5 ms·

I'd rather have my country die out naturally and peacefully than to have anything a "multicultural" society has to offer.

meowface 3y ago
True. Who would ever want to live in the US, with their abysmal GDP and lack of innovation. The US is a prime example that people of multiple cultures or ethnicities can't even be in the same city, let alone the same corporation or government.
- locopati 3y ago
  Have you been to NYC? Take your racism elsewhere.
  - porkbeer 3y ago
    Nyc is hardly representative of america, thank god. And plenty of racisim and inability to adapt by a few cultures endemic to the area. Take your accusations of racism elsewhere.
  - meowface 3y ago
    I think you misunderstood my post.
- no_time 3y ago
  >True. Who would ever want to live in the US, with their abysmal GDP and lack of innovation. Not me for sure. If your utmost measure of value in life is GDP, then I feel like we won't understand each other. Worst part is I can't escape this mindset here, thanks to US billionaires generously bankrolling "NGO's","think tanks" and "independent news outlets"
- Ekaros 3y ago
  It is pretty clear that immigration ruined Americas. Just look at the outcome for them, it is absolutely horrid.
- friend_and_foe 3y ago
  The US has been the top performing economy for quite a while, yet only became truly multicultural about 50 years ago. Before that it was all European immigrants, assimilating to white american culture, and the native black people and some natives from the previous era scattered around. You had some cross border cultural transfer along the southern border and carribean, that's it. The amount of multiculturalism the US had until the mid to late 70s was about what you'd expect anywhere else in the world with land borders. So we can say, the multiculturalism is not the cause of the wealth. The truth is, the causes of the wealth are the sizeable population, regardless of origin, and the vast natural resources it controls. The US is a westphalian state, run like a business. The European nations once were nation states, but have also adopted this model. It works, if your goal is economic output, and unfortunately your goal must be economic output because otherwise you can't compete militarily with a rival who's goal is economic output and you'll get subsumed.
  - caeril 3y ago
    It's also important to consider that the US, prior to the modern era, was a "melting pot" of a somewhat select group of immigrants. We routinely turned away handicapped, poor, sick, mentally deficient, or otherwise "unfit" potential citizens. The "New Colossus" that adorns the Statue of Liberty is a fun little poem, but it does not in any way reflect the actual policies of the United States for much of its early and middle existence. We were a country that was happy to import wealthy people, scientists, conscientious hard workers, etc, while keeping the riffraff out.
e63f67dd-065b 3y ago
The death won’t be natural or peaceful. You can see this in current EU politics already — seniors expect pensions sufficient to maintain their existing standard of living, but this assumes that there exists the same amount of working people to sustain a sufficient surplus for the elderly to consume without meaningful contribution to the economy. What your policy actually means in reality is a well-known pattern — increasing taxes on the young to shift their consumption power to the elderly, as the elderly become an increasingly larger voting bloc, perpetuating the cycle. There’s only a few ways this can end — 1) retirees must have their living standards decrease as fewer working adults sustain them, 2) they maintain their standards at the expense of taking it from the young, who 3) will leave for other countries and make the problem worse, or 4) retirees exit retirement and actually work. You’re seeing the fight between options 1/2 happen in France, 2/3 in Spain, al four in Germany, etc. The option that policy makers see is 5) bring in enough migrants to maintain healthy demographics and 6) making more domestic babies. 6 is, however, a mirage; no policy we have tried worked (see SK, HK, SG, TW, JP, and many more).
- no_time 3y ago
  Awfully unlucky that ours is the generation that has to face the retirement pyramid scheme collapsing. But bringing in a horde of foreigners is like saying "fuck you, not my problem" to the next generation. It HAS to come crashing down at one point. Do I have a solution to this problem? No. But there has to be a solution that doesn't include my country getting a Wikipedia article of it's own about a list of granade attacks commited, like Sweden has... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Sweden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Swe...
- lordnacho 3y ago
  Importing migrants is not a long term solution, since they tend to end up producing the same number of kids as the domestic women, after a lag.
  - friend_and_foe 3y ago
    Yup, and in almost every country in the world fertility rates are dropping. We will face a global demographic crisis within a century. We are either going to have to start having kids again or we are in for a brave new world type future, or extinction.
friend_and_foe 3y ago
This has never happened in history. If the land your people are on has resources and is accessible, you'll get subsumed and assimilated by another one, one way or another. If you want your nation to survive, you have to 1) have a healthy rate of admixture fast enough to prevent inbreeding but slow enough to protect the culture, 2) get to fuckin'. The latter may require some reorganizing of the labor and housing market to make raising more than one or two kids feasible. But if you think your people can fizzle out, you're going to be disappointed whether you like it or not. And it doesn't matter what the government does, they can try to stop it, at some point there's just not enough able bodied of you to utilize and protect your resources. Building a wall around fertile land and staving off migrants who want it til the last one of you dies out is just not going to happen.
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  War and genocide are options, even if they are horrible ones that shouldn’t be considered. Throughout history, however, cultures assimilating others have often been violent (either through great defense or great offense). European assimilation of the Americas was extremely violent and destructive.
  - friend_and_foe 3y ago
    Yes, this process almost always is accompanied by fierce conflict.
- no_time 3y ago
  It's working well enough for Israel. Technology and disregarding international treaties goes a long way.

