3 ms·
If, that concern (of large uneducated immigrants) is paired in the same sentence or paragraph (or at least article) with a suggestion of how to increase immigra
by d1zzy 8y ago
If, that concern (of large uneducated immigrants) is paired in the same sentence or paragraph (or at least article) with a suggestion of how to increase immigration of highly skilled/educated people. Because if it just stops at "we should stop immigration because of these potential social problems", then you are (willingly or not) selecting arguments to match your narrative and that can be seen as pushing an agenda that goes beyond simply trying to cope with the potential problems expressed at face value. Hence why articles that describe issues that seem reasonable on the face, can be interpreted as pushing xenophobia.
- fromthestart 8y ago>then you are (willingly or not) selecting arguments to match your narrative and that can be seen as pushing an agenda If I lean towards one side of an issue (e.g. unchecked immigration policies are a net negative to first world societies) then the onus is not on me to present both sides. That does not make me a xenophobe. >can be interpreted as pushing xenophobia Only when there is social pressure to interpret things in such a way. No matter how you slice it, automatically associating anti immigration sentiment with xenophobia is dishonest conflation.
- lovich 8y ago>No matter how you slice it, automatically associating anti immigration sentiment with xenophobia is dishonest conflation. That is correct, unless the group in question is saying "we don't want immigrants because they are intrinsically worse then us". In Japan's case, lookat the example of ethnic Koreans changing their names to hide the fact, despite south korea being an industralized economy on par with Japan in terms of technology and prosperity. It is difficult to see a reason why they would discriminate against Koreans for any reason based on actual performance of their people and seems to show that it is in fact xenophobia