Swarm

[1eyedjack]

Heh, I love the final "Note .." at the end:

 

NOTE: If you think that "heartless bastards" will upset your readers, you may substitute "gutless cowards", or even "craven opportunists".[/Quote]

 

Good to see a carefully considered turn of phrase.

[y66]

That’s the British for you: criticising people fleeing genocide for pushing their children over a perimeter fence, when we’d do it for a 40% discount off an Asda telly. Frankie Boyle

[1eyedjack]

Exodus?

Endodus?

[Vampyr]

I think that it is important to remember that sympathy for these, or any other migrants, is unrelated to the fact that a small, densely populated country cannot take them all in. Perhaps a country with plenty of room could step up and help alleviate the crisis. The United States, maybe?

[Aberlour10]

Perhaps a country with plenty of room could step up and help alleviate the crisis. The United States, maybe?

 

My impression is that the countries with plenty of room act much more restrictively against refugees than others ( see Australia for example)

[blackshoe]

I think that it is important to remember that sympathy for these, or any other migrants, is unrelated to the fact that a small, densely populated country cannot take them all in. Perhaps a country with plenty of room could step up and help alleviate the crisis. The United States, maybe?

Hm. I'm not sure about "plenty of room" any more. Should we put them all in the Mojave Desert?

[Vampyr]

Hm. I'm not sure about "plenty of room" any more. Should we put them all in the Mojave Desert?

 

Well, New Jersey is the only state with a population density higher than England.

 

When houses and lots are cut back to English sizes, then you can talk about running out of room.

[mike777]

I think that it is important to remember that sympathy for these, or any other migrants, is unrelated to the fact that a small, densely populated country cannot take them all in. Perhaps a country with plenty of room could step up and help alleviate the crisis. The United States, maybe?

 

 

Excellent point, I hope and pray the USA takes more in, many more in from Asia and Africa.

 

I guess the worry is:

1) they may work harder, longer, smarter and cheaper, they will add to our culture in new ways

2) they will not work and spend the day smoking weed, swilling booze and making babies, all on your tab.

 

SILLY FOR THE MOST PART2, TRUE FOR PART1

[kenberg]

This idea of cultural benefits to the host nation keeps showing up. I think it is bogus. My thoughts:

 

According to Ellis Island records, my father's nationality was Hungarian, his ethnicity Croatian. He was nevere sure just where he came from, only that he arrived when he was ten with his sixteen year old brother. For the purpose of this note, let's say he was Croatian.

 

I have great confidence that neither my father nor the U.S. government felt a pressing need to import Croatian culture to the U.S. We (the U.S.) had a lot of space, we hoped to build a country, we needed immigrants. My father made a decent living installing weatherstripping, he married, bought a house, adopted and raised me. If we could hold a seance and consult the folks who brought Ellis Island into being, they would probably say "This is what we had in mind". Briefly put, My father was invited to come here. His presence, and that of others, was the result of legislation designed to help the U.S.

 

The situation with the refugees is entirely different. Not one of the prospective host countries is in need of a large influx of immigrants. From anywhere. And yes, culture, religion and race all matter. My father was born Anton Perekovic but he became Thomas Berg, he learned English, he went to the Presbyterian Church (although his interest in religious matters was, as near as I ever saw, absolutely zip). Had he not said anything, I and everyone would have assumed that he was born in the U.S. My maternal grandfather was born in Denmark. I first learned this about fifteen years ago. They immigrated, and then they assimilated.

 

If I can just say a bit more about the U.S. The usual figure for illegal immigrants is, I guess, eleven million. If this comes up in debates, I believe the first question any speaker should address is "Is it a good thing or a bad thing to have eleven million illegal immigrants here?". I think the answer is self-evident, it is a bad thing. If we thought it was a good thing then we would have set up a modern Ellis Island and brought them here legally. How this problem should be addressed is a legitimate debate, just as how to deal with the refugee problem is a legitimate debate. But speaking as if it's really great that we will be adding to our cultural diversity? No, I don't think so.

 

I expect to be called names for this post, particularly for saying that culture, religion and race matter in setting immigration policy. In addressing practical problems, I believe these things do matter. John Lennon's Imagine is a beautiful song. Hemingway provided the response, albeit in a different setting, many years earlier: "Wouldn't it be pretty to think so?"

[Vampyr]

By the way... the migrants that are causing the main problem in the UK at present are coming from France. How and when did refugees from France become recognised? Is escaping less generous welfare benefits a valid reason to grant asylum?

[PassedOut]

It seems to me that the pace of assimilation varies with circumstances like age and location.

 

My maternal grandmother was born in the USA to parents who had emigrated from Trysil, Norway with their (very) extended family and other families from the same area. They all settled in a county near Alexandria, Minnesota and started farming there. They picked out a beautiful spot overlooking a lake, built a Lutheran Church there, and called the church "Trysil." They spoke Norwegian at home and at church. My grandmother spoke no English until she went to school, and even then the kids spoke Norwegian to each other outside the classroom. She had a strong Norwegian accent all of her life.

 

My maternal grandfather came to the USA from Hustad, Norway by himself at age 19 with very little money. He moved to Minnesota and became a Lutheran minister, earning the money for his education first as a farm laborer in the area where my grandmother lived and then as a trolley conductor in Minneapolis. His first church was the aforementioned Trysil church near Alexandria. He married my grandmother when he was 31 and she was 21. She remembered my grandfather having given her and a bunch of other kids a sleigh ride at Christmas time when she was 10 and he was 20.

 

When I knew him, my grandfather had only a slight Norwegian accent, and he worked on it by tape recording his sermons in his study and then playing them back to listen for ways to remove his accent. You would never have guessed that he was the one born in Norway and my grandmother the one born in the USA.

 

My first wife arrived in the USA at age 10 speaking Russian and German, but very little English. Nevertheless, she skipped one year of elementary school, one year of high school, graduated from college in 3 years, and had her Masters in 17th-century English literature at age 20. I met her at the University of Wisconsin chess club when she strolled in, sat down across from me, and moved her King's pawn. She was there working on her doctorate. She was the only girlfriend I ever had who could play double-blindfold chess with me. (Once we were sitting in a Laundromat at 3 am when a police officer entered and asked what we were doing there, sitting back to back. He was pretty suspicious when we explained that we were playing chess.)

 

Finally, we know a mother and daughter where the daughter is a citizen and her mother is Mexican, illegally in the USA. As an illegal, it is very difficult for the mother to assimilate, as one might imagine. There are some things that should not be, but nevertheless are, and we need to deal with the situation.

[PassedOut]

I expect to be called names for this post, particularly for saying that culture, religion and race matter in setting immigration policy. In addressing practical problems, I believe these things do matter.

I believe that culture and religion (which I consider to be tightly linked) do matter. But I can't think of any way that race matters. My experience has been that race doesn't matter at all, except for people's reactions to folks who look different.

[y66]

If we're going to bring the Beatles into this, perhaps the "don't dig no Pakistanis taking all the peoples' jobs" version of "Get Back" is more to the point. That was Paul, who seems to be more concerned about David Cameron's position on fox hunting these days than immigration.

 

John's *real* fans might prefer "You say you got a real solution. Well, you know we'd all love to see the plan." or these lines from his 1968 Rolling Stone interview with Jonathan Cott:

 

Cott: Couldn't you go off to your own community and not be bothered with all of this?

 

Lennon: Well, it's just the same there, you see. Cause I mean India was a bit of that, it was a taste of it – it's the same. So there's a small community, it's the same gig, it's relative. There's no escape.

[psyck]

Hm. I'm not sure about "plenty of room" any more. Should we put them all in the Mojave Desert?

Just send them all to India, they are used to taking in millions of refugees, from Bangladesh etc.

[blackshoe]

Well, New Jersey is the only state with a population density higher than England.

 

When houses and lots are cut back to English sizes, then you can talk about running out of room.

I do not think anybody gets to decide what population density we should have here. Or what size houses and lots we should have.

[mike777]

By the way... the migrants that are causing the main problem in the UK at present are coming from France. How and when did refugees from France become recognised? Is escaping less generous welfare benefits a valid reason to grant asylum?

 

What is the "main problem" these immigrants are causing? Any suggested solutions, or partial solutions to this "main problem"?

 

In any event I hope the USA may help by taking some in.

 

-------------------

 

Here in the USA the big problem seems to be so many people jumping the queue.

Some basically do not want any border controls or something close to zero, others want a border with greater controlled entry.

 

This used to be much less of an issue when migrants were granted something close to zero in welfare benefits but paid something in taxes. Today that is thought of as cruel or worse.

[blackshoe]

What is the "main problem" these immigrants are causing? Any suggested solutions, or partial solutions to this "main problem"?

 

In any event I hope the USA may help by taking some in.

Good questions, but as for the US, maybe we should find a solution to our own immigration problems first.

[mike777]

Good questions, but as for the US, maybe we should find a solution to our own immigration problems first.

 

OK what do you see as the big main problem or problems? Any suggested solutions or partial solutions?

[blackshoe]

The big main problem is the influx of hard-core criminals connected with the drug trade. I think a good first step would be to eliminate the so-called "war on drugs" and everything attached to it. I do not think closing our borders, or putting up a fence, or a wall, would be helpful in any way.

 

I think that if someone wants to come here, be productive, and join our society (as opposed to bringing along a microcosm of his or her own), then more power to him. If he wants to come here, commit crimes, live off the productivity of the rest of us, then he ought to be denied entry. If he lies about why he wants to come here (surprise, surprise!) then when he is found out, he should be deported — after making reparations (I don't mean jail time) for any harm he's caused others here.

[Aberlour10]

By the way... the migrants that are causing the main problem in the UK at present are coming from France. How and when did refugees from France become recognised? Is escaping less generous welfare benefits a valid reason to grant asylum?

 

A german journalist talked with a group of refugees ( from Central Africa, Pakistan, Syria..) in "jungle" of Calais. All of them have tried to get to GB for a months. He asked them for the reasons why dont they want to stay in France.

