11–20 of 47 posts
If you’re a refugee though this doesn’t apply obviously.
The example of uk losing a lot of European “immigrants” suggest immigration is valuable to society.
There is an anecdote that is often used in India about how the Parsis (Zoroastrians who escaped the Islamic conquest of Persia) came to India and assimilated into the society. When a group of Parsis landed in Gujarat (Western India), the local chieftain posed a question to the leader of the group in the form of a glass of milk. The leader responded by adding a spoon of sugar to the glass and stirring the contents. Th…
[flagged]
In a similar fashion to Covid being a "minor" pandemic by historical / black death standards, being a dry run to see the mass discipline of modern society (it UTTERLY failed).
The world does not have the current capacity to handle mass population migrations of possibly a billion people that global warming will likely bring. The next century will bring continued technological development, but ultimately the spiraling environmental problems and reduction of natural resources/reserves will squeeze the population.
Perhaps lower fecundity of the world population in general is explained by mass economic development and leisure economy distractions. Or maybe it is the economic and technological squeeze being placed on everyone that is doing it.
Anyway, a wise man once taught me that wars over resource scarcity (e.g. the Sudan civil war was mostly about water) break down on ethnic lines, or barring that, religious lines (kind of the same thing historically).
Really this xenophobia is that expression in a "modern" democracy. Four decades of war on the middle class by the elites in America have seen steady ratcheting of less and less thinly veiled racism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I don’t think non-assimilation is limited to people of just one specific religious background. To state the problem is X when factors such as education, household income and circumstances of migration likely have a much higher correlation seem to indicate a sweeping generalization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm interested to hear alternatives. The only one I've ever heard is that countries should promote fertility amongst the existing citizenry, and that has a lot of opposition from feminists for obvious reasons.
> a lot of opposition from feminists for obvious reasons They oppose financial aid to young families, flexible working hours, and the promotion of living in multigenerational/extended family homes, where relatives help care for children, and free schooling/kindergartens? There are many countries, past and present, with above-replacement fertility, so this is nothing but pretend-helplessness. Israel, for example, is a…
>shows there is no simple linear link between gender equality and fertility
There is: https://i.imgur.com/SkLQBlv.jpg
I suppose we could erect pillories and publicly shame secret xenophobes, and take away their children to "limit their opportunity to socialize a new generation to be intolerant."
I'm speechless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
30,000 years worth of missing genetic immunity to essentially every disease imaginable wiped out native populations in the Americas and precipitated the collapse of civilizations there, actually.
That's irrelevant. The point of the story, if you missed it, is that Europeans were not interested in adopting the Native American way of life and assimilating. Cortez didn't arrive in Mexico and swear loyalty to the local king, and adopt their religion
Europe and its institutions failing to incorporate wildly conservative religious citizens has a lot more historicity than attributing “immigration” to the implication of native tribes in a post-apocalyptic pre-USA (it’s never Mexico or Peru) being culturally, physically, and biologically colonized.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's irrelevant. The point of the story, if you missed it, is that Europeans were not interested in adopting the Native American way of life and assimilating. Cortez didn't arrive in Mexico and swear loyalty to the local king, and adopt their religion
Cortes’s expedition of literal conquerors arrived by fighting for their lives the moment they met a state, let alone an empire. Europe and its institutions failing to incorporate wildly conservative religious citizens has a lot more historicity than attributing “immigration” to the implication of native tribes in a post-apocalyptic pre-USA (it’s never Mexico or Peru) being culturally, physically, and biologically col…
I don't like the tactic of claiming that someone who opposes your ideas has some sort of phobia.
