6 ms·

There is a lot of political science research that speaks to growing xenophobia when immigration is unleashed. I understand the sentiment—I'm very pro-immigratio

There is a lot of political science research that speaks to growing xenophobia when immigration is unleashed. I understand the sentiment—I'm very pro-immigration—but with respect to domestic policy my primary goal is stability and faith in government. Personally, I like how my country, Canada, does it. Points based system that rewards multiple factors, including skills, employability, and fluency in English and French. A large, sensible limit and a separate target for refugees. Some affordances for family reunification, but fundamentally economically and societally stable.

runarberg 6y ago
Xenophobia is more expected, when the immigrant population is ghettoized, alienated, given fewer opportunities and stricter policing, and made to compete with the local population for limited jobs. A more reasonable policy would be to make sure the that doesn't happen. Say by abolishing racist policing, better urban planning, better labor laws, and partly socialized job market. EDIT: Changed wording, previously incorrectly stated that immigration was natural under these circumstances.
- munk-a 6y ago
  Xenophobia is never natural, it's comprehensible but there are a lot of folks able to resist falling into it as a scapegoat from bad circumstance. I agree with improving society to help less folks fall into it, but I don't believe in allowing any excuses for xenophobic views.
  - runarberg 6y ago
    This is very true. It was bad wording on my part. Thank you for correcting it. Edited the previous comment to reflect this.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - shard 6y ago
    I would have thought that the comment "xenophobia is natural" is fairly uncontroversial. It's certainly not an artificial construct forced upon people (although certain expressions and targets might be). That's why there are articles like http://nautil.us/issue/49/the-absurd/why-your-brain-hates-other-people http://nautil.us/issue/49/the-absurd/why-your-brain-hates-ot... . After all, even animals can exhibit xenophobic behaviors. I don't think runarberg meant that xenophobia is acceptable or proper.
    - runarberg 6y ago
      I didn’t, but it was a poor choose of wording non-the-less and therefor deserved the criticism. It’s been a while since I’ve read up on the literature of psychological biases, but I don’t think there is a clear case that we have inherit biases towards outgroups. Or at least any experiments that previously have demonstrated such biases have had biases them self. I at least wasn’t ready to accept a theory of outgroup prejudges being ”natural” without resounding evidence from good experiments. A Marxist might argue that given the previously mentioned conditions (in particular worker alienation) would create an alienated “outgroup” which others (including the working classes) would learn to despise. However this is hardly something that some might call a natural condition. And marxism is far from being an accepted theory of human behavior.
      - csa 6y ago
        > It’s been a while since I’ve read up on the literature of psychological biases, but I don’t think there is a clear case that we have inherit biases towards outgroups. There is an abundance. Check out the literature on adult development. I’m partial to Kegan’s model, but others work. Here is an accessible article on Kegan’s work: https://medium.com/@NataliMorad/how-to-be-an-adult-kegans-theory-of-adult-development-d63f4311b553 https://medium.com/@NataliMorad/how-to-be-an-adult-kegans-th... Kegan might not say that stage 3 folks are inherently biased towards outgroups, but they are certainly defined by their in-group. This can lead to challenging perspectives when dealing with other groups.
        runarberg 6y ago
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- rayiner 6y ago
  > A more reasonable policy would be to make sure the that doesn't happen. Say by abolishing racist policing, better urban planning, better labor laws, and partly socialized job market It’s not clear to me that these things are true. Unions and socialized job markets, for example, often exacerbate ghettoization by excluding née entrants from the labor market. It’s hard to argue with the success story that is the US. Nearly every immigrant group in the US has seen incomes converges with the native population within a few generations. Even today, that’s happening for Hispanic immigrants. That’s true few other places. Fourth generation Muslims in France, for example, are still often ghettoized.
munk-a 6y ago
I was surprised, when I got my citizenship, just how limited the family reunification up here is, but I'm also okay with that. It might be different for people who come in via refugee channels (they've been forced to leave their home and may not have a valid and safe path to reunify if they need to) but, as an elective immigrant the only automatic ins I've got are nephews and nieces in the case of orphaning. I'm pretty okay with that. While the rest of my US family is freaking out a bit right now I think it's a lot more just to bring in folks looking for work with skills to support them.
jedberg 6y ago
I like the Canadian system too, but it was recently pointed out to me that the Canadian system is biased towards wealthy immigrants. Many of the points are things that take money to get (like advanced degrees and knowledge of French). And then you end up with the "PhD taxi driver" problem too.
- ponker 6y ago
  That's not a bug, it's a feature. Wealthy immigrants are more useful to a country than poor immigrants, unless those poor immigrants have a lot of promise which is most easily approximated by educational credentials. The PhD taxi driver isn't a huge problem because it's voluntary on the part of the immigrant and usually those people send their kids to top universites.
  - cambalache 6y ago
    Yes! All those wealthy immigrants who helped to build the US
    - david-gpu 6y ago
      I say this as a naturalized citizen who went through this process myself a few years ago: it's our country and we can decide which people we want to let in. It's not their right, it's a privilege we provide them with the expectation that they will contribute to our society more than the average Canadian. So, yes, we cherry-pick the applicants who will most likely contribute the most. People running away from war and famine have a different humanitarian immigration path into Canada which is not built with the expectation that they will become net contributors to our society.
      - ghufran_syed 6y ago
        >People running away from war and famine have a different humanitarian immigration path into Canada which is not built with the expectation that they will become net contributors to our society. Or at least, not in the first few years of their stay - there is every reason to expect them to become net contributors in time, it just might take a few years longer than the point-based immigrants
totetsu 6y ago
I often hear people say things like, diversity leads to conflict, but what is the actual research?
- seneca 6y ago
  Robert Putnam did research on this. Search for his name and "The downside of Diversity".
- dasudasu 6y ago
  Try "diversity" and "social trust" in google scholar.
pnw_hazor 6y ago
Early on the Trump administration floated the idea of a point based system and they were instantly savaged for being racists and white supremacists for even suggesting such a thing. The howls of outrage died out fairly quickly when it was pointed out that many developed countries use a point system.
- digianarchist 6y ago
  RAISE reduces immigration. It might have gotten bipartisan support if it didn’t reduce family based Green Card numbers significantly.
neeleshs 6y ago
a bachelor's degree in computer science, oodles of experience and holding high positions in large tech companies, fluent in english and very high IELTS score - not enough in the Canadian points system, because of age. (Age outweighs points for experience) That system is geared towards young masters holders fluent in English/French. All systems exclude a certain demographic. I guess that's just how it is.
tathougies 6y ago
Asking Americans to implement the Canadian system of immigration will quickly earn you accusations of xenophobia and nazism.
president 6y ago
> There is a lot of political science research that speaks to growing xenophobia when immigration is unleashed. From my experience these days, many statements or positions are deemed xenophobic or racist when they are actually not. Even your example of the Canadian immigration requirements could be deemed xenophobic or racist towards foreigners that don't speak English. Then there are the "open borders" people that believe countries should hand out visas willy-nilly to everyone that wants one and that any opposition to that idea is xenophobic and racist. Do you think that is warranted?

