Immigration

[tackattack]

@Ubermensch- That's my point. If you're trying to transpose your entire culture and language into a new societaly local construct, wouldn't it indicate that you at least prefer that new society? Why go and attempt to subvert and destroy it's constructs by refusing to at least learn the language (or at least not deliberately attack fundamental patriotism).

---

You sound like a total bigot.

That's my opinion.

Can't say fuck all about the US immigration problem, it's harder for them to get here. In our case I'm only for letting people in when there is a genuine shortage in skilled labor in the specific area, they can bring their culture with them all they like, in fact I welcome it.

---

I might have sounded that way, but it's not my intent nor the perception of those who know me and have met and discussed with me. Perhaps you could point out exactly why and I can see if I can clarify.

---

1) Why would you want to move into a Country because it espouses "freedom" and "equality" and in the process of petitioning directly attack the sense of patriotism of said country?

There's really no link between freedom/equality and patriotism. This is a common fallacy put forward by authoritarians. "If you don't support your country's every action, you don't believe in freedom"
It's complete nonsense.

I appreciate diversity and cultral recognition, but why do we need terms like xxxxxxx-american? If you were born in America, or are a nationalized citizen, wouldn't you just be american? I understand that a persons culture and heritage are important to the crux of who they are, but if you're going to change the culture of the territory you move to, why move? Is opportunity worth sacrificing a little personal pride and public heritage (not private)? Is there a cost/ sacrifice for moving to the US? Should there be?

So...
"I appreciate diversity and cultural recognition... *statement about cultural diversity being a bad thing* "

What?

In England we have a joke about Daily Mail readers that whenever they start a sentence with the phrase "I'm not racist, but..." it's invariably followed by a racist statement. This paragraph really reminded me of that.
If you want to speak against cultural diversity, fine, of course you have the right to do that, but don't be dishonest by preceding it with a false statement in an attempt to artificially make your position sound more socially acceptable.

2) What's the big deal about border enforcement? If someone breaks into your house with the intent to make it their own, and you had a gun, wouldn't you shoot them? In my opinion do it all the way or not at all, stop half assing everything. Opinions?

No, because my house is insured, if someone tries to squat, I'm covered for that. So I have to live somewhere else temporarily. So what? I'd much rather that than live the rest of my life as a murderer.

Secondly, the analogy is flawed anyway. If someone "makes your house their own", you can't live there anymore. Not so with immigration.
Ownership of a house is very simple, by one person. The running of your house can be controlled by you alone. Not so with a country, that's called a dictatorship, and they tend to be rather unpleasant places to live.

Are you seriously advocating killing in the name of protecting an arbitrary line on a map?

---

1)Ok no fundamental link between the patriotically colloquial phrase "Home of the free" and perceived societal freedom? I beg to disagree, freedom from opression is a common theme in the US and lends quite a lot to our patriotism. I am in no way saying people can't be free to express disagreement with govmt. , it's also a founding principle of this country. However disagreeing with policy and protesting it is fine. But is it produective to do it while refusing to even pretend to contribute to the society you're protesting and actively attack the national pride?

1a)Is the purpose of moving to a favored society to productively integrate? I'm not nearly as bigotted as most people I know. I'm for people celebrating African heritage month, etc. It's not celebrating the culture of america though, so 'm just confused why the joining of the words?

1b) I see xxxxxxx-american as a needless segregation of society. Why not just celebrate and enjoy your culture wherever you are. If you're from Africa; be African, you can do that living in America. If you want to live in America and want to retain your African nationality, be an African in America or even an American from Africa, not an African-american. It may seem like a tautology, but I really see no purpose in dual nationality or somehow equating 2 nationalities. For example I know plenty of "african-americans" who haven't been in Africa for at least 5 generations. I have no probelms with any of them celebrating their heiritage or culture, what I have a problem with is them claiming a nationality based off lineage rather than their nation of residence. Why aren't they just Americans? Not to mention it has nothing to do with culture or heritage or nationality anymore it's only about color. Perhaps I could convey this if I stop using other people and use myself. I have Scotch, German, Dutch, American Indian geneology in me. I don't claim to be scottish-american, native-american,or dutch-american. I consider myself American. I enjoy the cultures I have in my geneology and other I don't. I find slightly more significance in the one's I have a family histroy in.

1c)Whatever my biases are I think it's fundamentally wrong to try and integrate into a society with which you show willfull disobedience to statutes and freedoms and a general contempt for.

2) Perhaps you don't have a "family to protect" instinct. If someone came into my 40 room mansion and wanted to live, sure I'd welcome that. If they didn't want to pay I might have a litle gripe about that but I wouldn't have a problem with that for short term. However, there is an expectation (in society) that contribution by all is standard. If they not only emphatically refused to contribute, and willfully started rearranging areas to the way their home looked I would talk with them, but not necessarily be against it. If they maliciously defied all previous communications and obstinantly refused to contribute attacked the foundational structure of their room and decided to start burning my drapes.... then I'd have to kick them out. If they wouldn't leave I'd have them escorted. If they broke in I would defend my family and property. I'm not advocating senseless killing. I am advocating protecting our country from radicals that refuse to conform to entry procedures (no matter how broke the process is) by an escalating scale.