That’s what they’re doing.
Which describes Ireland to a “T”. Same to Norway (1/3 of their population came here in the 19th century), which experienced persistent crop failures due to the cold, and people there had to flee to find someplace with food.
It’s also the same with Cubans, and anyone who was fleeing the Eastern Bloc.
It’s also the same with Italians & Greeks who came here during their internal struggles with Communism.
What the Latin American refugees represent, is not new to us.
Not their education level, not their poverty rate, not the language they speak, not their circumstances, and certainly not their religion.
The people fleeing El Salvador are not fleeing communism, they are fleeing crime and economic chaos which their elected leaders cannot deal with.
In TODAY’S world, how many people in the world live in abject poverty, crime infested regions or under government tyranny? 10’s of millions? 100’s of millions? I won’t try to estimate. So you are hunky-dory with letting in any of them who can make it to the banks of the Rio Grande? Yes or No, please.
No they’re NOT, AS. They’re planning on skipping across the border and THEN asking for “refugee” status. They’ve been trained and coached on how to do this by this “open borders” bunch who have NO INTEREST in helping actual refugees, but in flooding our country with 3rd-world, uneducated, potential Democrat voters. Look at the pictures of these people. NONE of the men, or the few women and children appear to be starving…far from it. If they’re fleeing “danger” in their country, they succeeded the second they crossed the Mexican border. but they don’t want “safety.” They want the perks they’ll get by coming HERE.
Uh, no. Kurds are more diverse internally than the people living in the Balklands. “Kurds” is as specific a term as “Eastern European”.
Iraqi Kurd have plenty of divisions with Kurds living in Turkey or Syria. They’ve fought wars with one another. And even the Iraqi Kurds aren’t one people.
Evidence shows the opposite. Assimilation is something of a two-way street; we adopt things from the incoming culture we don’t find threatening.
Hot dogs, Christmas trees, Corn beef & hash, none of these things would have made a lick a sense to the Founders, as they were all brought here by immigrants.
However, a country only becomes more like the incoming culture than itself, if the incoming culture is more developed. E.g., the Volga Germans, or the Hungarians in Romania, or the Russians in Kazakhstan.
Or heck, us, and the influence we had on Native Americans.
American history gives us a better explanation.
The U.S. assuming the mantle of a world power, taking on responsibilities that have to be tended to by a large, expensive Government apparatus, and using said apparatus to intervene in the world (attracting the attention of hostile outsiders). This apparatus will then vouch for itself, and through power creep & its corporate nature, seeks to take on more power, and more roles within society.
Japan went through a similar trend; it had nothing to do with “diversity” (they have none). Same to the British Empire.
Switzerland never had one, they’ve been split statically between 3 cultures & languages, yet they’ve remained integrated for centuries.
… And Singapore, while I think about it. 4 officials languages and a migrant workforce larger than their native population.
We ourselves lost a “central ethnicity” in the 19th century. We had a 25% immigration rate (double of that today), we had more Germans living here than English, and top of that, Irish, who we openly despised more than blacks.
Why? Because the Blacks were Protestant, and the Irish were Catholic.
What you’ve yet to discover Cwolf, is that it’s not about numbers, it’s about development.
We didn’t see all or sections of ourselves become permanent Irish or German colonies (despite them naming a town after the then-ruling German Chancellor), because neither of these populations were as developed as the natives living here.
The culture who is most developed, has the most soft power. Hence why the ancient Egyptians Hellenized, and the Czechs were left reading German textbooks, despite having only tiny populations of the people concerned.
I’ve already brought this up; Hispanic immigrants learn English at the same rate as the Italians, and became better at learning English overtime.
3rd generation, English is the primary language, if not the only one they speak:
Cwolf, you need to read that article:
Long term, assimilation runs its course. This is why nativist uprisings, every time it’s shown up in America, got the consequences of letting people in wrong, even if they were somehow right about the people they were objecting to.
It’s because you don’t know who those people can become. And the fact they’re both less developed than the existing culture, and they and their children will probably want to be middle class, means they’ll have to avail themselves of our culture to get anywhere.
They don’t have a choice, and what long term trends we have show that they are in fact doing this.
? All communism does is create economic chaos. See China and the “Great Leap Forward” , or the Soviets and collectivism starving out the Kulaks, or anything in North Korea.
Your objection just doesn’t follow, and you seem to be unaware that El Savador is in the state it’s in, because of communism.
This is all aftermath of the civil war the central Government fought with the Communists, and how it fragmented everything in the country.
