d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate >
Poll > Trump 2016 > Trump Vs Clinton
Prev1141914201421142214233169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Aug 7 2017 07:46pm
Quote (Brian_D @ Aug 7 2017 05:03pm)
Ive been to Japan and everyone was nice as hell to me. Even the homeless people were nice. I gave a guy a few yen in change to buy some food and he came running up 3-5 mins later to give me some of what he had bought with the money.

The only experience I had that was off at all was a girl who made an ugly face when she noticed my tattoos.

I would live in Japan in a heartbeat if I was not creating roots in CO.


It's because you didn't live there. The racist in Japan is more under-the-table than it is here. They won't yell nasty words at you, or be impolite to your face. They will just deny you jobs, social meetings, and other important facets of life until you decide to leave.

Quote (ofthevoid @ Aug 7 2017 04:39pm)
Precisely but the world perception is no where near as critical compared to the US or EU. Japan immigration policy is pretty draconian compared to western standards, even though they are a modern & developed nation but they get no flack from the media. Meanwhile here in the US, trying to restrict immigration temporarily from active conflict zones and media & everyone else is foaming at the mouth 24/7.


There's a few reasons why the situation is different.

Our population density is far far lower than Japan. We have historically allowed mass immigration, and even depended on it for a large portion of our history to be successful. The reasons given for restricting immigration wouldn't be accomplished by said immigration restriction, so there's no reason to actually carry it out besides xenophobia. They didn't have a direct hand in causing the negative situations that cause immigration into their country in the first place.

The list of why they can legitimately have a more restrictive immigration policy than us and not violate the same moral standards is pretty fucking long.
Member
Posts: 52,301
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,404.67
Aug 7 2017 08:04pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 8 Aug 2017 03:46)
We have historically allowed mass immigration, and even depended on it for a large portion of our history to be successful.


well, the european immigrants were culturally much closer to the original settlers than present-day's immigrants. germans, irishmen and italians are easier to integrate into a society built and shaped by englishmen than mexicans, africans or arabs.
and even then, the integration of all those european immigrants didnt go thaaat easy and actually caused a lot of friction and backlash.

also dont underestimate the role that technological progress and a changed economy play. back in the 19th and early 20th century, there was a big demand for manual, unskilled labor. all those immigrants actully had something to do, they could contribute to the US society even if they were illiterates. nowadays, the job market for lower skilled workers is particularly strained. there is simply much less use for unskilled immigrants than 100 years ago. this also means that the mean net effect of unskilled immigration on society and public finances is today much worse than back then.


simply put, the fact that unskilled immigration was a good idea 100-150 years ago doesnt necessarily imply that it's still a good idea today.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 7 2017 08:06pm
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Aug 7 2017 08:15pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Aug 7 2017 08:04pm)
well, the european immigrants were culturally much closer to the original settlers than present-day's immigrants. germans, irishmen and italians are easier to integrate into a society built and shaped by englishmen than mexicans, africans or arabs.
and even then, the integration of all those european immigrants didnt go thaaat easy and actually caused a lot of friction and backlash.

also dont underestimate the role that technological progress and a changed economy play. back in the 19th and early 20th century, there was a big demand for manual, unskilled labor. all those immigrants actully had something to do, they could contribute to the US society even if they were illiterates. nowadays, the job market for lower skilled workers is particularly strained. there is simply much less use for unskilled immigrants than 100 years ago. this also means that the mean net effect of unskilled immigration on society and public finances is today much worse than back then.


simply put, the fact that unskilled immigration was a good idea 100-150 years ago doesnt necessarily imply that it's still a good idea today.


We are more similar to Syrian refugees now than Chinese immigrants in the 1800's.

A decent chunk of their "cultural difference" was due to our propaganda spreading in the Middle East to combat the evil atheist Russian communists, so the cultural argument really just boils back down to our own interference.

If immigration restrictions were being billed as "we don't need unskilled labor", then you might have a point, but it isn't. It's being billed as "stop terrorists!" even though it won't.
Member
Posts: 15,467
Joined: Sep 15 2007
Gold: 475.46
Aug 7 2017 08:23pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Aug 7 2017 06:46pm)
It's because you didn't live there. The racist in Japan is more under-the-table than it is here. They won't yell nasty words at you, or be impolite to your face. They will just deny you jobs, social meetings, and other important facets of life until you decide to leave.



There's a few reasons why the situation is different.

Our population density is far far lower than Japan. We have historically allowed mass immigration, and even depended on it for a large portion of our history to be successful. The reasons given for restricting immigration wouldn't be accomplished by said immigration restriction, so there's no reason to actually carry it out besides xenophobia. They didn't have a direct hand in causing the negative situations that cause immigration into their country in the first place.

The list of why they can legitimately have a more restrictive immigration policy than us and not violate the same moral standards is pretty fucking long.


There are alot of Americans living in Japan so tho that may happen from time to time it isnt a huge part of society otherwise I dont think the Americans who do live there would stay. Additionally, I didnt hang out at tourist places all day so most of the people I ran into had no idea if I lived there or not outside of not speaking Japanese perfectly but that alone isnt enough to make a judgment call on my living status.

This post was edited by Brian_D on Aug 7 2017 08:23pm
Member
Posts: 26,272
Joined: Aug 11 2013
Gold: 13,770.00
Aug 7 2017 08:26pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Aug 7 2017 06:46pm)
It's because you didn't live there. The racist in Japan is more under-the-table than it is here. They won't yell nasty words at you, or be impolite to your face. They will just deny you jobs, social meetings, and other important facets of life until you decide to leave.



