4 ms·
Not sure why it is so controversial. * A region with instability, poverty and agrarian-tribo-rural-economy will imprint emergent traits onto the local culture.
by screye 3y ago
Not sure why it is so controversial.
* A region with instability, poverty and agrarian-tribo-rural-economy will imprint emergent traits onto the local culture.
* Long ossified culture cannot be shed quickly even in the best of conditions
* Agrarian tribal cultural practices are incompatible with hyper-liberal secular society. Integration is the only option.
* Integration is hard. Even more so when it is optional, gentle and approached with ignorant naivete.
Of course things went wrong. The Swedish drank American kool-aid. Like America, they naively tried to claim that their national identity is not an ethnic identity. They set out to prove themselves better than the US by taking in large populations of refugees and showing how they could do the America model better. That's where they got it completely wrong. The US took centuries to decouple its cultural identity from its prevailing-ethnic identity. (by successfully secularizing Protestantism.) The US also heavily vets its immigrants (unlike Sweden) and places the most oppressive integration-force-field second only to France. The air you breathe (Media), the carrot (The American dream) and the stick (the English language) all perfectly align to facilitate integration of the 2nd generation born into the US.
Swedish is an ethno-cultural identity. If you can't start with accepting that, then ofc the grand immigration plan was going to fail.
- searealist 3y ago> The US also heavily vets its immigrants (unlike Sweden) and places the most oppressive integration-force-field second only to France. The air you breathe (Media), the carrot (The American dream) and the stick (the English language) all perfectly align to facilitate integration of the 2nd generation born into the US. Most of America's immigration comes from the southern border and is completely unvetted. Your thoughts on integration also don't align with reality. Edit: participating in this thread has resulted in the moderators of this site applying a rate limit to my account, so I can no longer reply.
- screye 3y agoThe rise of massive Hispanic immigration to the US is fairly recent [1] About 25% of USA's immigration is as a result of unvetted immigrants from the south [2]. It is still a minority. The majority come here through family (pre-integrated) or for work (high bar for productivity). Also, Mexico is not the same as war torn middle-east. Mexicans are already culturally aligned (Christianity), ethnically aligned (massive white admixture) and economically far closer to the developed world as compared to the recent warn-torn middle eastern nations. There have been large & well-established Spanish-Christian communities within the US for centuries, which makes it much harder for them to ghettoize. My point about the integration force-field still stands. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/20/facts-on-u-s-immigrants/#:~:text=groups%20were%20much%20more%20evenly%20dispersed https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/20/facts-on-u-s... [2] https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/20/facts-on-u-s-immigrants/#:~:text=unauthorized%20immigrants%20from%20Mexico%20fell%20from%20a%20peak%20of%206.9%20million%20in%202007%20to%204.9%20million%20in%202017 https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/20/facts-on-u-s...
- searealist 3y agoYou isolated Mexico for some reason. Your source cites 50% for Mexico and other Latin American countries. Also, while it is true that there is significant (Southern) European admixture in Mexico, it is much less represented among those who come to America.
- scruple 3y agoUnvetted, probably, sure, but culturally similar.