Is it fair to conflate immigration enforcement with xenophobia?

IF, those limits have been abused massively for decades, then it is reasonable for those limits to be set very low and very harshly, so that labor markets and social cohesion can recover over time.

This IS opposition to legal immigration.

I'm not sure how much Trump in on board with me, but I oppose legal immigration.

I want an effective BAN on immigration, for two or three generations.

Okay, why? Explain your position without sounding like a bigot.

First, labor markets NEED immigrants. Americans have been reproducing below replacement rates, and right now, we have labor shortages because we have 300,000 Boomers retiring every year and not enough Gen-Z to replace them.

Second, you are a complete ******* idiot if you think that the One Percenters want to stop immigration. They want an easily exploitable workforce to do menial jobs Americans won't do.
 
Let me know when a bunch of white guys from Canada and Europe end up at Alligator Auschwitz.

i personally know...knew a German girl deported for violating the terms of her student visa.
 
Let me know when a bunch of white guys from Canada and Europe end up at Alligator Auschwitz.
You're conflating multiple issues in a way that oversimplifies the debate and leans on emotional imagery rather than clear reasoning. If your position is that enforcement is applied unevenly or unjustly at times, we can have that conversation, but enforcing immigration law in itself isn’t xenophobic.
 
You're conflating multiple issues in a way that oversimplifies the debate and leans on emotional imagery rather than clear reasoning. If your position is that enforcement is applied unevenly or unjustly at times, we can have that conversation, but enforcing immigration law in itself isn’t xenophobic.
Just let me know, k?
 
Let me know when a bunch of white guys from Canada and Europe end up at Alligator Auschwitz.
How many Lilly white Euro’s that are here illegally are raping robbing and murdering innocent people in America?

Very damn few if any
 
How many Lilly white Euro’s that are here illegally are raping robbing and murdering innocent people in America?

Very damn few if any
That poster is missing some key context, possibly intentionally. Immigration from Canada or Europe isn’t the same kind of issue, not because of race, but because of scale, method of entry, economic conditions, and crime data.

Volume: The U.S. sees far fewer undocumented migrants crossing over from Canada or Europe than from the southern border. Not due to race, but geography and opportunity.

Economic security: On average, Canadian and European migrants tend to be more economically stable, which changes enforcement patterns and resource strain.

Crime data: Statistically, the risk profiles vary, not due to ethnicity, but due to the conditions surrounding illegal entry, trafficking, and border crime.

Enforcement exists to manage risk, resources, and process. We can’t have an honest conversation if we ignore the real-world differences that shape how enforcement plays out.
 
It’s worth pointing out that opposition to illegal immigration is often unfairly labeled as anti-immigrant, when in fact many people, including Trump, have consistently said they support legal immigration. As far as I can tell, the conflation of legal and illegal immigration seems to happen for a few reasons. Some on the left use it as a rhetorical strategy. By framing any immigration enforcement as anti-immigrant, they can cast their opponents as xenophobic, regardless of the actual policy details. Others may blur the lines because they view borders as morally arbitrary in general, so the legal distinction doesn’t matter to them. There's also a political advantage in simplifying the debate and evoking emotional responses. In reality, there's a clear difference between welcoming people through a legal process and opposing uncontrolled or undocumented entry. It’s not anti-immigrant to expect people to come legally. That’s a standard every country in the world maintains.
No.
 
It’s worth pointing out that opposition to illegal immigration is often unfairly labeled as anti-immigrant, when in fact many people, including Trump, have consistently said they support legal immigration. As far as I can tell, the conflation of legal and illegal immigration seems to happen for a few reasons. Some on the left use it as a rhetorical strategy. By framing any immigration enforcement as anti-immigrant, they can cast their opponents as xenophobic, regardless of the actual policy details. Others may blur the lines because they view borders as morally arbitrary in general, so the legal distinction doesn’t matter to them. There's also a political advantage in simplifying the debate and evoking emotional responses. In reality, there's a clear difference between welcoming people through a legal process and opposing uncontrolled or undocumented entry. It’s not anti-immigrant to expect people to come legally. That’s a standard every country in the world maintains.

Immigration enforcement is what the Trump administration is doing at the US border and elsewhere.

Xenophobia is what those leftists on Martha's Vineyard did to the group of migrants who came to them for help.
 
The founders also owned slaves and wore wigs. So naturally, we don't want to do everything they did. They created a system founded on humanistic principles, such as that of all men being created equal. And these should be what guide us rather than race.
Humanism for Proven Sub-Humans Is a Contradiction in Terms
 
15th post
No, blacks were never meant to be citizens. Our founders were wise. Even Lincoln wanted to deport them in his second term. Only Whites were to be citizens of the new nation. Also, so what if they owned negro slaves. And one other thing, blacks are not equal to White people. They never have been. Even Lincoln stated such.
Ignorant, racist douche ^^^.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom