The "They Will Not Assimilate" Argument Rising Yet Again From the Grave
How many times does an argument have to be wrong, and for how long, before it finally loses credibility? I suppose the answer must be nearly infinite, because the "they will not assimilate" argument is rising again, despite being about 0 for 19 on the groups to which it has been applied. Germans, Irish, Italians, Eastern Europeans, Chinese, Mexicans and now Chechnyans. This argument always seems to be treated seriously in real time and then looks stupid 20 or 30 years later. As an extreme example, here is Benjamin Franklin writing about Germans in 1751:
why should the Palatine Boors [ie Germans] be suffered to swarm into our Settlements, and by herding together establish their Language and Manners to the Exclusion of ours? Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion.
(By the way, if you want to retain an unadulterated rosy image of Franklin, who was a great man for many reasons, do not read the last paragraph at that link. People are complicated and sometimes even great men could not shed all the prejudices of their day.)
The only good news is that the circle of those acceptable to the xenophobic keeps getting larger. It used to be just the English, then it was Northern Europeans, then much later it was all Europe and today I would say it is Europe and parts of Asia. So that's progress, I suppose.
Fun fact: Ironically, the English King at the time Franklin wrote the quote above was George II. He was actually a German immigrant, born in Germany before his father came to England as King George I, jumping over numerous better claimants who were Catholic. His son actually assimilated very well, as George III spoke English as a first language, and his granddaughter Victoria practically defined English-ness. By the way, Victoria would marry another German immigrant.
Que?
CO2 alarm going off, Lar?
OH, you’re referring to your military charity work.
Actually, society would be better off had you been KIA.
There’s still time, Lar, go for it.
Larry – I mean this sincerely, no bullshitting – get help. I speak for most of us here.
You are so functionally retarded, it is embarrassing to the rest of us having to watch you bumble around on various comment boards, with your intellectual drooling and flatulence, deluding yourself that you’re coherent and logical.
You’re about as smart as my 2-year-old, and less coordinated.
You aren’t smart enough to fear for your offspring, so we do it for you.
Then again, they’re your offspring, so they likely are either severely handicapped or dead.
But we are worried for them on your behalf, nonetheless.
Seriously, Larry, you need help.
Meso - that's a scream coming from you guy! LMAO!
Denial is the first natural reaction, Lar.
Work through it.
You need help.
what?
be clear Meso. whats your point?
Only if they want to assimilate because they see it as a route to success. Welfare IS NOT success.
Lartard really upped his game on this thread...if 75% of all immigrants were criminals, according to the craptacularly retarded, grossly fucktarded LartardedGee?!, the just "might" be a reason to be concerned. Golly, gee whiz! If we had tens of millions of unassimilated immigrants wreaking havoc within our borders, Cap'n Brainstem just might be prodded into paying attention! Serious, you guys! He is a filthy, ignorant, piece of shit, just like the rest of the "open borders" cult that refuses to inform themselves of the facts.
"The US has operated from the beginning by importing labor to do very low-paying jobs..."
Oh, for fuck's sake. Are you one of those neo-leftists, like Warren, that feel the need to abrogate American sovereignty because of slavery? Because, really, that shit ended 150 years ago and we have said that we are sorry about a gajillion times.
Otherwise, you are just talking out of your ass. We haven't "imported" a goddamned soul since the second quarter of the 19th century. We have 30+ million illegal immigrants in the country that came here voluntarily, on their own. Are you capable of discerning the difference?
Pfft. You open borders advocates are so convinced that you are morally superior that you ignore the calamitous consequences that have been recorded everywhere, including here.
Over 10% of Mexico's citizens now live in the US. To Warren and other open borders propagandists, that's too low.
Heck, guy, get some help.
Heck.
geeze Meso.. I've gone all these years .. held a job... contributed to the defense of the country, paid my taxes, voted, volunteered, manned the polls, done jury duty, all kinds of stuff and people always thought quite highly of my efforts.... and now I'm getting advice from you? lord... meso... I mean this is tragic.
Bullshit, parasite.
You are a leech, and always have been.
Thankfully, you won’t be around much longer.
I totally agree. The guest worker designation is the appropriate "amnesty". Current illegals can go to their local federal office and receive the designation. But, the road to citizenship is a differnet story, for them AND their children, even children born here.
Some of the descendants of those German settlers are still unassimilated. OTOH, I haven't heard of anyone who still considered the Amish to be a threat.
Last I checked the immigrants to New Zealand did not assimilate to become Maoris, the immigrants to Australia did not assimilate to become Aborigines, the immigrants to all the Americas did not assimilate to become Aztecs, Mayans, Sioux,…; the immigrants to Gaul (from Rome) did not become Gauls; the immigrants (Anglo-Saxons) to Roman Britain did not assimilate…. Must I go on? Plenty of peoples have been destroyed by immigrants.
Only the outcome matters. If the USA assimilates its Spanish-speaking immigrants by adopting their political culture, then even if every single immigrants speaks English, visits Vegas, and watches the CBS Evening News instead of Univision, no worthwhile assimilation has taken place.
surely there is a difference between invade and conquer and allowing people to immigrate.
right?
perhaps we can say - that in less developed countries - they lack the will to collectively form a strong enough government to stop invaders at their borders, and that all such "countries" that do not agree to govern for a common defense, will succumb to invaders and conquerors long before they actually institute immigration laws.
and even now, not all countries allow anyone from any other country to immigrate.
