What is it that riles people up about immigration so much?

[Am99]

I’m really curious at why some people get so annoyed over immigrants. Sure, I’m all for LEGAL migration no matter where the immigrant comes from and I agree that migration should be controlled / monitored to ensure criminals aren’t entering without a solid work purpose. My maternal grandparents were from Jamaica and they worked so hard.

I’m always so happy to see any doctor / nurse in the NHS whether they’re Indian, African, Caribbean, English and I couldn’t ever imagine getting so upset and angry about their ethnicity. I also don’t understand why people get so angry about asylum seekers being temporarily housed in hotels whilst they await their decision

Why are people so annoyed about migrants being housed in hotels? How can they actually be affected by it? On the news it looks like they’re being accommodated at Holiday Inns, not exactly anywhere where the typical Brit would take a staycation. It’s pretty mundane and boring. It’s not The Ritz.

I work, pay my taxes but it doesn’t bother me in the slightest if my tax goes towards that because tax is inevitable and something we never see. It’s just so unavoidable so why complain? I guess it’s like my student loan. Equally, how come these people aren’t annoyed that our taxes can fund royal house renovations or their security etc… I don’t see people protesting outside Buckingham palace? Also what about council housing in the UK? I don’t see people protesting about the fact the council literally gives subsidised housing to brits because they can’t afford it? I’m not sure if the tax payers money go towards this (I might need to educate myself on it) but surely that’s a bigger burden on taxpayers money.

I understand the argument that a country might lose its ‘identity’ with mass immigration. I saw a video with someone saying Japan is Japan because it’s more enough wholly Japanese. India is India because it’s wholly Indian. I get it to some extent, maybe we aren’t typically white and British like we were 59 years ago; but it’s still not enough to convince me that immigration is negative because what would actually happen if we did take all of the ‘foreigners’ outside of the NHS, TFL, cleaners etc etc … I wonder if they’d be enough Brits to fill their spaces? This isn’t sarcastic, I’m curious if anyone knows the answer

Lol.

I don’t give two shits about it.

it’s usually a thinly veiled excuse for racism.

Hilarious
So people post about having calm, fact driven discussions about both legal immigration and illegal. And they know the numbers better than you
And you then say they are in support of mass immigration and emotive
Deary me

Refugees have many understandable reasons for wanting to head to Britain over the other safe countries they pass through: language is a key one, as is the existence of networks, maybe they have friends and family over here. It’s not as simple as the pull factors being purely economic.

And as for legal documents, remember many asylum seekers come from chaotic war zones where they have been internally displaced or forced to flee at short notice, or may have had passports or identity documents stolen. Clearly arriving here legally would have been the ideal (and cheapest) option, but it’s not an option available to many in this situation. What we need is new legal routes, allowing refugees to apply for asylum status from outside the country, as that would cut off a lot of the genuine demand for small boats via people smugglers.

Yes, are you saying there aren’t people who support mass immigration in this thread ?

Are you saying that the people whose posts you are quoting fall into this category?

Tbh I can't recall anyone being in favour to that extent on this thread?

To what extent ?

Supporting mass immigration, the thing you were claiming...

Yes I’m claiming people on this thread support mass immigration, I don’t know to what extent. I’ve been replying to specific points to highlight the sheer scale of immigration as people seem to support it as a knee jerk emotive reaction when the negatives are brought up. I’m not really sure what you are arguing with me about tbh.

It’s a fairly reasonable inference to make that those on this thread who are calling others racist for thinking that immigration numbers are too high are supportive of high levels of immigration? If they weren’t supportive they would be calling themselves racist which would be odd.

No its not.
They've all talked about controlling and monitoring immigration of all types
Not supporting "mass immigration" which is emotive and deliberate inflammatory language

No one has supported mass immigration. They have supported controlled and fact driven immigration

You are deliberately using inflammatory language

You also deliberately try to make out that illegal immigration is higher than it is by exaggerating numbers or flipping to legal immigration figures
Its Reform tactics through and through

So those who disagree with you must therefore support mass immigration? How very, urm.. black and white.

Do you support mass immigration?

