Let me rephrase: all those that I know of are extremely racist. If you could give me examples of significant non-racist, anti-immigration figures in politics today, that would be nice.
This feels like Great Replacement nonsense.
Controversial Historical Opinions You Have
- Thread starter EricD
- Start date
- Discussion
Let me rephrase: all those that I know of are extremely racist. If you could give me examples of significant non-racist, anti-immigration figures in politics today, that would be nice.
This feels like Great Replacement nonsense.
- Location
- Somewhere
Then they may be racist or may not, but they are definitely stupid. Higher standards of living have universally lead to lower birth rates within a generation or two. And the same happens to the immigrants a generation or two after immigrating.
Mrbrown1000
Working on a story, may post it soon.
- Location
- United states
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Well, I don't know of any countries in the developed world that would actually be willing to enter into a federal relationship with a developing country. The chances of a single party forming out a developing nation seems fairly unlikely to me. Although, I think that issue could be resolved by proportional representation. As to the cross region traffic element, I guess there would be little to stop immigrants from the less developed region from flooding the more developed region. And that could result in a state where most of the people from the less developed region move to more developed region and then rich people buy up all the lad in the less developed region for vacation homes. Resulting in the few people left, having very few opportunities. If the more developed country has a smaller amount of land, this could easily become a recipe for disaster.
I do think the way that the US currently treats Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands is wrong, but not to an extreme degree. Ideally, think that they should be made states, but I am not optimistic about that.
For brain drain I am not sure of the best way to deal with it. I think that potentially having scholarships to developed countries Universities contingent on going back to the original country and teaching at some level might help? The US has a series of scholarships that will cover all your tuition costs if you go work for a public school in a bad neighborhood for a while after you graduate. Another option might be starting up universities in the country that is being drained.
Well, the only cases I know of where Democratic or Republican governments have chosen to engage in some sort of colonial like practice things have gone bad. Particualrly if the US or Russia is involved. And usually such measures are enacted either at the ignorance of the populace at the time. Or they happen because Large multinational corporations want to plunder some natural resources from the country, so they lobby or bribe politicians to get them to do it for the benefit of the Companies based there. Although, Australia has done that sort of thing, a decent amount too. Although not as much as the US or Russia.
I have seen no indication that consensual colonialism would have any beneficial effects on immigration. If it was enacted non-consensualy on a wide scale. But that is a case were the cure is much worse than the problem. I personally am against a decent chunk of immigration because the systems we have for it today work horribly. In addition to the rain drain affects that can happen.
Being concerned about the cultural impacts of mass immigration is fine in my view. I think your reason is a rather silly reason. The only western countries that are crowded are the European ones. The US and Australia have tons of room outside the cities. The cities are a bit crowded but I think that the shift to telework will fix that. I don't think considering Futurist a racist over such a reason is fair. Even though I do think that it's a rather uninformed opinion. I haven't seen any evidence that their is going to be a massive boom in the number of kids in first world countries any time soon. We might seen a increase do to people being at home and couples have more time than they might normally have. But, I don't think that is likely to make a big enough change to it to affect crowding in most places.
I do think the way that the US currently treats Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands is wrong, but not to an extreme degree. Ideally, think that they should be made states, but I am not optimistic about that.
For brain drain I am not sure of the best way to deal with it. I think that potentially having scholarships to developed countries Universities contingent on going back to the original country and teaching at some level might help? The US has a series of scholarships that will cover all your tuition costs if you go work for a public school in a bad neighborhood for a while after you graduate. Another option might be starting up universities in the country that is being drained.
Well, the only cases I know of where Democratic or Republican governments have chosen to engage in some sort of colonial like practice things have gone bad. Particualrly if the US or Russia is involved. And usually such measures are enacted either at the ignorance of the populace at the time. Or they happen because Large multinational corporations want to plunder some natural resources from the country, so they lobby or bribe politicians to get them to do it for the benefit of the Companies based there. Although, Australia has done that sort of thing, a decent amount too. Although not as much as the US or Russia.
