Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 159 posts

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#131

Post by array_key_first »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #107
fhkatari wrote: post #30

I want to share a couple of stories of immigration. 1. Personal. In the aftermath of 9/11, a simple switch from F1 Student Visa to H1 work visa became a perfect Kafkaesque nightmare. The consulate denied the visa without giving a reason. After two months of non-response, my company reached out to the congressman's office. Apparently, the consulate wanted a copy of my transcript and they reached out to my university,…

Imagine launching $75 billion dollar war on drugs where you didn't arrest drug dealers, only users. Yet the party of law and order and their supporters somehow aren't demanding these large scale abusers of employment law, and encouragers of illegal immigration be included in enforcement action. Really makes it look about racism more than smart/intentional/traditional law enforcement.

The right requires the machine in order to maintain their propaganda about bringing down the machine. They don't want to get rid of drugs, or undocumented people. They want to take undocumented people one-by-one off the street, so there's a constant "need" to continuously ramp up authoritarism.

The end of undocumented immigration would spell disaster for the Republicans, and they know that. For many red states, it would be literal economic disaster, even if we look past the messaging.

So it's flashy non-solution after flashy non-solution.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#132

Post by array_key_first »

roenxi wrote: post #60
bubblethink wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard this argument going back to Milton Friedman, but the immigration discourse these days is quite detached from any economic concerns. Forget impoverished people; there is rabid opposition to pretty much all immigration including, for example, investor or employment categories. It's a lot more tribal than rational.

Sure. But hypothetically, if we pretend people are rational for a few minutes here, how does the Ellis Island idea interact with a functional welfare system?

I would imagine more young, ambitious working age adults would help the welfare system, not hurt it.

If you look globally at countries which have issues with their large social services, they're almost all mostly homogeneous and declining in population, especially among the young. Which makes sense if you sit back and think about what social services are typically offered and where the money comes from.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#133

Post by array_key_first »

kreetx wrote: post #97
Ar-Curunir wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it reads like an explanation of the pain-in-the-ass called immigrating to the US.

In context of current events it really doesn't. Also, perhaps the pain is deliberate as to limit the inflow? Again, vote into office people who do it the way you want and don't try to rip law apart when you're the minority.

It's a bit rich to be talking about ripping the law apart when we have an authoritarian in office and regular citizens are being executed on the streets.

Even if you think ICE is the answer, which frankly it's not and even a second of introspection will reveal this, you cannot just pretend that the current situation is desirable.

The undeniable reality is that this administration has absolutely no intention of ending illegal immigration. None. They intend to expand the police state, shut down dissent, and bring the US into a fascist state.

You want to end illegal immigration? Fine. Just start locking up executives who hire undocumented people. It's easy, about 1000x easier than ICE, and much, MUCH less expensive.

Will the Republicans ever propose anything even close to this? No. Because the reality is that that would immediately implode the economy of most red states, and they can't do that to their constituency. I mean, the red states that don't already have a shit economy.

Besides, you cant rage against the machine if you destroy the machine. They NEED illegal immigration for their fascist wet dream. Without that justification for surveillance and violence, they have nothing left.

Look, at the end of the day the only thing keeping states like Georgia from going under, besides the welfare of more economically successful blue states, is a steady supply of cheap labor willing to do dirty work. Even Texas, for Christ's sake, is only economically successful because of, like, 3 blue little dots. They're like Atlas carrying the economy of Texas on their shoulders. Outside of that it's... you guessed it, cheap labor doing dirty work!

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#134

Post by donkeybeer »

eudamoniac wrote: post #90
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With recent legislation here in Australia Are you of Aboriginal extraction? Otherwise, I'm not sure an ethnic homeland for you would be Australia, right? This stuff is so weird, as basically all humans migrated to wherever they are now. Like, I'm pretty sure that I have Celtic, Norman, Viking and other ancestors, despite my official ancestry being Irish (and all of my last 3-4 generations being born in Ireland). Is…

Yes it is culture. The desire for an ethnostate is a proxy desire for a monoculture, somewhat easier to implement because it's easier to see someone is white than to see their behavior patterns. There are also studies that show most people have subconscious tension among other races even from the same culture, though. But the outright desire for an ethnostate or a monoculture are both politically untenable in the Wes…

I absolutely don't feel comfort based on common ethnicity. I find comfort more or less in any democratic, capitalist liberal society and I absolutely hate life in anything not this even if it may be my race people or anyone else.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#135