Again, why not? When has letting in refugees, long term, resulted in something that was only a cost to us?
And if you reject them, then when do you let refugees in? You’re not being clear.
In 2004, 50% of our refugees were coming from Somalia and Laos. In 2008 it was Burmese and Bhutanese.
Their circumstances aren’t much different than these Latins. Were they all just “mistakes”?
"When they get to Mexico, the Honduran migrants visit different embassies and consulates, including those belonging to the U.S., to try to be officially recognized as asylum seekers.
“These are people that have been stranded in Tapachula, Mexico, awaiting refuge. Most of them have to wait for a year or more and the majority get rejected,” said Abeja who describes Mexico’s asylum system as one that’s “demoralizing and exhausting.”
“When Mexico rejects them, the next step is to go to the U.S., and the safest, most organized way to do that is through the caravan,” Abeja said."
And even if they did, so what? The S. Vietnamese didn’t wait in a different country to appeal for asylum, and the situation of these refugees is no less desperate.
Who have no connection with domestic politics here, you haven’t looked into them Dave.
Pueblos Sin Fronteras, look them up. You have no idea right now what they do, and what they have in fact done for people like this.
I’ll take that as a YES. I’m putting you down on the same list as all the leftists who DO want to destroy this country as we know it. I have nothing further to discuss. Reply, or not, at your leisure.
Even better! They don’t even consider other Kurds to be pure enough and frequently quarrel and kill each other. Let’s get in on that action as fast as possible!
Nothing America needs more than quarreling factions of Islamic immigrants living next to each other. Only good and amazing things can come from such cultural enrichment.
When did letting in refugees not work out for us?
How are they different from people with the same situation who came here before?
You say “destroy”, but where is the evidence for that? History, even recent history, gives us a very different picture.
I read 'somewhere that CNN has broadcasts in some third world countries on how to get into America and then how to take advantage of all the freebies!
I would have just ignored this as a fairytale if I hadn’t been on an International forum and it was posters from some of these places posting this.
I’ve searched for links but haven’t found any.
Dude, why are you even hung up on the Kurds? They’re largely secular, Kurdistan is hailed as the “Texas of the Middle east”, and you can regularly see them waiving American flags at the head of their convoys.
The only listed Kurdish terrorist group is the Kurdish Worker’s Party, whose never attacked us. We recognize them as one because of Turkey.
Oh hey look, it’s Ronald Reagan tossing a coin to a Vietnamese refugee, who became a West Point graduate.
It’s almost as if he thought America was intended to produce these sorts of people.
You’re the one who brought them up. I’m mostly concerned about Mexicans as they make up over 1/2 of our immigrants(legal and non). No other particular group even comes close to that.
You’re really going to hold Reagan up as a good example of how to handle immigration? The current mess we have is in large part thanks to Reagan(and Teddy Kennedy).
Whom we’ve had an integrated migrant flow of since the 1920s, if not earlier?
Who were 70% of our railroad workers and meatpackers, even then?
Who, I’ll reiterate, actually are learning English, at the rate we would expect them to?
With the super-majority of the 3rd Generation, basically speaking it as their primary or only language?
Yeah, because his original plan, the one he ran on, was basically the Goldwater plan.
He was talked out of that, and embraced amnesty, because of the Unions (who wrote our current laws), as they were fine with that. They just didn’t want an immigration system that worked. They wanted one with “safeguards” and levers that they could use to create obfuscations as they saw fit.
And the result was a predictable cluster****.
BS. 44% of Kalifornia households speak a foreign language at home…even today! That’s NOT “assimilation.”
Yes it is, because only 18.6 percent don’t speak English well.
That’s the trend Dave, and that number is from the same slate of statistics you’re quoting.
Brb, moving to China where I’ll dress like I’m in Lyon speak only French and hang out with only French people and when someone wonders why I’m not just still in France since I seem to have no reason to be in China I’ll just say “C’est raciste!”.
Going to pick up a history book on the 19th century while you’re there? This mythical time where over 1/4 of Americans were foreigners (double of today), and we didn’t succumb to balkinization? In a smaller, poorer country?
Fact: The 3rd generation dispropotionatly speaks English, and they grew, not shrunk in English rates since the 1980s.
I noticed you didn’t respond to this.
It’s almost like… you crack jokes to distract from the hole in your argument.
A hole big enough to sail a Chinese Junk through. A junk filled with immigrants from the 19th century, from China, who made us better off, despite having no cultural similarities to us.
Something you keep trying to tell me is impossible. ¯_(ツ)_/¯