Not intrinsically, but pretty commonly it is driven by bigotry over culture, religion or skin colour.
You know all the people up in arms over the wave of Ukrainian refugees? Oh wait, there’s nothing of the sort? Well, there you go.
Exactly. In and of itself, criticizing illegal immigration is simply criticizing an illegal act. However, it is usually steeped in racist logic and arguments. Talking about how people who come over our southern border are genetically inferior and prone to crime is racist as fuck. Adding roadblocks to immigration for brown people while simultaneously streamlining immigration of white South Africans (the guys who did Apartheid) is racist as fuck.
There for sure was.
Where, and to what degree relative to Arabs or Latin Americans or whatever?
Like sure, you can find someone who said it was bad somewhere, but even in places like Romania or Poland they were never the main target of the xenophobic rage.
I live in SC. There was a big uproar about it and an even bigger one that the news shrugged its shoulders and went “eh, not really news worth.”
Well, that’s the where. How big, relative to dissatisfaction over Latin Americans?
I’m pretty sure it’s negligible by comparison. Because I know America.
Thats because the media didnt try to cause mass hysteria. Man you guys are so easily manipulated by media i think we should force psychological classes so you can see the warning signs of manipulation
Edit: you are the easiest people to manipulate and its already obvious.
Hopefully you’ll be in that class.
Uh-huh. Straight to forced re-education programs and shadowy conspiracies.
When the fascists send people to argue for them, they’re not sending their best.
Edit: Cool cowardly edit.
No no… that’s their best.
Yeah, TBF it’s not an ideology that really pulls the best and brightest,
I think it’s very telling that it’s not about “How do we allow them in legally” but it’s about “Kick them out”. If they were simply mad about illegal immigration then the natural discourse would be “Why do they not come over legally then?” The answer there is that of course it’s insanely difficult to legally become a citizen of the US, and it can take years - even decades, but people have a family that’s hungry now.
The discourse going to “Kick them out” shows that it’s not about legal immigration at all, it’s that they don’t want a specific type of person around them. Otherwise we’d be having fairs and events to help people get their citizenship right now. After all they want to be here, the even want to pay taxes. If they just need to come in legally then the vast majority would, if our process allowed it.
The answer there is that of course it’s insanely difficult to legally become a citizen of the US, and it can take years - even decades, but people have a family that’s hungry now.
Same for other places. Even Canada, which is apparently one of the best destinations, has a system that’s poorly designed to the point of maliciousness.
It took my dad about 15-20 years in the US to get citizenship. It took my friend about 10 in Canada. Both are fucking terrible, but the US is a special kind of processed garbage
Not all opposed to illegal immigration are racist, but (obviously) all racist are against illegal immigration (And immigration in general).
Short answer yes with an if. The long answer is no with a but.
I’d say it’s racist if someone is complaining about illegal immigrants alongside a general contempt of ‘foreigners’ and not paying attention to the details of why it’s illegal for them to migrate the way they did and what options are available for legal migration.
It’s not racist to be opposed to those who are in violation of the law, as that is not a racial or ethnic classification. But it is important to be inquisitive as to why the law is the way that it is, and be willing to consider the possibility that just because something is against the law does not mean that it should be. Law has long been used as a tool of systemic oppression and racism, as well as many other horrific abuses inflicted on people.
Feels like it’s a dog whistle most of the time and not a very good one. I’ve seen people assuming that someone isn’t here legally much more often with someone of a different race. A lot of the time people will bring it up for the sake of racism. Inherently? I don’t know if it would be racist to oppose them for it’s own sake, but you’d have to have just as much a problem with the German guy overstaying a visa. I’d also say that opposing it for it’s own sake is unchristian.
Not really, but most people’s reasoning is racist.
Maybe. Depends. It’s complicated.
Yes
Often people who oppose illegal immigration do seem to also be racists.
I think if someone says they oppose illegal immigration and also genuinely feels they have done serious introspection and feel they are not racist, they might benefit from asking themselves what they dislike about illegal immigration and see if those things actually have the negative impacts they fear or if the negative impacts they see are but drops in the bucket compared to other sources of similar impacts.
deleted by creator
YES.
If you’re an American, our entire history of immigration legislation is racism bundled on racism following in the tradition of racism. Were it not for chattel slavery and our betrayal of the native tribes our racist immigration laws would be the most shameful part of our history.
