4 ms·
I notice the absorption of outsiders is portrayed as a goal, implying that it's an unalloyed good, beyond question. Is there some good reason to think that? I m
by rdiddly 9y ago
I notice the absorption of outsiders is portrayed as a goal, implying that it's an unalloyed good, beyond question. Is there some good reason to think that? I mean America prides itself on it, but is there any good reason to think that (for example) Danes should be responsible for non-Danes? Or on a basic level, what's wrong with having places exist in the world where the people there are mostly from there? Isn't that what a nation is? And wouldn't the people of such a place tend to exercise their sovereignty to decide, based on whatever criteria they want to use, how many and which people they allow to join the club? I dunno... Sure wish we could have a rational discussion about it, without it degenerating into nationalist race-baiting on the one side and jumping to conclusions and cries of xenophobia on the other.
- rayiner 9y agoIf you're going to accept outsiders, you need to integrate them. That's always been one of America's strengths--putting together a somewhat governable country out of ethnic groups that had long been at war with each other in their home countries (German, English, Irish, etc.), oh, and had enslaved each other's ancestors (African Americans). You don't need to accept outside immigration. Japan and Korea are very nice countries that are almost completely ethnically homogenous. They're not good at integrating foreigners, but they don't accept them anyway so it's moot. But on the flip side, that probably dooms you to dying out as a civilization as your birth rate falls below replacement levels...
- pcwalton 9y ago> You don't need to accept outside immigration. Japan and Korea are very nice countries that are almost completely ethnically homogeneous. You need to accept immigration if you want your economy to grow and be sustainable. Japan is an example of what happens if you don't--just look at the Nikkei 225 after 1990.
- Thriptic 9y agoI don't think it's a problem at all for places to be culturally or ethnically homogenous. I would say the primary advantage of integration and diversity is that no culture is perfect in every way, and cross pollination allows for the best parts of each culture to be recognized and used. That being said, cultural exchange relies on a decently high degree of overlap between cultures to establish kinship and trust. There are definitely cultures which are so different that they cannot exist well in close proximity, and so it's inefficient to try to force them to.