Everyone keeps talking "more babies. more immigration". what about "less old people" (this is a joke but I am curious if that has ever come up?)
What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
121–130 of 201 posts
Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#122Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why does ever single bleeding heart liberal globalist try and ignore the deep psychological truths about human tribalism? I'll bite. In the US, for one, every single person has an ancestor that thanked their lucky stars the locals didn't think the way that you are recommending we think today. Or an ancestor that suffered because the locals did think that way. We honor that heritage by paying it forward, lest we be…
You are forgetting the natives who royally massively got screwed. Perfect example why they should have done everything possible to stop migration.
Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea that Japan is a uniquely "homogeneous culture" is honestly a modern construct anyway. Japanese culture and language has been enormously influenced by colonial and migrant presence in the country, from Chinese to Dutch to British to American, and a zillion others. Just look at the language! I don't have the exact figure in front of me, but I remember when taking Japanese language courses that something like 3…
I was going to say, Japans history is one that was very... combative. They fought amongst themselves heavily for a long time.
Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#125Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#126You know, many eastern countries apparently intuitively think in cycles. The west tends to think linearly: "We're trending upwards, argh argh overpopulation, famine, death. We're trending downwards, argh argh population collapse, famine, death". Same with the perception of time. My country sees time as a line. I once had an interesting training where the instructor pointed this out. She went on to say that seeing tim…
I do find it funny that some folks treat this is like the complete end of Japan (or whatever) nation, like you said a straight line down. But eventually it will bottom out and potentially rebound a bit. It find on the way up or at the top, and it will be fine at the bottom once the trends return but the issue really is the pain of the phase shift.
Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#127They’ll find it easy to keep their homogenous culture and shared traditional values. Why would the solution to “our people aren’t having enough babies” be “we should import different people to have their babies here”? Why does ever single bleeding heart liberal globalist try and ignore the deep psychological truths about human tribalism? It’s not even a bad thing, but even if it was, it’s a fact.
>They’ll find it easy to keep their homogenous culture and shared traditional values. That idea is a fallacy. It has never been true. All of Europe was always a melting pot for people from everywhere. Over the centuries people kept moving, immigrating and emigrating. England.. Britons, Celts, Anglo-Saxxon, Norse, Normans (which were themselves originally immigrants). And my own country? Surnames from everywhere. 40%…
You literally posted an example of the opposite.
Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#128You know, many eastern countries apparently intuitively think in cycles. The west tends to think linearly: "We're trending upwards, argh argh overpopulation, famine, death. We're trending downwards, argh argh population collapse, famine, death". Same with the perception of time. My country sees time as a line. I once had an interesting training where the instructor pointed this out. She went on to say that seeing tim…
Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#129Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
The last migration of equivalent magnitude was the Anglo-Saxons 1500 years ago... Most people did not move around much at all. An average person would be born and die in the same village, or the same region. A handful of people travelled a lot, generally merchants, sailors, and such, but they were a pretty tiny percentage of the population compared to the people engaged in subsistence agriculture.
It only looks like that because you're looking over a relatively short timeframe. Start looking over more than a generation and things will look different. I just have to check my father's ancestry research to see that - his notes includes a lot of extra information not directly related to my forefathers, and yes people moved. That a lot of people move in, historically, an instant, is something that doesn't happen al…
And places become more boring if the have the same migrants as every other place, not less boring.