I have seen no indication that consensual colonialism would have any beneficial effects on immigration. If it was enacted non-consensualy on a wide scale. But that is a case were the cure is much worse than the problem. I personally am against a decent chunk of immigration because the systems we have for it today work horribly. In addition to the rain drain affects that can happen.
Being concerned about the cultural impacts of mass immigration is fine in my view. I think your reason is a rather silly reason. The only western countries that are crowded are the European ones. The US and Australia have tons of room outside the cities. The cities are a bit crowded but I think that the shift to telework will fix that. I don't think considering Futurist a racist over such a reason is fair. Even though I do think that it's a rather uninformed opinion. I haven't seen any evidence that their is going to be a massive boom in the number of kids in first world countries any time soon. We might seen a increase do to people being at home and couples have more time than they might normally have. But, I don't think that is likely to make a big enough change to it to affect crowding in most places.
You're assuming that these lower birth rates are actually going to be permanent, which might not actually be the case:
The heritability of fertility makes world population stabilization unlikely in the foreseeable future
The forecasting of the future growth of world population is of critical importance to anticipate and address a wide range of global challenges. The Un…
www.sciencedirect.com
Bernie Sanders? Well, he's not anti-immigration per se, just against too much immigration--specifically with him being anti-open borders.
Well, this is an argument that nationalists could use, whether in Israel, in the West, or elsewhere--as in, "if we'll invite huge numbers of additional immigrants into our countries, it will be harder for our own existing population's fertility rates to eventually recover because we're going to have less available land and resources than we would have otherwise had."
Also, specifically in regards to immigrants, if there are hundreds of millions of them, then their demographic impact on the West will still be absolutely enormous even if their fertility rates will significantly drop in 1-2 generations.You're assuming that these lower birth rates are actually going to be permanent, which might not actually be the case:
The heritability of fertility makes world population stabilization unlikely in the foreseeable future
The forecasting of the future growth of world population is of critical importance to anticipate and address a wide range of global challenges. The Un…
Mrbrown1000
Working on a story, may post it soon.
- Location
- United states
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Even if fertility were to increase. Abortions and other forms of Birth Control as so prevalent in the developed world that I think an increase in fertility would likely have a negligible effect on population growth. It might affect the number of people from certain religious groups. For groups that don't use birth control, it is somewhat feasible that the size of those groups will grow more if fertility increases.
To me it seems like fertility is mostly irrelevant to the issue of immigration.
EDIT: Also, I am not sure if the topic of immigration is actually relevant to history either. Unless we want to talk about the sorts of affects immigration has had historically. Which I would enjoy talking about if that is the direction we want to go with the discussion.
To me it seems like fertility is mostly irrelevant to the issue of immigration.
EDIT: Also, I am not sure if the topic of immigration is actually relevant to history either. Unless we want to talk about the sorts of affects immigration has had historically. Which I would enjoy talking about if that is the direction we want to go with the discussion.
Last edited:
Not everyone would actually want to consistently take advantage of abortions and birth control, though. Some people naturally want to have larger families--and it's possible that these people's share of the total population will increase over time due to them having more kids than everyone else has and thus ensuring that a larger percentage of subsequent generations has "breeder genes".
As for fertility being relevant to the issue of immigration, it depends on how exactly one views the issue of space and resources. Does one view these things as being limited? Or does one view these things as being so abundant that one doesn't have to worry about overpopulation and/or resource shortages anytime soon?
That relies on some pretty suspect assumptions regarding numbers and demographics, and seems more based on common racist dogwhistles than reality. But, if you're not talking about a union then why are you speaking about a relationship of domination being good?
- Location
- Busan Metropolitan City, Republic of Korea
Well, does RPing count?
Cetashwayo
Lord of Ten Thousand Years
- Location
- Across the Horizon
I don't think these conversations are very productive or relevant to the thread. Can we move on?
Mrbrown1000
Working on a story, may post it soon.
- Location
- United states
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Well, there are some countries that might face such an issue. But, I am not informed enough to know of any. From what I know of due to it's small size countries such as the UK would be the ones I would consider most vulnerable to that sort of thing.