There's a few reasons why the situation is different.

Our population density is far far lower than Japan. We have historically allowed mass immigration, and even depended on it for a large portion of our history to be successful. The reasons given for restricting immigration wouldn't be accomplished by said immigration restriction, so there's no reason to actually carry it out besides xenophobia. They didn't have a direct hand in causing the negative situations that cause immigration into their country in the first place.

The list of why they can legitimately have a more restrictive immigration policy than us and not violate the same moral standards is pretty fucking long.


The limited immigration that they have allowed was from other Asiatic countries i.e. South Korea. Not sure how excluding other racial groups from your immigration does not fall under discriminatory immigration policies.

The whole point of their system is to preserve homogeneity, something that is absolutely fine and dandy in non-white majority countries but it's an absolute crime against humanity in white majority countries.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Aug 7 2017 08:31pm
Member
Posts: 52,301
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,404.67
Aug 7 2017 08:32pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 8 Aug 2017 04:15)
We are more similar to Syrian refugees now than Chinese immigrants in the 1800's.

A decent chunk of their "cultural difference" was due to our propaganda spreading in the Middle East to combat the evil atheist Russian communists, so the cultural argument really just boils back down to our own interference.


hold on, are you saying that the effects of western interference and propaganda are one of the major reasons behind the cultural differences between western societies and the muslim world?
are you freakin serious? O.O


Quote
If immigration restrictions were being billed as "we don't need unskilled labor", then you might have a point, but it isn't. It's being billed as "stop terrorists!" even though it won't.

fair enough. but you saw what happened last week when trump made the - in my opinion - very reasonable suggestion that immigration should be steered more by skill and demand than by family ties: an outcry all across the liberal and mainstream media, all essentially saying "is he completely nuts that he wants to crack down on legal immigration? what the fuck trump?"

I really wonder why the idea that a nation's immigration policy should primarily serve this nation's interests (and not those of the potential or want-to-be immigrants) is so frowned upon...
Australia and Canada have been doing just that for the longest time and almost no one really blames them for it, but god forbid someone suggests to do the same in the US or europe...

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 7 2017 08:36pm
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Aug 7 2017 09:06pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Aug 7 2017 08:32pm)
hold on, are you saying that the effects of western interference and propaganda are one of the major reasons behind the cultural differences between western societies and the muslim world?
are you freakin serious? O.O



fair enough. but you saw what happened last week when trump made the - in my opinion - very reasonable suggestion that immigration should be steered more by skill and demand than by family ties: an outcry all across the liberal and mainstream media, all essentially saying "is he completely nuts that he wants to crack down on legal immigration? what the fuck trump?"

I really wonder why the idea that a nation's immigration policy should primarily serve this nation's interests (and not those of the potential or want-to-be immigrants) is so frowned upon...
Australia and Canada have been doing just that for the longest time and almost no one really blames them for it, but god forbid someone suggests to do the same in the US or europe...


Yes. We dropped propaganda and supported radical jihadist groups during the cold war in an effort to use them as a proxy to fight the Soviet Union. The Taliban and Al Qaeda still use our propaganda materials TO THIS DAY.

You are mischaracterizing the outcry. You're missing entire levels of the argument on why family ties matter to immigration policy.

It is frowned upon that we shouldn't favor immigrants BECAUSE WE LARGELY CAUSED THE UNREST. It's not a difficult concept. If you are going to fuck over another nation you need to deal with the fallout, not just leave it to fester as a power vacuum. If you don't deal with the fallout this is known as "a dick move".

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Aug 7 2017 09:07pm
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Aug 7 2017 09:08pm
Quote (ofthevoid @ Aug 7 2017 08:26pm)
The limited immigration that they have allowed was from other Asiatic countries i.e. South Korea. Not sure how excluding other racial groups from your immigration does not fall under discriminatory immigration policies.

The whole point of their system is to preserve homogeneity, something that is absolutely fine and dandy in non-white majority countries but it's an absolute crime against humanity in white majority countries.


I mean, if you're totally going to ignore everything I typed which already deals with your criticism, that's fine. Just don't pretend we're having a conversation.
Member
Posts: 26,272
Joined: Aug 11 2013
Gold: 13,770.00
Aug 7 2017 09:18pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Aug 7 2017 08:08pm)
I mean, if you're totally going to ignore everything I typed which already deals with your criticism, that's fine. Just don't pretend we're having a conversation.


Again with your poor comprehension. It's not about population density. They actively favored certain demographics i.e. other Asians for purpose of preserving homogeneity. Explain how that's not racist?

Preventing people from active war zones may or may not reduce terrorism but that requires research & analytics, you going for the nonsensical "xenophobia" even though the banned countries account for like 13% of all Muslims worldwide is pretty nonsensical.

Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Aug 7 2017 09:24pm
Quote (ofthevoid @ Aug 7 2017 09:18pm)
Again with your poor comprehension. It's not about population density. They actively favored certain demographics i.e. other Asians for purpose of preserving homogeneity. Explain how that's not racist?

Preventing people from active war zones may or may not reduce terrorism but that requires research & analytics, you going for the nonsensical "xenophobia" even though the banned countries account for like 13% of all Muslims worldwide is pretty nonsensical.


Hmmm still deflecting your poor reading comprehension onto me. You're literally the only one I have this problem with, and you have this problem with half a dozen users.

Wonder who needs improvement. ..
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1141914201421142214233169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll