General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf you're an American citizen of European ancestry and opposed to immigration, you're a hypocrite
It's that simple. You wouldn't be here without immigration from there to here.
Not saying or suggesting it's okay to be anti immigration if you aren't of European descent, but the European case is particularly hypocritical.
(And I am of European ancestry, so I'm not calling names, just pointing out the obvious)
Llewlladdwr
(2,165 posts)How can decisions made by people in 1884 possibly have any binding hold on my opinions regarding immigration in 2015?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)I know MANY Italian-Americans who were 2nd generation in the 80s ... Granny was from the old country, some of the parents brought as infants, or born here ... their kids were the first born on US soil.
But they were European. So its ok.
Kurska
(5,739 posts)1. All the immigrants from everywhere in unlimited numbers.
and
2. No immigrants from anywhere.
People have a right to decide what they support.
Everyone's ancestors have immigrated from somewhere else at some point. Human populations move, that is just what they do. That isn't a uniquely European phenomenon.
HFRN
(1,469 posts)and 'racism'
Marr
(20,317 posts)Not that I'm anti-immigration, but it's about having a sound national policy. That's something to be determined year by year, according to what makes sense at any given time.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Bush tried it.
Obama tried it.
Congress stops it.
dumbcat
(2,120 posts)Whatever my ancestors that immigrated to this country in 1710 did, or thought, has absolutely no bearing on my thoughts and/or opinions.
And for the record, I am not opposed to immigration, only illegal immigration.
Your post is stupid (not you, your post.) (That's an opinion.)
cali
(114,904 posts)But beyond that, I think you have to define immigration.
WestCoastLib
(442 posts)It's that simple. You have ancestors that committed murder.
ETA: I am not, in any way, opposed to immigration. I am opposed to illogical arguments.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)"We got here, so the rest of you can f---k off!"
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)However, that does not mean we cannot hold certain opinions.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)We could have humanity's great homecoming party!
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Neanderthal and Devisonians. Probably, based on genetic timing. We are finally untying that knot.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I find it more than a bit odd, but we are all entitled to our opinions.
LexVegas
(6,094 posts)CreekDog
(46,192 posts)for example, when my family came over, there were effectively no laws regarding immigration, so it was all legal, so to speak.
now that there are laws, many people whose ancestors came over as mine did, are suddenly very, very, very against illegal immigration of any kind and often against the amount of legal immigration currently allowed.
even if there's justification for the limitations, let's face it, anybody who supports those limitations when the reason they are here is because there weren't when their ancestors came here...that's hypocritical, no two ways about it.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)I have Scottish, English, and possibly German ancestors who were here by the 18th century. No "papers" back then.
Facility Inspector
(615 posts)all they had to do was not have TB.
They had complete freedom to communicate in their native tongues back then.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Caught it in the hospital when he blew himself up making bombs in 1916.
I have the same name. TSA stops me less nowadays, but my father in law has been on various state dept. shit lists since he shares a hometown and name as a lot of ISI dudes. Traveling as a family means extra time for everyone...
pampango
(24,692 posts)in the 1850's then the Chinese Exclusion Act in the 1880's then the Harding and Coolidge restrictive immigration laws in the 1920's. Only in the 1960's under JFK and LBJ did immigration really open up.
Basically there has been a segment of the population that has felt there were "too many immigrants" since the country was founded. The sentiment always seems to be "past immigration was good. (Otherwise, I wouldn't be here.) But now (1820, 1920, 2015) there are too many immigrants. They are competing for jobs and not speaking English."
Shandris
(3,447 posts)I know they are about unlawful immigration, but I haven't heard anyone locally complain about immigrants as a group, and 'local' of course includes my sizable family of Republicans.
pampango
(24,692 posts)as Democratic dupes, as the "diversity" that imperils white culture and control. Hence the plethora of restrictive immigration laws under republicans going back 130 years.
And many on the right have always viewed immigrants this way, going back at least 200 years, even when all immigration was "legal".
Some on the right have initially concentrated their wrath on "illegal" immigrants in the same way that the concentrated on "welfare queens" as the opening move in discrediting, and later defunding the safety net. If you talk down "illegal immigrants" and "welfare queens" for long enough, it becomes easier to attack immigration and the safety net in general than if you had targeted them immediately and been written off as a right wing crackpot.
Some conservatives seem to have a long term strategy for accomplishing policy goals which is, unfortunately, often quite effective.
Shandris
(3,447 posts)...but I have been accused of being a bit on the naive side more than once, so I'll acknowledge you may well be right. For what it's worth, not everyone on the right is like that as I wasn't raised that way. It's repulsive that there are people who are.
As for the long term policy goals, yeah, they did have some that worked pretty well (sadly), but there is plenty of pushback these days. There'd be more if we can find the decent among the right and work with them (because there are some whether people like to admit it or not, just not among their leaders), but right now that's still a ways off I fear. I hope they don't wait too much longer though, I'd like to see some freedom to move in the world before I die.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)CTyankee
(63,912 posts)I have no idea whether he was legal or not. On my father's side, his grandfather immigrated from Wales...again, no record of him being legal. For all I know, they snuck in...
Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)Illegal vs. legal immigration.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I don't think the Tuscarora tribal nations, or the Penobscot, or the Creek thought the immigration of the colonists was legal.
Broad brush, part II.
Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)Syzygy321
(583 posts)when sea levels fell and belugas were briefly unable to continue working as border guards on the northeast coast of Siberia. So by OP's logic they would have been hypocrites to object to any subseuent stream of newcomers.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)If you enter the country illegally or overstay your visa, you are breaking the law. My great-grandparents were immigrants, but they didn't break the law to come here.
There is no nation on Earth that just lets you walk in, set up shop, and stay as long as you want legally. It just doesn't work that way. Every country has a immigration process. You have to go through that process or you are breaking the law.
Those people who are against ALL forms of immigration are likely in a very small minority.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)ways that people enter the US and start to acquire permanent residence.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)That's the government's fault for not policing those companies.
No doubt there is corruption involved in that.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)davidn3600
(6,342 posts)If you really believe companies are not taking advantage of the H1B visa program to reduce labor costs, you are blind.
That's not fear-mongering against immigrants... it's reality. Disney just did it earlier this year. They even forced American workers to train their foreign replacements. Google it.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I'll agree the law is badly written, but the requirement is that it is within a range the Department of Labor considers prevailing for the region.
What Disney did was that they stopped employing IT people internally altogether, and hired a contracting company to provide the IT staff. This is something companies do all the time. It also means no job was legally "replaced"; Disney has fewer jobs now and the contracting company has more (I agree: now, write a law that manages to actually make that illegal). This contracting company is considered "H-1B dependent" legally, because more than IIRC 22% of its employees are H-1Bs, so it must offer any position to any qualified US citizen. (Department of Labor is who checks that; no idea if they checked in this case, but companies do get caught and lose their visas.) This staffing company brought over a bunch of H-1Bs from India at wages that the Labor Department considered within the prevailing range for Florida. (Disney was paying well above that range, which is why this ended up saving Disney money.) When the visa applicants were being adjudicated, the Department of State checked their employment contracts (the falsification of these is the most common form of H-1B fraud) and verified that the compensation met the Department of Labor's "prevailing wage" requirements (in addition to the normal checks like having ties to India to prevent absconding). On arrival, this visa was validated by ICE in addition to whatever other security screens they do (ICE is completely opaque to me; I at least know something about State and Labor).
So, in your opinion, what step here was the regulatory failure?
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Because I believe H-1B's should be allowed to immigrate here. The problem for so many is when they come here, get experience and education, and then leave. But they only leave because of stringent immigration policy. They should be allowed to stay and build a life here.
Of course, if they stayed, they'd "lower wages" even more, so really, the wage issue is a right wing issue at its core. People want their cake and want to eat it too.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)But conversion isn't as uncommon as people seem to think; I think it's up to about 20% now converting to LPR status.
People want their cake and want to eat it too.
Boy, don't they?
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)H1-B employment is tied directly to education. I believe Brookings had an article on it but I can't find it.
If you're against H1-B's you shouldn't be all "fuck visa's!" You should be "education funding, NOW!"
I hate the anti-immigration sentiment that this topic conjures. And it's clear that it's a topic that Trump thinks he can gain grounds on, even if it's almost completely rhetorical (the actual numbers are not that bad).
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)although to be fair, most DUers are horrified by anti immigrant sentiment here or elsewhere.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)...if your opposition is based on resource capacity and economic impact, rather than cultural nativism.
More people means more labor competing for jobs; if you believe in infinite free immigration, are you prepared for the risk that salaries get bid down?
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)There are so many shades of Gray in the whole area of Immigration. The Pilgrims had prior approval from the King of England for their original colony plans. Since those were changed they filed a request to have the change allowed which the king did grant. Granted nobody consulted the residents of Mass on this, but there were documented procedures followed. IIRC Many more people came with letters of Recommendation etc. which were presented to Colony officials upon arrival. In subsequent centuries many an immigrant was quarantined on places like Islands off New York and Boston before being processed thru Immigration. Many with health conditions were sent back home.
What should we be doing on the southern boarder today? Neither excluding everyone nor turning a blind eye to everyone. Nobody likes the thought of an Ellis Island being setup at Nogales or other border crossing station. But we really should do some basic health checks and document everyone who does come here. And that probably means there will be a line at times and maybe some people will have to wait a bit before they can get in.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)and I'm not opposed to immigration, thanks.
I'm not sure what prompted this; I could point out a whole bunch of things I see on DU these days that strikes me as hypocritical, and immigration didn't even make that list.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)But I also think there's a WHOLE lot of land that should be handed back to the original Native Americans, even if it means eminent domaining various folks and paying them market value for their current properties. Starting with the Black Hills.
Syzygy321
(583 posts)immigration. No one says that people of the world should freeze where they are and put not one toe across US borders, ever.