All I’ve done is quote the immigration numbers and clearly defined what sort of immigration they result from. Really not sure why you are so angry if you agree with me

Ah, I think conversing on this any longer is a waste of time. You do have a problem with leaping to conclusions and a little trouble understanding.

The same thing that riled people against single mothers in the 1980s

they see them as responsible for their woes

if you got rid of that part of society

theyll blame another vulnerable group

What is it you’d like? Can you define it in numbers

I'm sorry but the very first response on this thread leaps straight into calling people racist and xenophobic and says absolutely nothing at all about control or monitoring. There are multiple other posters on this thread who instead of debating the issue resort to name calling. It is a fact that we are living through a period of mass (or high) immigration. Why is it inflammatory to recognise this? To discuss the issue we have to first recognise what is happening. Then as a country we can either plan accordingly for a dramatic increase in population or the government can implement polices to lower the numbers to a more manageable level. Either way we are a democratic country and we need to be able to have the discussion without the constant name calling.

Resorting to snide remarks and insinuating that I am hard of thinking does nothing to bolster your argument I'm afraid.

It's very frustrating that you can't have any kind of nuanced discussion about immigration without being accused of xenophobia or racism.
It's not just MN, perhaps it's a class thing or a generational difference?
If you question immigration, legal or illegal, of any kind there's an assumption you are racist.
I don't think I'm racist but I do admit to living in a rural community with zero diversity. I didn't grow up here. This no doubt gives me less awareness than someone who lives in a multi cultural city.
I see the protests and headlines and the rise of reform but I don't recognise any of the objections. Perhaps I would feel more strongly if my immediate area changed very noticeably.
I'm interested to hear people's experience good or bad because my only direct interaction with immigrants now is with the NHS.

's very frustrating that you can't have any kind of nuanced discussion about immigration without being accused of xenophobia or racism.
It's not just MN, perhaps it's a class thing or a generational difference?

Just the same as the transgender ‘debate’

It would help if you put together a coherent argument and didn’t resort to insulting people’s intelligence or morals when facts contradict your views.

I think people's natural concerns are for their own families.

So if someone's mum can't have a hip replacement for 12 months because there isn't enough resource.
If someone's daughter can't get a council flat because there aren't any available.
If someone's child is in a class with 20 children for whom English is not their first language so a lot of time is spent managing that.

Health, education and housing are usually the flash points because they are the things in shortest supply and the most expensive to provide independently.

I know someone locally to me who holds extreme views but their grandchild was hit by a car driven by an unlicenced Afghan. We also had two rapes in our town by an asian taxi driver using fake ID. He was caught and convicted very quickly but it taints perceptions.

Heritage is a very nuanced and complex thing. I'd you look at the UK, there are some very obvious examples of our heritage. I think it's easier to understand what these things are by looking outside of the UK.

What did our ancestors bring to the countries they colonised?

So our heritage is made up of King and Country, of the Monarchy. We have Queensland, Victoria, Adeliade, New York, Maryland, New England. Our ancestors brought our system of law and order to a third of the world. Many countries still base their current laws on colonial systems. We have given the world the English language, Shakespeare, the locomotive, the steam engine, the Internet, stainless steel, the tank, the jet engine, the spitfire, the RAF, the Royal Navy, war heroes, penicillin, the flushing toilet, the chocolate bar, the thermos flask . . .

I could go on. Our heritage is a centuries long history of world changing inventions, discoveries, colonisation. It is fish and chips, and corniche pasties and strawberries and cream. It is all of those things, represented by one of the most recognisable flag in the world.

People fear that the England which made those things possible is slowly being comprimised. Eroded by the presence of people who don't care about those things. Ultimately, that's why the empire collapsed, the countries our ancestors colonised didn't want their way of life changed irrevocably, and the resources required to enforce Britiah rule were just too much. We are now, according to which Tic Toks you watch, facing the same dilemma here.

And no, Japan wouldn't be "Japanese" if a fifth of the population wernt Japanese and didn't share the values of Japanese people. If you've been to certain Spanish seaside towns which are "favoured" by "Brits Abroad", you'll know what I mean by "not being Japanese".