runarberg 6y ago

Xenophobia is more expected, when the immigrant population is ghettoized, alienated, given fewer opportunities and stricter policing, and made to compete with the local population for limited jobs. A more reasonable policy would be to make sure the that doesn't happen. Say by abolishing racist policing, better urban planning, better labor laws, and partly socialized job market. EDIT: Changed wording, previously incorrectly stated that immigration was natural under these circumstances.

munk-a 6y ago
Xenophobia is never natural, it's comprehensible but there are a lot of folks able to resist falling into it as a scapegoat from bad circumstance. I agree with improving society to help less folks fall into it, but I don't believe in allowing any excuses for xenophobic views.
- runarberg 6y ago
  This is very true. It was bad wording on my part. Thank you for correcting it. Edited the previous comment to reflect this.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- shard 6y ago
  I would have thought that the comment "xenophobia is natural" is fairly uncontroversial. It's certainly not an artificial construct forced upon people (although certain expressions and targets might be). That's why there are articles like http://nautil.us/issue/49/the-absurd/why-your-brain-hates-other-people http://nautil.us/issue/49/the-absurd/why-your-brain-hates-ot... . After all, even animals can exhibit xenophobic behaviors. I don't think runarberg meant that xenophobia is acceptable or proper.
  - runarberg 6y ago
    I didn’t, but it was a poor choose of wording non-the-less and therefor deserved the criticism. It’s been a while since I’ve read up on the literature of psychological biases, but I don’t think there is a clear case that we have inherit biases towards outgroups. Or at least any experiments that previously have demonstrated such biases have had biases them self. I at least wasn’t ready to accept a theory of outgroup prejudges being ”natural” without resounding evidence from good experiments. A Marxist might argue that given the previously mentioned conditions (in particular worker alienation) would create an alienated “outgroup” which others (including the working classes) would learn to despise. However this is hardly something that some might call a natural condition. And marxism is far from being an accepted theory of human behavior.
    - csa 6y ago
      > It’s been a while since I’ve read up on the literature of psychological biases, but I don’t think there is a clear case that we have inherit biases towards outgroups. There is an abundance. Check out the literature on adult development. I’m partial to Kegan’s model, but others work. Here is an accessible article on Kegan’s work: https://medium.com/@NataliMorad/how-to-be-an-adult-kegans-theory-of-adult-development-d63f4311b553 https://medium.com/@NataliMorad/how-to-be-an-adult-kegans-th... Kegan might not say that stage 3 folks are inherently biased towards outgroups, but they are certainly defined by their in-group. This can lead to challenging perspectives when dealing with other groups.
      - runarberg 6y ago
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
rayiner 6y ago
> A more reasonable policy would be to make sure the that doesn't happen. Say by abolishing racist policing, better urban planning, better labor laws, and partly socialized job market It’s not clear to me that these things are true. Unions and socialized job markets, for example, often exacerbate ghettoization by excluding née entrants from the labor market. It’s hard to argue with the success story that is the US. Nearly every immigrant group in the US has seen incomes converges with the native population within a few generations. Even today, that’s happening for Hispanic immigrants. That’s true few other places. Fourth generation Muslims in France, for example, are still often ghettoized.

