I really liked my neighbour until she said this

[neighbourhoodwatch]

I've recently moved to a new area and was talking to my neighbour, who I really like.

Somehow the conversation went to GPs and how you can never get appointments and basically have to beg to be seen nowadays.

She was saying how it didn't used for be that way... before...

She then went on to say that it's because of all the immigrants that have come into this country and how our country is too small to hold all these people.

She also talked about the illegals coming in on boats etc and how terrible it is.

I am immigrant. I didn't come on a boat and I have a good job etc. But essentially I came to this country. I've never claimed benefits or anything like that. I'm on a high salary etc and studied here etc etc. So, I'm well established. Essentially whenever people say stuff like that, alarm bells start ringing for me.

Am I seeing it too black and white ? It's just difficult when someone says stuff like this to someone who also came here..... as an immigrant...

you’ve completely lost me? I think they should apply for asylum in France.

You realize that this is a kind of imperialism, if you take it to it's logical conclusion?

The end result is that the people who live in a place become relatively disempowered, in terms of voting, shaping their communities, and so on.

You, because of your experience of being rootless, may not value stable communities, close connection with neighbours and family, of living in the same community as your parents or indeed your ancestors, of a strong sense of place. Or a strong cultural environment. But other people do value those things and are entitled to that way of life.

It's really interesting that people who speak this way would typically never do so if they were talking about gentrifying some kind of community they have perceived as marginalized. They would not think, gee, these Amazonians have lived here for generations in a particular way of life, but I think I and others like me should be able to come in and change the nature of their culture, use the local resources, shape the economy and public life.

Something worth realizing is that this is not a historical norm.

Apart from things like mass invasions of the Saxons, to a large extent net immigration until the second half of the 20th century was very low. It's not an historic norm at all.

And where we do see these mass movements historically, whether it is due to land pressures or war or whatever, they have been seriously destabilizing. Whether in the UK or elsewhere. The UK has been very able over the centuries to integrate these people, ultimately, into a kind of unity, and that is in part perhaps why they are relatively open to immigrant communities now, as opposed to countries like Japan. The British tend to have a confidence that they can absorb new people and their culture while retaining their own culture and connection to place.

But it's a mistake to think that mass immigration was not without serious effects on the population when it did occur, or that it happened year on year without let up.

Immigration does benefit the country when educated people like the OP come here to work. I know a few. However I also know far more immigrants who are very nice people but live in council houses.

Really good post MangyInseam. It's exactly this.

She's a racist, simple as that. I would stay away.

Casperroonie, Why does noticing the impact of mass immigration make her a racist? Did you put any thought into to what you were going to write before posting?

@Freedomfighters of course she/he didn't. They only parrot what they've been told to.

The British tend to have a confidence that they can absorb new people and their culture while retaining their own culture and connection to place.

Anyone can be British now apparently.

The accusation of racism provides a justification for what they're doing, and what other people are doing. Its hideous behaviour.

@MangyInseam I am still unsure what this 'mass' uncontrolled immigration is ?

Are we talking about the people arriving on inflateables from across the channel who claim asylum when they reach the UK ?
Are we talking about people who took advantage of freedom of movement prior to the referendum ?
Are we talking about people who have come here legally from various countries to study, work or join family ?
Are we talking about Afghans and Ukrainians ?

Which one of these constitutes mass immigration ? which constitutes the biggest figure in the overall immigration figures ?

yes so do I , my response was directed at the poster before you who said that terrigying things go on in the camps in france inferring that the people in them were not sage there - sorry if that was not clear

clearly i cant type today !

People have been mass immigrating to and from this country since the middle ages. Well over a thousand years ago came the Romans, then the Saxons, Angles, Jutes, then came the Danes and Norsemen. If you have a problem with immigration in 2022, you're a bit late to the party.

@TanyaZing and what did the Romans ever do for us !

They spread their Roman seeds all over the place!

I would think that if we are talking about how people feel about it, their experience of it, the weight is about the whole.

Most people are sympathetic to refugees so long as they feel they are legitimate, but even then, a scenario where you have a person who is homeless, who cannot access a GP in good time, they are going to be resentful, and maybe angry when they see outsiders given an apartment, put on a doctors list. When you have the state relying on getting trained people from other countries, so avoiding investing in training, or communities where the whole social network has been lost, and the community is full of strangers from anywhere, or people on the bottom whose wages have been depressed, or schools where kids are spending a lot of time and energy dealing with language issues - people will notice.

The idea that these problems are caused by under-investment is chicken-egg. Yes, to a point more investment would create more infrastructure capacity. But only to a point, and apart from that, it really is up to the people paying taxes to decide whether they want to spend endless amounts of tax dollars to increase services to serve large numbers of non-citizens. There will always be a line to be drawn and the "no borders" people see to be reluctant to delineate it.

Movement of labour has always been a serious issue for the working classes, why now all of a sudden it's not is mainly about what is good for the middle classes and an attempt to impose globalism on the population, which is in the end good for the rich. People who are most affected by having their communities changed and their economic life affected having a different perspective wasn't strange in the past and it shouldn't be now.

I wouldn't have said the Roman invasion went smoothly. Do you think the various Celtic tribes should have just invited them in?

I would think that if we are talking about how people feel about it, their experience of it, the weight is about the whole.

That doesn't really fly though, with the widespread 'not immigrants like you' comments though, does it? The concept of The Good Immigrant (who is liked, who is excused from the pejorative rhetoric, who contributes and does their share and is hence Allowed) also demands a counterpoint of The Bad Immigrant/the wrong kind of immigrant.

So who are the ones who are coming over here stealing our jobs/men/GP appointments and who are the ones contributing to society? Who gets to decide, and where is the line drawn? What sort of controls would actually be enough for people to stop blaming immigration for the impact of pisspoor planning, management and investment decisions?

Brilliant post. Things aren’t black and white. We need to be open to other points of view to think critically, discuss and learn.

The main thing I’ve taken away from this thread is that so many are happy to dismiss anyone with a different point of view and call ‘racist’ and ‘bigot’ and avoid having the conversations that are uncomfortable but so needed.

I make a point of never discussing anything controversial with friends or neighbours. If I'm asked outright, I will say that I never make up my mind without knowing all the facts or learning more about the subject. All true but in essence, saying nothing.
Sex, religion, politics, war...ditto.
Saying the 'wrong' thing can alienate what were previously, good friends and those friends can talk. Some people ask without letting you know their own stance on the subject and you can be sure they will never tell you that they think the exact opposite.

Ha ha no it was probably me way too early and not engaging my brain

@DysonSphere
Your post of 19th @ 05:29.
A perfect beautifully phrased critique and I endorse every word.
I hope that you're in a position, socially or professionally, where your clear thinking and concise explanations on this and other subjects are heard and repeated more widely.
If the rest of your thinking is as rational and fair then I would certainly vote for you as an MP and even, dare I say it, PM. Unbiased clarity.
I doff my hat.

It's really interesting that people who speak this way would typically never do so if they were talking about gentrifying some kind of community they have perceived as marginalized. They would not think, gee, these Amazonians have lived here for generations in a particular way of life, but I think I and others like me should be able to come in and change the nature of their culture, use the local resources, shape the economy and public life.

This. Or think of Maoris, even

About the only good thing about Brexit is people like this voicing their bigoted opinions more freely and giving the rest of us a heads up to avoid them!