Post by donkeybeer »

eudamoniac wrote: post #90
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With recent legislation here in Australia Are you of Aboriginal extraction? Otherwise, I'm not sure an ethnic homeland for you would be Australia, right? This stuff is so weird, as basically all humans migrated to wherever they are now. Like, I'm pretty sure that I have Celtic, Norman, Viking and other ancestors, despite my official ancestry being Irish (and all of my last 3-4 generations being born in Ireland). Is…

Yes it is culture. The desire for an ethnostate is a proxy desire for a monoculture, somewhat easier to implement because it's easier to see someone is white than to see their behavior patterns. There are also studies that show most people have subconscious tension among other races even from the same culture, though. But the outright desire for an ethnostate or a monoculture are both politically untenable in the Wes…

Whites visiting scandinavianis a funny one, because today we treat all white people as one race but unless that man was of origin from scandinavia it's most probable its the governance system and culture he likes not a racial kinship.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#136

Post by donkeybeer »

hikkerl wrote: post #127
LexiMax wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Countries have the right to cultivate this feeling among their citizens. I disagree, because what seems to always be the logical next step is "My monoculture is superior, and deserves dominion above your monoculture, which deserves eradication. And oh by the way, if you don't like our monoculture and try to escape it, we'll invade that place too." That's kind of what the "mono" in monoculture implies. Multicultural…

[flagged]

Why do you feel among all the cultures there, you know which one among them would will out. I see no point in being among my race if it's a communist or fascist country. The race has already failed me then. Hell give me aliens from mars and I'd gladly live among them if they are liberal democratic and capitalistic. To me these three principles are paramount, the identity of the agents executing them is irrelevant.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#137

Post by donkeybeer »

hikkerl wrote: post #127
LexiMax wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Countries have the right to cultivate this feeling among their citizens. I disagree, because what seems to always be the logical next step is "My monoculture is superior, and deserves dominion above your monoculture, which deserves eradication. And oh by the way, if you don't like our monoculture and try to escape it, we'll invade that place too." That's kind of what the "mono" in monoculture implies. Multicultural…

[flagged]

Suppose a future world where all the world, every country is thoroughly mixed up by today's racial standards. There is no "white" country, no "chinese" country, no "black" country. How do you think race wars would be organized, "Lets kill all the [racist slur] bastards of this country" wait what, there's no easy country to point to, already making race war quite difficult. Or do you like having race wars? Again, I fail to see what exactly is the "loss" or "gain" of a race existing or not? What has it ever given us? It's like religion and nationalism, very little benefits and pure destruction and waste of human life in the balance of history.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#138

Post by donkeybeer »

hikkerl wrote: post #127
LexiMax wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Countries have the right to cultivate this feeling among their citizens. I disagree, because what seems to always be the logical next step is "My monoculture is superior, and deserves dominion above your monoculture, which deserves eradication. And oh by the way, if you don't like our monoculture and try to escape it, we'll invade that place too." That's kind of what the "mono" in monoculture implies. Multicultural…

[flagged]

If you do believe in anti-democratic system of governance, then I propose we force every person to marry a person of a different race and forcibly make every locality thoroughly mixed up using information theoretic entropy definitions. Why not, why's mine better or worse than your idea of anti-democratic rule?

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#139

Post by donkeybeer »

hikkerl wrote: post #127
LexiMax wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Countries have the right to cultivate this feeling among their citizens. I disagree, because what seems to always be the logical next step is "My monoculture is superior, and deserves dominion above your monoculture, which deserves eradication. And oh by the way, if you don't like our monoculture and try to escape it, we'll invade that place too." That's kind of what the "mono" in monoculture implies. Multicultural…

[flagged]

I suppose you will then say, you fear your country would become "Muslim" or insert whatever religion you hate. But Muslim is an idea it's not a race. A religion can convert a country without even a single marriage or mixup because it's an idea, so tell me again how do you feel you are safe from a foreign religion just because your "race" is different? And the nice thing is the arabs or whatever race has you wetting your bed will also have had thoroughly had to mix up with the locals by that point, already rendering them "impure". And I have you covered with a great anti-democratic solution for that: forcible state mandated atheism.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#140

Post by donkeybeer »

eudamoniac wrote: post #112
LexiMax wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you believe that a hypothetical American balkanization would go any better than...say...what happened in the balkans proper?

I don't necessarily think it would. But what makes you think that a hypothetical status quo will go any better than what happened in the Roman empire? There are no great options imo.

What is the Roman Empire worse than in your mind? It lasted centuries, its literally perhaps the longest running in history. If it's the fate of the Roman Empire we have to face, then I can't wish for anything better. You can of course say it slid into dictatorship, now prove it was due to the race admixture. Anyone can read anything into the transition and fall of the Roman Empire.
Post reply on HN