meowface 3y ago

True. Who would ever want to live in the US, with their abysmal GDP and lack of innovation. The US is a prime example that people of multiple cultures or ethnicities can't even be in the same city, let alone the same corporation or government.

locopati 3y ago
Have you been to NYC? Take your racism elsewhere.
- porkbeer 3y ago
  Nyc is hardly representative of america, thank god. And plenty of racisim and inability to adapt by a few cultures endemic to the area. Take your accusations of racism elsewhere.
- meowface 3y ago
  I think you misunderstood my post.
no_time 3y ago
>True. Who would ever want to live in the US, with their abysmal GDP and lack of innovation. Not me for sure. If your utmost measure of value in life is GDP, then I feel like we won't understand each other. Worst part is I can't escape this mindset here, thanks to US billionaires generously bankrolling "NGO's","think tanks" and "independent news outlets"
Ekaros 3y ago
It is pretty clear that immigration ruined Americas. Just look at the outcome for them, it is absolutely horrid.
friend_and_foe 3y ago
The US has been the top performing economy for quite a while, yet only became truly multicultural about 50 years ago. Before that it was all European immigrants, assimilating to white american culture, and the native black people and some natives from the previous era scattered around. You had some cross border cultural transfer along the southern border and carribean, that's it. The amount of multiculturalism the US had until the mid to late 70s was about what you'd expect anywhere else in the world with land borders. So we can say, the multiculturalism is not the cause of the wealth. The truth is, the causes of the wealth are the sizeable population, regardless of origin, and the vast natural resources it controls. The US is a westphalian state, run like a business. The European nations once were nation states, but have also adopted this model. It works, if your goal is economic output, and unfortunately your goal must be economic output because otherwise you can't compete militarily with a rival who's goal is economic output and you'll get subsumed.
- caeril 3y ago
  It's also important to consider that the US, prior to the modern era, was a "melting pot" of a somewhat select group of immigrants. We routinely turned away handicapped, poor, sick, mentally deficient, or otherwise "unfit" potential citizens. The "New Colossus" that adorns the Statue of Liberty is a fun little poem, but it does not in any way reflect the actual policies of the United States for much of its early and middle existence. We were a country that was happy to import wealthy people, scientists, conscientious hard workers, etc, while keeping the riffraff out.

e63f67dd-065b 3y ago

The death won’t be natural or peaceful. You can see this in current EU politics already — seniors expect pensions sufficient to maintain their existing standard of living, but this assumes that there exists the same amount of working people to sustain a sufficient surplus for the elderly to consume without meaningful contribution to the economy. What your policy actually means in reality is a well-known pattern — increasing taxes on the young to shift their consumption power to the elderly, as the elderly become an increasingly larger voting bloc, perpetuating the cycle. There’s only a few ways this can end — 1) retirees must have their living standards decrease as fewer working adults sustain them, 2) they maintain their standards at the expense of taking it from the young, who 3) will leave for other countries and make the problem worse, or 4) retirees exit retirement and actually work. You’re seeing the fight between options 1/2 happen in France, 2/3 in Spain, al four in Germany, etc. The option that policy makers see is 5) bring in enough migrants to maintain healthy demographics and 6) making more domestic babies. 6 is, however, a mirage; no policy we have tried worked (see SK, HK, SG, TW, JP, and many more).

no_time 3y ago
Awfully unlucky that ours is the generation that has to face the retirement pyramid scheme collapsing. But bringing in a horde of foreigners is like saying "fuck you, not my problem" to the next generation. It HAS to come crashing down at one point. Do I have a solution to this problem? No. But there has to be a solution that doesn't include my country getting a Wikipedia article of it's own about a list of granade attacks commited, like Sweden has... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Sweden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_grenade_attacks_in_Swe...
lordnacho 3y ago
Importing migrants is not a long term solution, since they tend to end up producing the same number of kids as the domestic women, after a lag.
- friend_and_foe 3y ago
  Yup, and in almost every country in the world fertility rates are dropping. We will face a global demographic crisis within a century. We are either going to have to start having kids again or we are in for a brave new world type future, or extinction.

friend_and_foe 3y ago

This has never happened in history. If the land your people are on has resources and is accessible, you'll get subsumed and assimilated by another one, one way or another. If you want your nation to survive, you have to 1) have a healthy rate of admixture fast enough to prevent inbreeding but slow enough to protect the culture, 2) get to fuckin'. The latter may require some reorganizing of the labor and housing market to make raising more than one or two kids feasible. But if you think your people can fizzle out, you're going to be disappointed whether you like it or not. And it doesn't matter what the government does, they can try to stop it, at some point there's just not enough able bodied of you to utilize and protect your resources. Building a wall around fertile land and staving off migrants who want it til the last one of you dies out is just not going to happen.

seanmcdirmid 3y ago
War and genocide are options, even if they are horrible ones that shouldn’t be considered. Throughout history, however, cultures assimilating others have often been violent (either through great defense or great offense). European assimilation of the Americas was extremely violent and destructive.
- friend_and_foe 3y ago
  Yes, this process almost always is accompanied by fierce conflict.
no_time 3y ago
It's working well enough for Israel. Technology and disregarding international treaties goes a long way.