Of course not everyone will use birth control. But, I am sure that enough will that on a resource perspective in the mid to long term there shouldn't be an issue. Although, there is a cultural issue. First, is the danger that immigrants could lose touch with good elements of the culture of their original home. The other is that an excessive number of immigrant from a single country with a strong culture can often affect the broader culture they immigrate to in negative ways.
Of course a sudden influx of a large number of immigrants could be taxing to a country in the short term if they were not prepared.
I am hugely against illegal immigration in particular in the US because the system in place today makes it easy for illegal immigrants to be used as slaves illegally in the US. And then the threat of Deportation is amplified and used so that these immigrants have little to no protection. And any attempt escape from their slavery would just result in being sent back to the horribly run country they came from.
On the policy level, having an effective way of managing legal immigration is very important. From what I can tell the historic and current US system doesn't work. I don't really think this is the right thread to discuss what form of immigration policy would be best for the US in the present considering this thread's focus on history.
There is a potential issue of resource shortages. Particularly when it comes to things like welfare, and hospital system. In the US, the destitute are treated free for life threatening injuries even if the don't have insurance. Even for non-citizens or illegal immigrants. But the cost of those treatments is carried at the lower levels. So, when enough people move into an area smaller hospitals either have, to get more money from somewhere or reduce costs by cutting things the hospital considers less important. Or raising costs for uninsured people to get health care for non-life threatening things. In some cases, Immmigration can have negative effects on a community. I think 100% open borders with no requirements for immigrants could have a lot of negative effects. There are also many countries where misinformation about how immgration works are actively spread to encourage people who would normally immigrate legally to do so illegally so that they can be exploited. A bad immigration system can easily result in immigrates being worse of than what they were in the country the came from.
The 10 countries with the highest GDP have over 60% of the total GDP according to the World Bank. World Bank Source
So, they have a disproportionately large share of the world's wealth. Just China and the US have 40% of the worlds GDP.
So, if immigration causes the richest countries to have to split their wealth further, there should be plenty of wealth to split. There are some nations that really can't afford immigrants. But, most of the ones I know are not the ones I typically hear of people getting riled up about it in. Although, if you think that a war between the US, and china is coming then that gives a lot more reason to care about the relative strengths of the two. But, a lot of things that might give an advantage in case of war are pretty unethical.
I think the most important problem regarding immigration to address is the brain drain problem. But, that is not the usual aspect I see tackled when it is brought up.
I think it is currently a pretty bad time to tackle immigration issues due to the current economic climate. Although, discussion might still yield something of use in the future.
I also think that comparing something to colonialism is mostly useful to point out when bad things are happening. I think that comparing the CCP belt and Road Initiative to colonialism might be useful.
Offering countries that might be tempted by such a deal better deals could be a good idea to curb chineese influence. But, I am peesimistic about whether it will actually improve things for the nations given the deals. From what I can tell in the vast majority of cases, CCP money is a trap for smaller countries. Maybe US money might have less negative consequences? I think that whatever deals happen the Big US corporations will manage to get in on thm in a way that allows them to benefit at someone else expense. But, I guess that having you countr trapped by US companies might be better than being under the thumb of the CCPs authoritarian regime.
Also, I agree that this topic is no longer productive. The only reason I posted this is because I wrote it back when I felt like it still was.
Of course not everyone will use birth control. But, I am sure that enough will that on a resource perspective in the mid to long term there shouldn't be an issue. Although, there is a cultural issue. First, is the danger that immigrants could lose touch with good elements of the culture of their original home. The other is that an excessive number of immigrant from a single country with a strong culture can often affect the broader culture they immigrate to in negative ways.
Of course a sudden influx of a large number of immigrants could be taxing to a country in the short term if they were not prepared.
I am hugely against illegal immigration in particular in the US because the system in place today makes it easy for illegal immigrants to be used as slaves illegally in the US. And then the threat of Deportation is amplified and used so that these immigrants have little to no protection. And any attempt escape from their slavery would just result in being sent back to the horribly run country they came from.
On the policy level, having an effective way of managing legal immigration is very important. From what I can tell the historic and current US system doesn't work. I don't really think this is the right thread to discuss what form of immigration policy would be best for the US in the present considering this thread's focus on history.