 

The reasons they talked about:

 

There are no "jungles" in GB ( "jungle" of Calais" = self made slum near a rubbish damp. In GB you may get fast into hotel room.

 

In France refugees wait for the decission "accepted or not accepted" 2 years, in GB 2 months

 

The "accepted rate" in France = 10% in GB near 60%

 

The language,, all of them speak english ( very different skills), no one french.

 

 

 

[kenberg]

I believe that culture and religion (which I consider to be tightly linked) do matter. But I can't think of any way that race matters. My experience has been that race doesn't matter at all, except for people's reactions to folks who look different.

 

I want to be sure that I understand you. Are you saying that race doesn't matter or that race shouldn't matter. I would happily agree that it shouldn't matter. But it does. And I would not underestimate the impact of people's reactions. People's reactions are a lot of what drives race problems in this country, and I don't regard those problems as minor.

 

But I think I have a larger point. I predict that Europe as a whole will not commit to handling both the large number of current refugees and the expected numbers continuing indefinitely into the future. Myself, I find this extremely understandable, I have no plans to explain to them that they have not met my expectations. But for whatever the reason, the problem will be beyond them. Or so I predict.

 

But, as mentioned, this does not have to mean that nothing can be done. In awful events, you often cannot do everything, you usually could do something. I suggest moving beyond whether it is a swarm or a tide, and instead choosing what will be done and what will not be done. Possibly, I don't know but possibly, a way can be found for some to stay where they are. They don't like it there, I get that. That is not difficult to understand. I wouldn't like it there. Maybe some can be moved to other areas of the same country. I don't know. But it seems pretty clear to me that having everyone who wishes to go to the UK just hop on a boat is not going to work.

 

Quite some years back we went into Somalia in force to feed people. That went pretty well. Then we tried to reorganize their society. That didn't go so well. There might be a lesson there.

[PassedOut]

I want to be sure that I understand you. Are you saying that race doesn't matter or that race shouldn't matter. I would happily agree that it shouldn't matter. But it does. And I would not underestimate the impact of people's reactions. People's reactions are a lot of what drives race problems in this country, and I don't regard those problems as minor.

I don't either.

 

Problems arise when immigrants bring with them, and cling to, cultural and religious ideas at odds with those of the place where they move. FGM is an extreme example. Those are the sorts problems that the immigrants themselves need to solve.

 

Problems with race go the opposite direction.

 

(Have to go now. Maybe more later...)

[Vampyr]

I do not think anybody gets to decide what population density we should have here. Or what size houses and lots we should have.

 

Perhaps not, but to then tell countries like England and the Netherlands you have no more room is just taking the piss.

[y66]

The big main problem is the influx of hard-core criminals connected with the drug trade. I think a good first step would be to eliminate the so-called "war on drugs" and everything attached to it. I do not think closing our borders, or putting up a fence, or a wall, would be helpful in any way.

 

I think that if someone wants to come here, be productive, and join our society (as opposed to bringing along a microcosm of his or her own), then more power to him. If he wants to come here, commit crimes, live off the productivity of the rest of us, then he ought to be denied entry. If he lies about why he wants to come here (surprise, surprise!) then when he is found out, he should be deported — after making reparations (I don't mean jail time) for any harm he's caused others here.

The big main problem is the influx of hard core criminals connected with the drug trade? Even the Wall Street Journal reports that this is a myth.

 

A good first step would be to eliminate the so-called "war on drugs"? The U.S. funded war on drugs (hardly so-called) has been a total cluster f**k from day one (over a trillion dollars spent since the 70s with net negative results) and has most definitely exacerbated the immigration problem by strengthening narco-cartels and narco-terrorism and destabilizing governments from Mexico to Bolivia. Even the Washington Times reports that the Obama administration gets this. Libertarians obviously got this before the war on drugs was even conceived.

 

The first step in implementing a semi-rational immigration policy is for Congress to pass one. The Senate did this on June 27, 2013. Not rational enough? Spare me.

[kenberg]

Is there room?

 

We have room, of course we do. We hear of illegal immigrants living in groups of ten or more in an apartment meant for three but this is not related to lack of space in the nation. There is plenty of elbow room in Montana. Quite possibly I would enjoy living in Montana but it is not a natural destination for most immigrants.

 

You never know who is going to go where and with what result. The Hmong have settled in Minneapolis/St. Paul. The Wik says "The 2010 U.S. Census stated there were 66,000 ethnic Hmong in Minneapolis-St. Paul, giving it the largest urban Hmong population in the world". There is also the amusing note that "In 2012 McDonald's introduced its first Hmong language advertising in the United States at a restaurant in Minneapolis. However it was unintelligible to Hmong speakers"

 

I don't get back to St. Paul that often (I grew up there) but from what I gather, this counts as a success story. (I mean the Hmong migration there is a success. Perhaps my absence is also seen as a success but we can skip over that.)

 

And that, I think, is the point. Some things work, some don't, and it is a mistake to embark on a plan that will predictably fail, regardless of moral arguments about what we "should" do.