blamed on immigration.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- legodt 10y ago
  Yeah but that wasn't the immigrant's fault. Quite the opposite actually. Ruling white people are a major source of the history of violence.
  - FreedomToCreate 10y ago
    Do you even read what you write. I see comments like this all over the internet and it amazes me how the irony of your statement completely eludes you. You basic argument is that immigrant culture has no effect on violence but the culture of another group(the white people) does. Ok, so in that case, nations completely ruled by the culture the immigrants comes from, must inherently be free of major violence. Hmmm does that sound correct. If anything, the west post world war 2 bred a new culture that gave birth to true liberty. The democracies formed in this period shaped the freedoms we have today, and pushed for human rights and equality. There is still progress to make, but targeting groups of people is no solution. Btw I am Indian, and if you want to argue that ruling whites are a source of major violence, just go and read the history of India from 1000-1800. No white people, lots and lots of violence. All races are the same.
    - legodt 10y ago
      I was replying to specifically the last 200 years in America. As you right as you are it has nothing to do with what the comment was about. Also how is pointing out that the ruling class/race is responsible for violence "singling" them out? White people aren't some specific out-group here. Who fought to keep slaves? White people. Who only wanted to free the slaves to put moral pressure on other countries during they eqyptian cotton crisis? White people. Who roamed the country side after slaves were free to Lynch free men for the color of their skin. White people. Who imported crack to the inner cities? Who started the devastating war on drugs? Who defunded public welfare and health programs for the poor? Us every time. This goes on too. Concentration camps for asian-americans, constant abuses of Native American populations, the constant harassment of immigrant cultures- none of this was imported with immigrants, it's the product of a society they desperately wants to remain homogenous
      - 10y ago

jacobolus 10y ago

These “cultural factors” have to do with strong social and economic institutions like public schools and libraries, reasonably fair and legitimate court systems, a free press and freedom of association, a somewhat accountable and accessible political system, stable and reasonably clearly defined property rights, highly functioning distribution networks for basic goods and services, a fluid job market with protection of labor rights, a wide distribution of political and economic power across many regions and industries, a taxation system which leaves everyone feeling they have “skin in the game”, and so on. There’s no evidence that immigrants (documented or undocumented) cause any more corruption or crime than native born residents. Indeed, the evidence we have in the USA generally suggests that first and second generation immigrants are less likely to break the law than other residents. Nativist anti-immigrant rhetoric today in the USA about Muslims or Latin Americans or Chinese is nearly identical in content and structure to anti-immigrant rhetoric about Germans, Irish, Italians, Eastern Europeans, Catholics, Jews, etc. in the past. There’s no reason to believe that undocumented Guatemalans or Syrian refugees immigrating to the US today will be any different than my Irish ancestors were 150 years ago, w/r/t assimilation.

reddytowns 10y ago
Legitimate court systems, accountable political system, protection of labor rights, they are all examples of things not being corrupt. So the reason for less corruption can't be less corruption. You're talking in circles here.
- jacobolus 10y ago
  You’re missing my point, which is that the “cultural factors” are not about individual people being inherently “corrupt”, but more about institutional strength and power distribution in the whole society. The US has a long history of integrating immigrants from a variety of cultural backgrounds, historically including large numbers of rural peasants from quasi-feudal societies, and plenty of people from places dominated by local “corruption”.
  - reddytowns 10y ago

legodt 10y ago

"the cultural norms that make our communities excellent places to live" In case anybody didn't know already, this is what dog whistle racism looks like

welanes 10y ago
As someone who originated from a developing country and now resides in a developed one, there's much truth and not a lot of racism in that sentence. It's not about race, it's about values, i.e. culture. Speak to an immigrant, they'd tell you this. My Aunts say it all the time - "I do miss home but we have such bad leaders....yes the food is terrible but life is so much simpler here.....people here are so trusting and kind". Cultural norms are important and fascinating. Let's not hijack the opportunity for interesting conversation with accusations of racism.
- makomk 10y ago
  It's treading close to the line though. It's assuming that corruption is a result of some kind of internal pro-corruption tendency in the people of those countries, rather than structural issues within the countries that would be left behind when they left. For example, one of the problems with Brazil right now seems to be that allegations of corruption and corruption investigations are themselves untrustworthy, tools used by corrupt individuals to get rid of others who might investigate them.
- legodt 10y ago
  Because you missed it, let me help you out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics Parent comment was using a series of phrases that are repeated to reinforce the idea of importance of cultural homogeneity and keeping out groups out in the name of traditionalism and "values."
  - welanes 10y ago
    I don't see it. I think you may be projecting your own interpretation on to the parent comment.