There is a potential issue of resource shortages. Particularly when it comes to things like welfare, and hospital system. In the US, the destitute are treated free for life threatening injuries even if the don't have insurance. Even for non-citizens or illegal immigrants. But the cost of those treatments is carried at the lower levels. So, when enough people move into an area smaller hospitals either have, to get more money from somewhere or reduce costs by cutting things the hospital considers less important. Or raising costs for uninsured people to get health care for non-life threatening things. In some cases, Immmigration can have negative effects on a community. I think 100% open borders with no requirements for immigrants could have a lot of negative effects. There are also many countries where misinformation about how immgration works are actively spread to encourage people who would normally immigrate legally to do so illegally so that they can be exploited. A bad immigration system can easily result in immigrates being worse of than what they were in the country the came from.
The 10 countries with the highest GDP have over 60% of the total GDP according to the World Bank. World Bank Source
So, they have a disproportionately large share of the world's wealth. Just China and the US have 40% of the worlds GDP.
So, if immigration causes the richest countries to have to split their wealth further, there should be plenty of wealth to split. There are some nations that really can't afford immigrants. But, most of the ones I know are not the ones I typically hear of people getting riled up about it in. Although, if you think that a war between the US, and china is coming then that gives a lot more reason to care about the relative strengths of the two. But, a lot of things that might give an advantage in case of war are pretty unethical.
I think the most important problem regarding immigration to address is the brain drain problem. But, that is not the usual aspect I see tackled when it is brought up.
I think it is currently a pretty bad time to tackle immigration issues due to the current economic climate. Although, discussion might still yield something of use in the future.
I also think that comparing something to colonialism is mostly useful to point out when bad things are happening. I think that comparing the CCP belt and Road Initiative to colonialism might be useful.
Offering countries that might be tempted by such a deal better deals could be a good idea to curb chineese influence. But, I am peesimistic about whether it will actually improve things for the nations given the deals. From what I can tell in the vast majority of cases, CCP money is a trap for smaller countries. Maybe US money might have less negative consequences? I think that whatever deals happen the Big US corporations will manage to get in on thm in a way that allows them to benefit at someone else expense. But, I guess that having you countr trapped by US companies might be better than being under the thumb of the CCPs authoritarian regime.
Also, I agree that this topic is no longer productive. The only reason I posted this is because I wrote it back when I felt like it still was.
Rule 4: Don’t Be Disruptive - Pattern of disruptive posting, problematic and potentially hateful content, and persistent multi-posting.
Yep, rape fantasy role-play.
I heard that it's a thing in the BDSM community.
Stop: This has gone far enough
this has gone far enough
@Futurist, you have been infracted and threadbanned for one month under Rule Four for thread disruption, and raising sensitive issues in a problematic (and potentially hateful) way which has a tendency to inflame the discussion, as well as persistently making multiple posts in succession. Please don't do this again, and be more mindful in the future.
Thanks for your time.
@Futurist, you have been infracted and threadbanned for one month under Rule Four for thread disruption, and raising sensitive issues in a problematic (and potentially hateful) way which has a tendency to inflame the discussion, as well as persistently making multiple posts in succession. Please don't do this again, and be more mindful in the future.
Thanks for your time.
- Location
- Busan Metropolitan City, Republic of Korea
I just hope I don't get marked alongside for his last reply to me.
- Pronouns
- They/Them
To be fair, this could describe a lot of democracies in the early 20th century. And 21st century. And 19th century.
But yes, I agree.
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
So, not too different from the UK at the time, given colonialism, the franchise at the time, and all that.
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Even so, Kaisereich stans should get down on their knees every day to thank Hitler for making it (the Kasiereich) look good by comparison.
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
I mean, I agree with what you are aiming for, but I gotta be honest, "people should thank Hitler on their knees" is maybe not exactly the best rhetoric ever.
- Location
- Somewhere
The only good Kaisereich is the one with the flying mages.
Sulemain
Self-Requested Ban
- Location
- United Kingdom
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The WHFB Empire?
Isn't this the thread for controversial opinions?
Unless we're dealing with 12 year old Kaiserboos I highly doubt anyone is going to disagree.