How big is immigration an issue on people's minds (USA and elsewhere)?

[Senethro]

But I'm sure that there is just the same British identity in London that hasn't been altered by this. By some magical thingie or whatever allows you to put your ideology over facts.

So what?

No, British identity is not under threat. British identity will have changed more for other reasons anyway. I note you've shifted the goalposts from destroyed to changed, and did not bother to check on the absolute numbers of British people in London.

So what do you think is the problem?

And if you're wanting to prepare in advance remember you'll need to show the problem is worth the enforcement.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Are the British and Germans still like top 5 migrant groups in Spain or has that shifted in recent years?

British:

German:

It went down after the peak in 2012 and now it is going up again. Brexit didn't have much effect apparently, higher prices did.

 

[Synobun]

The national one ? I mean, that's so obvious it just sounds like a "playing dumb" question.

Okay. What's the national identity? Why is this compromised by immigrants? Why is this being compromised by immigrants a negative thing? If the issue isn't race or religion, it should be trivial to expand on this national identity and its sanctity and provide a clearer explanation of the argued threat.

 

[Gorbles]

I'm saying it's a continuum, and when that's the argument, pointing out an extremely visible example is useful(though if you track the history, the cavalry flags don't come first, they come later).

Examples have to be comparable. No?

If you're arguing that destruction of cultures is a left wing agenda, I call foul.

No idea how you picked that up.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I note you've shifted the goalposts from destroyed to changed, and did not bother to check on the absolute numbers of British people in London.

What's this? The pie chart doesn't help your argument so change the rhetorical goalpost from percentage to absolute numbers.

It went down after the peak in 2012 and now it is going up again. Brexit didn't have much effect apparently, higher prices did.

Good to hear someone not blaming Brexit.

 

[Farm Boy]

Examples have to be comparable. No?

They are. Scale is scale. Badges, flags, force. Whether they flap or shine.

 

[Gorbles]

They are. Scale is scale. Badges, flags, force. Whether they flap or shine.

So just to be clear: your point is that the historic destruction of the indigenous peoples of Northern America* is comparable to what is meant by people in this thread when they're talking about a "loss of culture" in modern, Western, developed nations?

*that is what you were referring to with this, right?

The country wasn't empty when we "filled" it. Maybe pointing at hwhite people will help make the point in a way we're comfortable with.

Like, I'm just struggling trying to parse whether you're arguing the general technicality, or if there's something else I'm missing.

 

[Senethro]

What's this? The pie chart doesn't help your argument so change the rhetorical goalpost from percentage to absolute numbers

The discussion was about destruction, with a graph implying a final condition, but no explanation. Yes, absolute numbers are relevant in assessing if something has been destroyed.

Of course, if you understood akkas argument well enough to say I'm not addressing it, perhaps you should state it more clearly!

 

[Zardnaar]

So just to be clear: your point is that the historic destruction of the indigenous peoples of Northern America* is comparable to what is meant by people in this thread when they're talking about a "loss of culture" in modern, Western, developed nations?

*that is what you were referring to with this, right?

Like, I'm just struggling trying to parse whether you're arguing the general technicality, or if there's something else I'm missing.

25% here immigrants 40% in Auckland.

Most of the world is conservative. Some traditional red (labour not GoP) seats gave flipped blue.

Note here it's the right that like immigration more. Labour exploitation and they tend to vote right due to cultural or economic reasons (you generally have to be muddle class or better to migrate here).

Online they push the white people are racist angle in reality they're the glue holding things togather. That's because they will socialize with, employ or date pretty much anyone. Polynesian verbally abuse Asians, Asians generally won't socialize with or date the Polynesians.

 

[Gorbles]

25% here immigrants 40% in Auckland.

Most of the world is conservative. Some traditional red (labour not GoP) seats gave flipped blue.

Note here it's the right that like immigration more. Labour exploitation and they tend to vote right due to cultural or economic reasons (you generally have to be muddle class or better to migrate here).

Online they push the white people are racist angle in reality they're the glue holding things togather. That's because they will socialize with, employ or date pretty much anyone.

What on earth does this have to do with anything I posted?

 

[Zardnaar]

What on earth does this have to do with anything I posted?

People were talking about replacement theory and immigration rates aren't that high.

Also pointing out some political flow on effects from high immigration rates.

