Genuine question re: immigration, not trying to be goady!

[questionsICantAskInRL]

This is a genuine question please don’t accuse me of trying to be goady or whatever the hell people say on mumsnet:

my question is countries like USA who literally took over the country from the natives therefore have no right being there, how can they talk about immigrants taking over their jobs, their country etc? Also the UK how can they talk about immigrants etc. when they invaded lots of countries with the British empire and took all the wealth and gems etc and killed thousands of people who opposed them then complain that the same countries try to come over to make their lives better.

thread title edited by MNHQ at OP's request.

A lot of it is just dressed up racism tbh. My mum is the daughter of a Polish immigrant, our whole family exists because of immigration and yet my parents still object to it. Funnily enough they object more to African immigrants than European ones, but it’s definitely due to culture and not the colour of their skin… 🙄

It can be more than one reason, no? It's the economic implications, the effects on social resources, the cultural change - and for some, it's also because they don't like people of other ethnicities/nationalities.

Oh gosh, I'd never thought of this. Maybe annhilate all white people as a solution, or maybe turn them into slaves first; I think there's a precedent for this. Maybe subjugate all UK Natives to regular beatings to pay for the sins of their ancestors?

Not sure what you're expecting OP? Do you?

@questionsICantAskInRL, we've edited your thread title now, as requested. Hope that helps.

I’ll bite… so we’re talking about the US, right?

Ok, let’s start with the colonization of what is now the US… who did that colonization? The US government? If you said yes go read some history and join when you’re done. Nat Geo…

Next… in your discussion did you clarify legal or illegal immigration…2/3rds of Americans support immigration . Legal immigration typically polls very well among Americans, a lot of people support controlled immigration. Source for the screenshot below (2020 data)

After that did find out the numbers of illegal immigrants crossing the border daily? Let’s just throw some numbers out there for fun… 2.4M in 2023 Last month 250K . For scale Your top 2 cities population wise are London -7.4K and Birmingham at ~2.6 depending on which source you use. So think about that… monthly 1/2 the population of your 10th largest city meanders over the border.

You had 52K illegal immigrants last year . The US get’s 5 times that number per month.

Let’s also be very clear that these numbers only include those how have contact with border patrol.

Now on to a few problems that this brings with it…

Key Facts:

• Encounters at the Southwest border (SWB) in FY2023 increased over 40% since FY2021, 4% compared to FY2022, and more than 100% compared to FY2019.
• Last month, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reported a 40% increase compared to September 2021 and 18% compared to September 2022.
• Since President Biden took office, there have been 7.5 million encounters nationwide and 6.2 million encounters at the Southwest border, in addition to 1.7 million known gotaways.
• In FY2023, 169 individuals whose names appear on the terrorist watchlist were stopped trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border between ports of entry. 18 were apprehended in September alone.
• So far in FY2023, CBP has arrested 35,433 aliens with criminal convictions or outstanding warrants nationwide, including 598 known gang members, 178 of those being MS-13 members.
• In FY2023, CBP, including Air and Marine Operations, has seized 27,293 pounds of fentanyl, coming across the Southwest border—enough to kill more than 6 billion people.

So to sum up… no, Americans didn’t do the colonization and stealing originally (in fairness we did keep it). A large percentage of Americans support legal immigration, but that support is waning due the crush of illegal immigrants pouring over the border daily.

@Southpoint @coldcallerbaiter Immigration is an emotive subject, but ultimately there has to be a distinction between legal and illegal immigration, ppl who’ve undergone a vetting process and those who haven’t. Genuine asylum seekers excepted, of course.

I’m a legal immigrant to the US and I underwent background checks, health checks, submitted reference letters, etc. before I entered the country. I think that’s perfectly reasonable, tbh, why should I just roll up and expect to be admitted?

For those mentioning emigration to the US. Yes, the original settlers were colonists, mainly fleeing religious persecution, but the massive waves of immigrants who arrived during the 19th century were vetted at Castle Garden and later Ellis Island. Some were rejected due to medical conditions, and the shipping company that had transported them was obliged to take them back free of charge.

The simple answer is that humans generally act in their own self interest.

the European explorers / colonial forces were acting in their own self interest when they invaded other countries, took them over and exploited them. They benefited hugely in economic terms. And others who followed - missionaries, settlers - were also following their own self interests, to convert benighted souls to their religion, to acquire land and resources, to settle and establish themselves.

and now, for those that resist immigration into a country, they are acting (they believe) their own self interest (however misguided or misinformed they are). Some of them believe that they are competing with immigrants for scarce resources - school places, medical services, social welfare and benefits - so it’s in their interests to resist them. Others do not like the fact that ‘their’ place smells, sounds, looks, feels different as a result of ‘foreign’ communities moving in and establishing themselves. So it’s in their interests to resist them. Whatever happened in the past - it’s irrelevant to people who are, they believe, acting in their own self interest today.