That would be one extreme. The other extreme: let's offer free one-way airfare to Vegas to all 7 billion people of the world, with a US passport waiting on arrival - because whoever wants to come should be free to come, immediately.
Everyone who isn't insane wants something in between.
CajunBlazer
(5,648 posts)My ancestors arrived on the North American continent before there were any laws governing immigration and were kicked out of Nova Scotia before the US became a country. The vast majority of them were resettled in the territories that would ultimately make up this country long before they came under US control. But how I came to be born here is irreverent to the current immigration discussion.
Every generation of Americans has to decide what rules are to govern immigration for the time and circumstances in which they live. In some periods sticker immigration policies may be best for the country, in others allowing more immigration may be desirable.
I used to be against the illegal immigrates from South of our borders because they entered the country illegally. However, I have come to understand those people are here in their current state because of our failure as a country to set up legal immigration policies that actually work.
In recent years we have put a premium on allowing in the best and the brightest from other countries, those who would most contribute to our country's economic well being. We also prioritized the entry of political refuges. What we have paid little or no attention to are those potential immigrates who are willing and able to do the jobs that most Americans don't want fill.
The vast majority of the 11 million illegal immigrates who are old enough to work are employed and somehow earning a living or they would not be here. I'm sure they would rather be unemployed in their native countries than be unemployed here.
For many years our immigration laws have virtually ignored a fundamental economic principal - unemployed people will flow to where jobs they can do are available. You can't condemn people for attempting to better themselves and provide for their families. Their crime is little worst than stealing food for one's family before allowing them to starve. However, we can blame our politicians for failing to set up workable work visa system to fill the jobs which were going unfilled and we can also blame ourselves for electing them. I also have a problem with companies which employ illegal workers instead of willing Americans because they can exploit their illegal status by paying much lower wages than they would have to pay otherwise.
Regardless of who is to blame, there are at least 11 million illegal immigrate in this country and regardless what lies are being told by Republican clowns running for President, there is no way we are going to manage to deport all of these people, many of which have children who are American citizens. Just catching and deporting the very small percentage of that populations who are bad actors will be difficult enough.
Therefore, we are going have to find some way of legalizing the presence of most of these people, whether or not that includes a pathway to citizenship or not. We are also going to have to find a way to avoid having to deal with an near identical situation every 20 or 3o years. That path forward has to include to a work visa plan to fill otherwise unfillable jobs at the bottom of our economic ladder.
The bottom line is we need to quit ducking this problem and solve it with responsible legislation and the sooner the better. That means we have to elect people who will solve these problems in a pragmatic manner instead of filling the airways with BS rhetoric.
NCjack
(10,279 posts)you are opposed to immigration, you are a huge asshat.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)If you're an American, period, your ancestors immigrated here. Unless, of course, one can show proof that human beings originated in this hemisphere and not in Africa.
Throd
(7,208 posts)RebelOne
(30,947 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)if you oppose "open borders"?
Do you favor an "open border" for the US?
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,339 posts)Well, probably not. But my dad said all the old timers "had a price on me head"
Syzygy321
(583 posts)iandhr
(6,852 posts)But the rhetoric used against latino immigrants isn't new.
Similar stuff was said about the Irish, Italians, Jews etc.
Texasgal
(17,047 posts)Immigration. Illegal is not good and works against us.
I have a friend from India that is a trained specialty RN. She has waited YEARS to become legal and has so much to offer all of us. Why she should have to wait years and become in fear of being deported is ridiculous to me. Her work visa is getting ready to run out. She is in fear!
Make the process easier, and make it easier to become a citizen. Illegals are often exploited and left to fend for themselves. The process is daunting and it needs to be changed. Illegals have a hard existence here. It's horrible and not easy.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)It is hypocritical.
You might bristle at the term, but that's just the way it is.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)We didn't care. In time, Europeans scolded them for not 'speaking English.'
And Africans were not volunteers. I wonder if the anti-immigrant people remember that. As long as people work for nothing, it's all cool, huh.
Opinions on immigration are irrelevant. It's going to happen as predicted in the 1970s with climate change models.
Masses of people will travel to escape famine, warfare and lack of water. Borders will not stop them. This is world wide and it's not going to end.
Anti-immigrant people are attempting to hold a moment in time and keep it there, immovable. Not going to work. Get ready.
DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)came over from germany on the boat around 1890. i think that's where they met.
i have no problem with immigration. actually i don't have much of a problem with illegal immigration. if i lived in mexico under some of the conditions these people live i would try to cross the border too.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Some of the quotas in place are ridiculous. We're at a 1:1 population replacement ratio. This has proven to be detrimental to a lot of countries. We need to accept that White Euro-Decedents aren't the end all of the American spectrum and need to relax immigration policy to allow anyone of all stripes to come here.
Native American and European ancestry.....along with a dash of a couple of others.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)I don't think they need any more breaks, and the 99% don't need any more 8-balls to be behind.
It's irresponsible to allow large numbers of people to flood in when we're not taking care of the people we already have -- who ARE here legally.
Call that any name you want.