Is it racism to be against immigration?

Post Reply New Topic

Very often, it isn't about race. When the Berlin Wall fell politically, the then West Germans were understandably concerned about the overnight influx of the then East Germans who were crossing the border for jobs and a better economy. Increasing an economy's population too much or too quickly has its negative effects. West Germans knew this and experienced some immediate problems, economic and otherwise. Thankfully, it has equalized with both former nations acting quickly to mitigate the problem lawfully.

Now, as the rest of the world understood, apart from some political differences, East Germans and West Germans were otherwise no different from each other. Certainly, racism had no influence in the West German fears. So, what was it, instead? Well, as I described, very often it isn't racism to expect simply that a nation's or union's economy and laws would resist influences which would negatively affect the lives of their citizens. Sure, in other nations like the United States and the United Kingdom, some of their citizens demonstrate incidental racism when they express their frustrations when inefficient laws and policies provide little to protect against negative economic and legal changes. But, the reaction shouldn't be criminalized or ignored, simply do what Germany did in adopting equitable economic policies and laws. The racism will resolve itself.

The mass immigration of Asians and Africans into Sweden is racial aggression against ethnic Swedes, since it is just a racial conquest of the ethnic Swedes' homeland sponsored by aliens and traitors among the power elites. If opposition to that is racism, then so what? It is ethnic Swedes who oppose mass immigration into Sweden on racial grounds who have the moral high ground, not the posturing moral pygmies who squeal about "racism".

The same goes for any other country.

Just declaring your own personal preferences to be "liberty" and "enlightenment" doesn't mean a thing.
Hey, if you have any locks on your front door, why don't you get rid of them? After all, it's wrong to exclude people from anywhere, because people should be allowed to go anywhere in the world, right?


Why does he need to justify to you why he cares? Why don't you try justifying to him why you're attacking his natural instincts? Do you want to see even more Arabs moving to Sweden? Do you hate Swedes?
What is your ethnic background? I want a better idea of where you're coming from.

I cannot speak for white_as_snow, but if I were a Swede I would prefer Asians and African immigrants not to integrate with Swedes than to than integrate (ie, miscegenate) with them.

Oh, I agree. While racist commentary isn't something I engage in (I would hope that I could argue my point without resorting to ad hominem attacks), it is free speech. Now, granted, it can quickly turn into fighting words and lose it protected speech status. But, under most conditions, I suspect that it would provoke little more than a disagreement with most people. Regardless, it shouldn't be criminalize.

white_as_snow has been pretty clear that it is at least partially about race and religion - he repeatedly mentions "Arab Muslims", not the Finns and Eastern Europeans who constitute the bulk of migrants into Sweden.

What exactly would be wrong with miscegenation?

Sweden (and all other European countries) broadly benefit from migration from outside of Europe. They generally increase the GDP and lower the crime rate. The immigrants themselves also benefit, so it's a win-win. So yes, I am in favour of immigration, and I want to change anti-immigrant sentiments that are not rooted in reality or are rooted in irrational racism or xenophobia.

In my 35 years in politics, I learned early on that those things that are prohibited by law or social repugnance are usually also those things that are most popular among the self-described rebels among us. When drugs are banned or shunned, everybody wants them. Amsterdam has proved this idea since it repealed its drug-prohibition laws, and popular use and abuse have decreased noticeably because it has lost its edginess. So, when it comes to racism, I neither play along with it or protest against it. It is what it is, and if someone wants to utilize it, so be it. After all, it is free speech (at least in the United States). But, then again, your intent to change such sentiments is also your right to attempt. But, someone other than myself might need to wish you luck with that.

There is no correlation between drug prohibition and drug use, and I'm not actually sure you're right about Amsterdam - do you have a source for that claim?

I don't think many people are really against immigration but the EU policy of completely unfettered immigration from the poorest most backward countries in the world so much so that it causes extreme demographic shift is something entirely different. Sweden for example will be completely unrecognizable as a country in 50 years time, it will not longer be Sweden and is predicted to fall to 45th in world in HDI by 2030 by the UN in between Libya and Malaysia. Sweden is a small country, taking in like 800,000+ people every decade is not sustainable.

Here ( http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/netherlands_v_us and http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/20 ... n-portugal ). And, here ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... s-legalize ).

Of course it isn't. I'm very anti-immigration but I don't consider myself a racist

What's right with it? Miscegenation, over the long-term, means racial death - the destruction of human biodiversity and of the distinct races. However, I can see how someone might recommend it to their racial enemies, or - if they are mixed race - to the whole world.

I notice you expect me to answer your questions, but you won't answer mine. What is your ethnic background?



Firstly, the idea that non-white immigration into Europe lowers the crime rate is simply a lie.

Secondly, even if non-whites generally did improve "the economy" of European countries (and they don't), why should white people care about that? When whites took over America, they improved "the economy", but that was hardly any consolation to the American Indians.

Lastly, if it could be proven to you that certain non-white groups had a negative effect on the economies or crime rates of European states, would you accept racial arguments against immigration then? I doubt it, since I know from experience that facts don't matter to people like you anyway.

Like cultural appropriation?

Regarding the question in the title:

Yes.

As asked, you don't care about whether anyone in particular is racist, acts racist, or sounds racist. Of course they do, if they oppose economic migration. No. You asked if general social and political opposition to immigration meets the usual standard for evidence of the social institution of racism. It does.

This is one of those questions with more than one answer, depending on what you mean by 'against immigration'.

If you are against the immigrants themselves, whether it'd be because of their skin colour, cultures, religious beliefs, and language, then that is definitely racist.

If you are against the way the country manages immigration and how it may be an economic strain, and don't take it out on the immigrants themselves, then that isn't racist at all. Because how is disagreeing with the management of your country discriminatory towards any races and ethnic groups?

Just saying, word for word, "I am against immigration" might make some people automatically assume that you are racist and against foreigners for being foreign, so you'll have to be careful when phrasing yourself.

I don't think you quite understand those data.

The first link shows that cannabis use increased in the Netherlands between 1997 and 2009, a direct contradiction of your initial claim.

The second link concerns Portugal. Whilst drug use has fallen there, overall there is still no correlation between drug prohibition and drug use. See my link - whilst Portugal has seen a drop, the Czech Republic has enacted the same policies and seen a rise.

The final link shows that, whilst alcohol and tobacco use are declining amongst American teenagers (and hard drugs remain extremely rare), marijuana use remains flat.