It's certainly possible if enough people in the US decide they do not want people from certain
other countries to immigrate - and they reflect that view at elections - that policies will change.
I will agree and admit that we only have capacity for a certain number of immigrates and it
cannot be uncapped.
Unfortunately there is a lot of documentation about the fake. It isn't just fake, you are suppose to try to live off the kindness of the enemy (go on welfare and food stamps) as well.
You have a good point. In the olden days, it was hard to immigrate, and immigrants knew that there wouldn't be a safety net so they came to America to work, and many of these immigrants not only worked hard but created businesses and industries that thrived due work ethic. Others came because they were really persecuted but came here for a better life - again willing to work for it. After WWII we changed the system to allow people in if they had necessary skills, this meant that folks had to be fairly well educated, or ran a significant business, in order to immigrate. Ted Kennedy changed that all in the 1960's - I guess it was considered racist, because poor people couldn't come in.
Now there are still folks from poor countries who have come, relatively assimilated and are doing quite well. Vietnamese are a very good example. But then again, they persecuted and endured hardships and came here wanting to make a better life. The less motivated stayed in 'Nam. Problem we have today is that we are letting many folk over who do not really want to work for a living, and do not really want get ahead in life. We see this in Los Angeles, which has become a ghetto for poor Mexican immigrants. They don't make their kids go to school, and aren't motivated to do more than get welfare. Many who are illegal get the welfare as well. This is much different than San Diego area, where most of the Hispanics want to be part of the American system.
Well yes in Deerborn and some parts of London, non-Muslim women are voluntarily wearing the full body garb, because the Islamic notion is that any woman showing skin above the ankles and wrists is a Slut and deserves to be raped. This notion does not seem to be being assimilated away.
Part the problem is the Mosques. If they were like Christian churches and funded locally there would be no problem. They wouldn't preach such extremism - but the US mosques and mosques throughout the western world are funded by Saudi Arabia to preach the most extreme form of Islam. Yes this garbage is being brought to us by our friends the Saudi's. They also sponsor camps for the kids - where Muslim parents just assume that the kids are going on a nature camp church outing, but instead the kids are being indoctrinated with the Wahabi POV
It will happen though, too many Rino's want to be liked, and the liberals think getting 20 million freeloaders into the country on welfare and voting will guarantee liberal dominance of our society for at least another 30 years.
Coyote Blog: (By the way, if you want to retain an unadulterated rosy image of Franklin, who was a great man for many reasons, do not read the last paragraph at that link. People are complicated and sometimes even great men could not shed all the prejudices of their day.)
Franklin's essay is also sometimes credited with prefiguring the basic ideas of Malthus's "Essay on the Principle of Population".
Don: Among the prejudices of the day, how better to try to convince people not to bring slaves to the Colonies than to make them think about it in terms of "Darkening" the "Complexion of [his] Country?" Doesn't seem inconsistent with what I know of the man's writings.
That has been our impression.
Yep. I'm with Milton Friedman on this one: you can't have an open immigration policy when you have a welfare state. It seems to me a lot of libertarians make the error of equating the benefits of immigration with an open immigration policy under a welfare state. We may all agree that immigration is a good thing, and was a good thing. But this all depends on the incentives to immigrate. Once you change those incentives, the results can be negative.
Of course, the incentive argument applies to the entire population of the US, not just the immigrants. Therefore, this isn't an immigration problem, it is a welfare state problem.
But when libertarians insist on open borders, because of the hypothetical benefits under a better incentive system, I think they forget that we are far from an ideal incentive system in this country.
Joshua Vanderberg: So, how long does it take for assimilation to take place then?
Typically three generations. The first generation has troubles with English, and wear traditional garb. The second generation is bilingual. The third generation forgets the native tongue.
MingoV :French descent people in Canada who, to this day, have not assimilated.
France had its own colony, and their own very strong culture.
nehemiah: There are "no go" sections in European cities where non-Muslims must conform to the cultural, legal and religious norms of Islam or expect to be greeted with violence.
"Well there are certain sections of New York, Major, that I wouldn't advise you to try to invade." — Rick Blaine to Major Strasser, Casablanca
Eris Guy: Plenty of peoples have been destroyed by immigrants.
That's right. It's not a matter of conquest, but of culture. Vikings and Mongols conquered, but were assimilated. On the other hand, Western and American culture is very powerful. They wear I♥NY baseball caps in Beijing and eat Big Macs in Paris. It's not a matter of immigrants assimilated within America—of course they will—, but of American cultural assimilation outside its borders.
Fundamentalists in the Islamic world are reacting to the pervasive influence of Western culture. They don't want to lose what they have in the rush to modernization. Their children wear modern clothes, have modern ideas. Some react violently.
That and an attitude difference. The groups used to come because they wanted to be part of the American way. Many groups today, are told by their religious leaders not to assimilate, and those that come in and might assimilate, are told by "well meaning" folk here, not to assimilate because our US culture is so bad.
You tell folks to come to the US and keep your messed up countries ways - and you are also bound to have trouble.
I don't necessarily endorse this website, but when googling to find immigration as a percent of the population by year, I found this page with some stats on it, FYI...
http://www.cis.org/2012-profile-of-americas-foreign-born-population#historic
Regardless on one's position on immigration, I would think that, outside of anarchists, we ought to be concerned with how insecure the borders are. One might even argue that not being "documented" also raises a security concern.