munk-a 6y ago

I was surprised, when I got my citizenship, just how limited the family reunification up here is, but I'm also okay with that. It might be different for people who come in via refugee channels (they've been forced to leave their home and may not have a valid and safe path to reunify if they need to) but, as an elective immigrant the only automatic ins I've got are nephews and nieces in the case of orphaning. I'm pretty okay with that. While the rest of my US family is freaking out a bit right now I think it's a lot more just to bring in folks looking for work with skills to support them.

jedberg 6y ago

I like the Canadian system too, but it was recently pointed out to me that the Canadian system is biased towards wealthy immigrants. Many of the points are things that take money to get (like advanced degrees and knowledge of French). And then you end up with the "PhD taxi driver" problem too.

ponker 6y ago
That's not a bug, it's a feature. Wealthy immigrants are more useful to a country than poor immigrants, unless those poor immigrants have a lot of promise which is most easily approximated by educational credentials. The PhD taxi driver isn't a huge problem because it's voluntary on the part of the immigrant and usually those people send their kids to top universites.
- cambalache 6y ago
  Yes! All those wealthy immigrants who helped to build the US
  - david-gpu 6y ago
    I say this as a naturalized citizen who went through this process myself a few years ago: it's our country and we can decide which people we want to let in. It's not their right, it's a privilege we provide them with the expectation that they will contribute to our society more than the average Canadian. So, yes, we cherry-pick the applicants who will most likely contribute the most. People running away from war and famine have a different humanitarian immigration path into Canada which is not built with the expectation that they will become net contributors to our society.
    - ghufran_syed 6y ago
      >People running away from war and famine have a different humanitarian immigration path into Canada which is not built with the expectation that they will become net contributors to our society. Or at least, not in the first few years of their stay - there is every reason to expect them to become net contributors in time, it just might take a few years longer than the point-based immigrants

totetsu 6y ago

I often hear people say things like, diversity leads to conflict, but what is the actual research?

seneca 6y ago
Robert Putnam did research on this. Search for his name and "The downside of Diversity".
dasudasu 6y ago
Try "diversity" and "social trust" in google scholar.

pnw_hazor 6y ago

Early on the Trump administration floated the idea of a point based system and they were instantly savaged for being racists and white supremacists for even suggesting such a thing. The howls of outrage died out fairly quickly when it was pointed out that many developed countries use a point system.

digianarchist 6y ago
RAISE reduces immigration. It might have gotten bipartisan support if it didn’t reduce family based Green Card numbers significantly.

neeleshs 6y ago

a bachelor's degree in computer science, oodles of experience and holding high positions in large tech companies, fluent in english and very high IELTS score - not enough in the Canadian points system, because of age. (Age outweighs points for experience) That system is geared towards young masters holders fluent in English/French. All systems exclude a certain demographic. I guess that's just how it is.

tathougies 6y ago

Asking Americans to implement the Canadian system of immigration will quickly earn you accusations of xenophobia and nazism.

president 6y ago

> There is a lot of political science research that speaks to growing xenophobia when immigration is unleashed. From my experience these days, many statements or positions are deemed xenophobic or racist when they are actually not. Even your example of the Canadian immigration requirements could be deemed xenophobic or racist towards foreigners that don't speak English. Then there are the "open borders" people that believe countries should hand out visas willy-nilly to everyone that wants one and that any opposition to that idea is xenophobic and racist. Do you think that is warranted?