No not really. For starters, who determines what is the “true” culture or what the goals even are?
Mass immigration explores the space very differently, in a way that is sudden and discontinues.I think it's reasonable for people to worry that they're being replaced, because that's actually what's (more or less) happening.
My issue is the entitlement that goes hand in hand with this mentality. Everyone replaces someone. What makes me so special that I get to go, “oh no you don’t, all cultural change ends with me and my friends unless I specifically sanction the change”?
People made room for me, after all.
Civilizational: Respect for rights of minorities, rule of law rather than of the strong, willingness to work and pay taxes, valuing education.
Superficial: Cuisine, dress, artistic taste, ritual formalities of religion.
Few governments have had success splitting immigration policy priorities along these lines, though some have had the wisdom to at least try.
I believe it is called progressive and liberal because African Americans and Native Americans have historically been enslaved or (nearly) exterminated by Europeans in North America.
What's wrong with being ethnic-nationalist?
Europeans are amazing and should be held up high.
They should stop and reverse the importation of the third world and remain European.
Not that this is an option for all countries, specially those that don't have unified history or culture. For example with USA it might make sense for native population.
I don't have a strong opinion on immigration either way, like anything it can be a force for good or a distaster depending on how it's handled. But if there's one thing I hate, it's taboos and buzz words, mixed with hypocrisy for good measure. There is nothing inherently wrong about opposing immigration or disliking immigrants, your country is like your house, you are perfectly justified on not wanting guests in it, even if it's for 'wrong' (read : racist) reason. This doesn't mean I like or hold those opinons, but they are natural and justified, and people have the right to hold them.
Also something that should not be easily forgotten or ever forgiven is the missionary work by religious groups... Destroying cultures around world. It is sad we have not punished them for that and maybe even banned them to protect the future.
No, nearly every one of the countries I listed had simply no intention or means to colonize effectively at a profit, has nothing to do with preoccupation with continental wars.
> Also something that should not be easily forgotten or ever forgiven is the missionary work by religious groups
Again, all of the countries I mentioned had very little if not null participation in this, and yet to varying degrees they are being punished for it...
It came up for a direct vote? Or did politicians who never ran on mass immigration platforms just kinda decide to introduce legislation?
People tend to conflate the acceptance of mass immigration in western countries (by characterizing opposition as horribly racist) with tacit approval by the citizens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Hungarian_migrant_quota_r...
The general failure of anti-immigration parties to win majorities in European countries suggests that most people are either pro-immigration or at least willing to accept it.
But again, that ties back to the demonization of being against immigration. Is it _really_ reflective of true popular support if you’re going to be labeled a racist if you don’t vote the right way?
You cannot influence without being influenced.
Why not? China has massive influence in many countries, and they seem to retain a lot of their culture while suppressing any internal change/dissent. It would seem to me that many European countries have simply decided they would like to be influenced for whatever reason, not that they are compelled to by some universal rule.
I went to Vietnam before the pandemic and lot's of hip coffee shops are basically exact clones of something you'd find in Portland.
This seems a remarkably false dichotomy.
These are neither purely traditional nor fully globally assimilationist.
Singapore, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Austin and San Antonio, TX, Vancouver, Sydney, London, Berlin, Miami, and Rio all come to mind. Those are among the larger cities, there are also smaller and more outlying regions.
People have always moved, migrated, and interacted. Quite often peaceably, as the alternative is extraordinarily destructive.
Is the problem that immigration drags down economies?
Or that it leads to gentrification?
You know, all those lazy Polish plumbers coming over and stealing all those British jobs....
Sounds like you've found a cause for every problem you see.
You need to brush up on your history my friend. The number of times the island has changed hands runs counter to your point, and the current inhabitants certainly aren’t some continuation of an ancient people.
Rome held it, the Britons held it, the Picts invaded from Ireland, the Angles and Saxons had it after beating the Picts and killing the Britons…the list goes on. There isn’t some sacred ancient culture at stake and I’m sure the groups that were kicked out by the current inhabitants would take umbrage with your point if they could speak up.
I’m not even going to dive into “London is a miserable failure.” That’s just another hand wavy talking point. I’m not even sure by what metrics you’d measure how London is a “miserable failure.”
Or maybe you meant "rigid"?