@TheHateIsNotGood ah, there’s always this argument. Nobody is remotely suggesting that - why should we pay for the past bla bla bla? Totally (perhaps deliberately) misses the point, which is that MAYBE the actual past should be acknowledged and honestly presented and dealt with, in a world that is wildly unequal because of the systems and structures that have created and subsequently enriched the west

Sitting here in the belief that some countries are inherently somehow smarter or better than others is just ridiculous. They nicked the wealth, they brutalised others, and now, to top it all off - they hate people for trying to come here and have a tiny piece of the pie, most especially anyone not white.

If we were smart, we’d welcome people with open arms, let them work and fill some of the massive labour gaps

If we were smart, we’d welcome people with open arms, let them work and fill some of the massive labour gaps.

I agree, @godlikeAI , but it’s also acceptable to have an application/vetting process for economic migrants beforehand.
What’s needed is immigration reform (who knows if/when that’ll happen).

Not actually what I was suggesting @godlikeAI - but whilst I agree there's some current immigration issues to deal with now, how are the current resentments from the past to slso be dealt with - so that the world can move on in it's current circumstance.

Not sure that paying a pennance of a pound of flesh (re; Shylock) actually sorts anything out. Pay, you white people, pay for what happened hundreds of years ago to all the non-white immigrants then and since may seem a great idea.

But do you really want to do that to your neighbour based on their pale skin? That sort of thing has been done before, and possibly a similar extropolation of that train of thought is happening right now in Gaza.

Presumably people come to the UK to live in peace - those pesky pale-skinned UK natives tend to live that way. Shame to destroy a 'haven' because of history. everywhere and everyone has history after all.

I don’t know, you’re the one doing the click bait thread, I’d guess to try to increase comments, but that’s a question that you’re best placed to answer yourself

@TheHateIsNotGood

.....whilst I agree there's some current immigration issues to deal with now, how are the current resentments from the past to also be dealt with - so that the world can move on in it's current circumstance.

Not sure that paying a penance of a pound of flesh (re; Shylock) actually sorts anything out. Pay, you white people, pay for what happened hundreds of years ago to all the non-white immigrants

This exactly. People should not be having to apologise for things from the past, that they had NO involvement in. I know I won't be saying sorry for something I haven't done!

@HamBone

Immigration is an emotive subject, but ultimately there has to be a distinction between legal and illegal immigration, ppl who’ve undergone a vetting process and those who haven’t. Genuine asylum seekers excepted, of course.

100% agree with this!

All of these empires were before the eg british empire,

1. The Roman Empire
2. The Persian Empire
3. The Mongol Empire
4. The Ottoman Empire
5. The Byzantine Empire
6. The Chinese Empires
7. The Mughal Empire
8. The Aztec and Inca Empires

THANK you @Morrisons02 !

It does seem very fashionable (with some) to attack the British doesn't it? Moreso the ENGLISH! I wonder why all the others who had empires, and who 'colonised' are not slated so badly ??? The thing that sickens me, is that many people who do it - are British themselves, and live very comfortably and happily in the UK with all the privileges living here brings.

Funny also, how you only see this on message forums... NO-ONE says it in real life.

Yes, it has become fashionable and the bashing is from within. It is like self hate.

I really do not understand why some people are calling for open borders and still want a civilised country with all the services and welfare working perfectly and not crime. Delulu much! Before anyone start saying they work and pay taxes may be just have a reality check on the situation. Low income low skills are most of the people coming here in 2023 for years now.

OP and others: Your talk of having a 'right' indicates your question is, at bottom, about morality. Is it (morally) acceptable to disallow immigration?

The answer: no. Whether I was born in the same street as you or the other side of the world to you, we have the same rights and obligations viv-a-vis one another. That's just how morality works. Discrimination based on place of birth is just plain immoral, as you implicitly recognise, OP.

Immigration control is, fundamentally, racist, and racism is immoral. So immigration control is immoral. This is often hidden by self-interest, but of course self-interest is no justification for immoral behaviour.

If you are a good (moral) person, you ought to be in favour of open borders. This is difficult, of course. Morality is often difficult.

What to do about this? A popular response is the so-called "dirty hands" doctrine, associated particularly, with Machiavelli. "It is necessary to a Prince," Machiavelli wrote (in The Prince), "to learn how not to be good." In short, the thought is, our rulers should themselves shoulder the moral burden of doing wrong on our behalf.

This may be an uncomfortable thought, but it is very common, I suspect. We know we shouldn't persecute immigrants and asylum seekers ... but, well, it's those nasty people in the Home Office (or, those terrible politicians) who really are to blame: what can we ordinary folk do?

Some politicians themselves are aware of this thought - that they, the rulers, shoulder the moral burden of doing wrong in order to thereby absolve the ruled from blame whilst nevertheless acting in their (sc. the ruled's) best interests.

None of this makes discrimination and racism - or closed borders - morally right, of course. It's a way of accepting it whilst recognising that fact, though.