All sorts social and political flow on effects.

 

[Farm Boy]

Of course cultures can be lost by immigration.

So just to be clear: your point is that the historic destruction of the indigenous peoples of Northern America* is comparable to what is meant by people in this thread when they're talking about a "loss of culture" in modern, Western, developed nations?

*that is what you were referring to with this, right?

Like, I'm just struggling trying to parse whether you're arguing the general technicality, or if there's something else I'm missing.

I led with it.

Intensity varies. You could probably apply intersectionality if you want to delve a small sample.

 

[Gorbles]

I led with it.

Intensity varies. You could probably apply intersectionality if you want to delve a small sample.

A simple yes or no will do. I referred back to the post already, I'm just looking for clarity.

People were talking about replacement theory and immigration rates aren't that high.

Also pointing out some political flow on effects from high immigration rates.

All sorts social and political flow on effects.

Nothing to do with what I was talking about then. Alrighty

 

[Farm Boy]

Is not yes or no. We aren't binary!

 

[Gorbles]

Is not yes or no. We aren't binary.

Comparable isn't a binary; it's a range.

I'm trying to understand. Do you think everything the colonists did is an appropriate example r.e. the cultural impact of modern immigration?

To not make it a leading question, because that isn't the aim here: I think that's very excessive!

 

[Farm Boy]

As said, it's a near maximal example to argue the concept exists well within the racial narratives I think will be accepted. Now this isn't a unique event. History is filled with such events.

Now, if it's a continuum, it's the intensity that varies. People are not different now somehow.

So how does it work? People do indeed move in, and there is a tolerance for absorption. A rate at which new absorbs into old and old into new before the absorption slows and atomization becomes dominant. Like little forts. And forts, unless existing in scarcity such that waste is catastrophic or under mutually understood accord... they fight. And when they have more leisure and resources... they fight more.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The discussion was about destruction, with a graph implying a final condition, but no explanation. Yes, absolute numbers are relevant in assessing if something has been destroyed.

Absolute numbers can be misleading.

An island chain with a few thousands may hold on to their own culture while a larger number in a very large city are less likely to do so.

I really don't see anything wrong with referring to the percentage pie charts.

 

[Gorbles]

As said, it's a near maximal example to argue the concept exists well within the racial narratives I think will be accepted. Now this isn't a unique event. History is filled with such events.

Now, if it's a continuum, it's the intensity that varies. People are not different now somehow.

So how does it work? People do indeed move in, and there is a tolerance for absorption. A rate at which new absorbs into old and old into new before the absorption slows and atomization becomes dominant. Like little forts. And forts, unless existing in scarcity such that waste is catastrophic or under mutually understood accord... they fight. And when they have more leisure and resources... they fight more.

Except it's a nonsense example of imperialist force vs. modern-day immigration. You thinking you need to blame "white folk" to sell the point seems to underscore a further misunderstanding.

Ignoring all of that, for numerous reasons, I get you have a theory, but it's just your theory. It still comes back to the problem of evidence. It comes back to in-group and out-group theory, and how we're good enough at that without any external intervention.

"but that's exactly it, more is worse" doesn't absolve us of the root fact that it's a pre-existing problem. You're a Biblical man, there's a story for that. Cain and Abel doesn't mean that every person should be by themselves forever? Or is that the lesson you learned from that?

Because some are using the principle (including the religious angle) to say "some" people should be excluded and not others. And yet, you can't get much closer than siblings. This isn't me trying a gotcha. I don't talk religion much as an atheist. But I don't deride it much either.

 

[Farm Boy]

More is not always worse.

Derailed there.

There needs to be accord. With accord, the tolerance rises.

Theory tho? Really? Would I need to replace "cultural forts fight" the metaphor with "class struggle" or "racial struggle" or "immigrant discrimination" to translate it accurately?

 

[Gorbles]

More is not always worse.

Derailed there.

"killed swathes people explicitly to take their land" is worse than "living down the street from an Asian family", but I keep worrying if I type it that plainly someone might take offense. And that's genuinely not what I'm going for, it just seems bizarre to stick with the comparison that strongly.

I get that you think it seems to exist on the same axis, I'm saying it very much doesn't. If you think it does, we need to roll back from the abstract and into something more concrete (and ideally modern-day, not however many centuries ago).