Hacker News Reader

Comment by gettodachoppa | Hacker News Reader

Remind me again, how did it work out for the Native Americans who let outsiders come in large numbers?

>It's hard to muster up conviction that US citizens are any more deserving of US opportunity than anyone else willing to work for it.

This is what a lifetime of globalization and capitalist propaganda does to a brain. In societies where the poison has not fully taken hold, people care about their fellow citizens' well-being being more than that of non-citizens. If a fellow citizens struggles to compete in the job market, they don't think "Job Unit #123123213 should just work harder if he doesn't want to be replaced".

View on HN

People are humans first and citizens second.

All humans deserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Obviously the US can't take in the world's entire immigrant population, but IMHO because of its history it has a moral imperative to accept a large number of immigrants.

And if it should come to pass that anti-immigration talking points come true, and immigrants do indeed 'take our jobs', then that needs to be addressed at a structural level (tax, education, welfare policy) rather than the border.

Are Americans allowed to choose which kind of immigrants they want? I know those on the left think merit-based immigration is "condescending" (Pelosi's exact words), but can we at least not pretend all immigrants come from immigrantland?

I feel like I'm the rare type of person who is both very pro immigration but also very anti- endless low skill immigration.

I take my cues from LKY, I guess:

http://thekansascitian.blogspot.com/2013/02/dont-take-fruit-...

I kinda wonder whether the chicken or the egg came first. All Anglo countries have a strong individualist streak. Did America cultivate that individualism to the degree that now they can't see a nation as being anything more than a collection of unrelated individuals? Or did wave after wave of immigration--resulting in a society where people had less and less in common--produce/reinforce that mindset?

the latter. But what does individualism really mean? We don't believe in strong free speech, religious, or other rights even though it is in the Constitution. The individual "rights" that are strongly enforced tend to benefit The Party of course. The ones that do not attract FBI interest. The US empire is quite authoritarian.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com