And if you’re not American, your own country’s immigration laws are almost certainly based on either racism or “nationalism”, with the latter mostly being a holdover from when “French” and “English” were considered different races.
Unlawful emmigration to a country should be, at worst, a bureaucratic fine and probation. Anything more is simply bigotry in a polite suit.
I feel like “illegal” immigration as a concept is inherently racist and being upset and anyone for not coming over the “right” way is also racist.
Even if the law bars say only pedodiles from entry? Just hung up on the word anyone here. I’m guessing there are some number of people we can all agree should be kept outside of a given sect of people. Even back in the day there would be exile’s.
Then if we say some number of people should be bared there would be a “right” way.
I’m not saying immigration policy is good now. Far from it.
Who decides if someone’s a pedophile or not? How are you going to track that? Force people to take a test or something? Hell, currently we’re in a world where queer people, especially trans people, are called “groomers” and “pedophiles” for the sheer act of being trans. So you call people you don’t want to come in pedophiles and then they can’t come in. Nope, no trans people allowed because we’re all “pedophiles” according to the government.
Okay what, you’re going to limit it to people who’ve been convicted of child sex crimes. Well, then they make the existence of people who they don’t like count as sex crimes. Again, as is happening to trans people. Existing in public as yourself is a crime so you’re charged and treated the same as a pedophile.
So we’ve already covered why your logic is completely broken and this idea is stupid. But let’s push all of that aside. For the sake of argument, best case scenario, we are only talking about actual genuine pedophiles. Have they committed a crime? Are they in prison? Then they’re not crossing any borders since they’re incarcerated.
What if they haven’t committed a crime yet? Well then we’d have no way of knowing they’re a pedophile unless they admitted it themselves. And no these people shouldn’t be punished just for having those sexual desires. For one, most people are able to control themselves despite sexual urges. Cases of rapes and sexual assault are the result of power dynamics, not random uncontrollable urges. And two, these people should be given help given this could cause genuine mental distress.
What if they’ve committed a crime but served their time? Well, what justification is there to stop them? What if they harm another child? Well what if they do it in their own country? That’s not going to make a difference. And this also goes into the complex issue that is the prison system and how it’s largely useless at doing anything other than containing people as a punishment rather than actually attempting to help reform people.
Anyway no, I don’t think there’s any justification for restricting any kind of “undesirable” from entering a country. Beyond anything else, it just ends up a loophole to punish any group of people you don’t like by branding them as that undesirable. Same for every human right. If it doesn’t apply to everyone then it applies to no one.
And if you’re a special kind of dumbass who’d say “well what about nazis/the kkk/etc”, the answer is that ideologies that are inherently intolerant of other people just for existing do not get the benefit of tolerance themselves.
Not sure where the vitriol is coming from. Did I do something to personally offend you? I’m guessing you are just not fully comfortable with your ideas.
Force people to take a test or something?
“Would you have sex with this child holds up picture of child?” “Yes…” “Well, you are not allowed in.” Yeah, I would be okay with that tbh.
anyone
“well what about nazis/the kkk/etc”, the answer is that ideologies that are inherently intolerant of other people just for existing do not get the benefit of tolerance themselves.
Oh so we agree as I said in my original post “Just hung up on the word anyone here” you would prevent some amount of people from coming over… So it’s not inherently racist to make nazis/kkk immigration illegal?
Ah so you are that special kind of dumbass.
Without a one world government that could police people cross border, wouldn’t it be all to easy walk in to a country, do a bit crime, and then walk to the next one? Not to mention human trafficking problems if no one was tracked how they travel across countries.
Knowing that the system as it is now is wrong does not make me an expert on how we could prevent issues. But some people being able to “do a bit of crime” easier is probably better than the human rights violations that are occurring now. And even otherwise, open borders doesn’t inherently mean nothing with no one checking people. Just means you can freely travel. But also, Europe doesn’t seem to have an issue of people popping cross the border to “do a bit of crime” and go home to get off scott free. Because that’s not how borders and laws work.
And human trafficking is a problem with the world as it is currently. So that’s not stopping anything. And hell, it makes “illegal” immigrants easier targets of this kind of exploitation. Can’t really get much help if you’re in the country illegally and your family member is kidnapped.
So you think every person on the planet should be tracked every time they cross any border anywhere?
I don’t. I would obviously like a world where border control wasn’t necessary for travel. And it’s obviously not an impossibility considering the schengen area exists. But I don’t see tracking influx of immigrants to be a bad thing, if anything so you know how many resources to budget for their care (in the case of refugees) and making sure people don’t go missing.
I’d argue no, if you have valid reasons and lets not kid ourselves even though there is enough wealth in the world to have everyone live comfortably, thats not the game the wealthy and their puppet politicians play. They want us cheap and desperate and immigrants are just another tool to achieve this objective.
I feel like if you’re asking then you’re searching for validation. A sort of way to not feel guilty about being racist. Tell me, what bothers you most about immigrants? This country wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for immigrants
What “this country”? Lemmy?
And I understand them searching for validation. It might be hard being anti-illegal-immigrant and everyone thinking you racist, even though your reasons are not racist nor xenophobic at all.
You just encountered US defaultism
My issue with them is their existence.
If I had things my way, legal immigration would be easy and fast. This would eliminate the need for people from a starving company to sneak across the border
No as it’s a fair national security concern
Every time I meet someone who opposes illegal immigration but claims to support legal immigration I ask one question. If the law changed so that all immigration was legal, you’d be fine with it, right?
Nobody so far has been fine with it. I conclude that the question of legality is a dodge for people who are embarrassed about their actual motives.
I also would not be fine with it.
Having a barrier to entry is what keeps most of the dipshits out. There are dipshits in every country. I don’t want to have to deal with another country’s dipshits - we have enough to deal with on our own.
Exactly what the barriers to entry are should be reformed so that they make sense and allow all people in easily if they meet some straightforward requirements.
Borders have existed since paleolithic tribes staked out perimeters around their camps and established hunting territory boundaries with other tribes. Is it possible that we will someday live in a world completely free of restricted travel? Sure! But abolishing all barriers to entry across national boundaries tomorrow with a snap of the fingers would be a disaster.
I think I understand what you’re saying and don’t necessarily fully disagree, but the directness at the very start definitely made me brace for xenophobia. In part because “dipshits” can be used as a dogwhistle
However, I would 100% classify trumpers as dipshits
but the directness at the very start definitely made me brace for xenophobia
Yeah, I mean, I was direct because I was disagreeing with them.
However, I would 100% classify trumpers as dipshits
I agree
keeps most of the dipshits out
Perhaps, but the undocumented immigrants being rounded up do not seem to be dipshits. Dreamers, day laborers, people here for the past 20 years with no criminal history. Keeping the dipshits out is a nice idea, but our current policies are evicting people I want as neighbors.
I agree. I think our current policies are dumb as fuck.
Oh my God the HEMMING and HAWING when suggesting easier immigration to one of these bigots.
They will do anything to avoid answering that question. It’s really disgusting
I support legal immigration, I empathize with illegal immigration (and think the laws could use adjustment in both directions)…but I don’t think all immigration should be legal.
And no, it doesn’t change if they’re from “a Western country” or from somewhere that people look different from the majority in my country.
We have rising unemployment among citizens, especially young people, yet corporations are taking advantage of immigrants in various ways. And immigrants of all kinds – legal, grey area, and illegal immigrants.
We are selling the idea of a lifestyle to people in other countries that isn’t attainable unless you’re part of the top quintile (or possibly an even smaller group) of income. Then they come here, bringing their university educations, and are competing for jobs against high schoolers.
I’m all about people coming to live in my country. But we’re doing a disservice to immigrants through our laws/regulations and our corporations. And people who are here illegally are usually the biggest victims; the most exploited.
Does unrestricted immigration work?
I’m not aware that any country (that anyone would want to go to, not like a war zone) has completely free immigration. I’d be opposed to having no more borders from one day to the next for the simple reason that it’s a big change. One that’s worth trialing and working towards, of course, but not something we can yet know will work afaik. Especially if we’re the first country doing this and 2 billion people decide the Netherlands would be a fine place to live in (it is!). I’d not be surprised if it turns out we need a lottery kind of system, or maybe an announcement system, at least for those not in mortal danger, so that we can build living spaces ahead of time. Supply and demand is currently such that the only way to afford a house (even for top, idk, ~2% of world incomes) is to have a house so you can sell it at the inflated price, and while immigration is afaik a net positive to a country’s wealth and welfare, this effect is offset in time. The housing crisis will pass again, as it always has, but in general the solution should be sustainable and I’m not aware that it’s as simple as “be in favor of unrestricted immigration or else you’re a racist”
