by Sixstrings » Sat 29 Nov 2014, 21:18:56
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'O')pen & tolerant multiculturalism is all nice & dandy until you get an infiltration by a particular group with no regard whatsoever for the status quo. Variations immediately springing to mind include Sharia advocating Islamists & agents of Chinese industrial espionage.
Do you think Australia's been overwhelmed?
At that G20 there were cossack immigrants in Australia, protesting in favor of "the steel ruler Putin," and the article said they were surrounded by Aussie cops.
As for the US -- it's Mexican immigration that's overwhelmed us a bit. They're not bad people, the aggregate.. but IT'S JUST TOO MUCH, it's going to make us a Spanish speaking country ya know? And -- we sure have a lot of Mexican gang bangers, but I never hear about any Polish or Ukrainian immigrant gangbangers. So why can't we take more Poles in, and fewer from just one place -- Mexico?
It's been too much, from just one place -- Mexico and central America. It's not that they are bad people, it's just too much from just one spot. We're talking ten million more illegals that Obama is now legalizing. The last time Reagan did this, it was one million. What will the next legalization be, 40 million Mexicans?
My sense is that in the US we're a lot more racially sensitive and too PC, compared to an Australia. But back in the late 19th century, congress had no qualms about setting quotas and saying "okay, we want x number of Germans, x number of Swedes, x number of Irish, x number of this, x number of that."
If you're making a melting pot then it's a stew, you can't have all potatoes or all carrots. There's got to be a way to talk about this issue again, without "sounding racist."

Immigration is okay, muslim immigration too -- they actually all work hard, over here at least, they aren't the ones on welfare. But muslim immigration has to be watched a bit though, Canada and Europe and Britain and France have gone a bit awry with that.
Generally, the US has always done well to take people in that were being oppressed. Like when the shah fell, and we took in all those Iranian immigrants. They're opposed to the new regime. Same with Cubans. And all these groups have done well, over here, and aren't wanting sharia.
You just gotta be smart about it, and get out of the political correct "I don't want to sound racist stuff" and start making some quotas of who you want in and how many.
Muslims from some places are fine, but no you don't want to open the doors wide open to Afghan or Yemeni immigration either.
It works out over here, mostly, because we don't have a welfare state. If people wanted to be miserable then they can just stay home and be poor and miserable, no reason to come here. If you come here to work, you can do very well.
And assimilation matters, you just don't want to be overwhelmed is all, people need to come here to become Americans. Russian American, fine, but the emphasis is on AMERICAN. We've had too much immigration from central America. I actually like the South American immigrants, but in sum total we're becoming a spanish speaking nation, it's all the Mexican immigration that's been too much.