• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is ubridled immigration really good for the UK??

wolfie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Messages
3,229
Reaction score
461
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ok Red Dave...

Are you feeling OK with the gross implications of a mixed population??
 

NoC_T

Imposition of miscellany
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
11,593
Reaction score
2,379
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Yes, ubridled immigration is really good for the UK.
 

NoC_T

Imposition of miscellany
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
11,593
Reaction score
2,379
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,929
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What is bad for Britain is multiculturalist dogmatism rather than immigration per se and unbridled immigration is always problematic. Immigrants arriving in a new country with a desire to assimilate and in numbers small enough to make that a possibility is a good thing.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
What is bad for Britain is multiculturalist dogmatism rather than immigration per se and unbridled immigration is always problematic. Immigrants arriving in a new country with a desire to assimilate and in numbers small enough to make that a possibility is a good thing.

Why is "multiculturalism" bad for the UK and Europe but just fine for Canada and the US?
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,929
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why is "multiculturalism" bad for the UK and Europe but just fine for Canada and the US?

THe United States is a melting pot society, not a multiculturalist.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
THe United States is a melting pot society, not a multiculturalist.

LOL it is the same bloody thing. The only difference is that multicultuarlism started long ago in the US, where as it is relatively new in the UK and Europe. The US went through the exact same crap the UK and the rest of Europe is going now with their "minorities" immigrating. The main US immigration wave was in the late 1800s and early 1900s and the people who arrived there were all discriminated and hated by the "locals" on a massive scale. The new immigrants fought back by establish defacto ghettos in major cities, places know as China Town, Little Italy and so on. Now some dont exist in the same way today, but some do.. China Town is a good example. The language spoken here is not English.

There is no difference between so called multicultraism and a "melting pot".
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,657
Reaction score
15,929
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
LOL it is the same bloody thing. The only difference is that multicultuarlism started long ago in the US, where as it is relatively new in the UK and Europe. The US went through the exact same crap the UK and the rest of Europe is going now with their "minorities" immigrating. The main US immigration wave was in the late 1800s and early 1900s and the people who arrived there were all discriminated and hated by the "locals" on a massive scale. The new immigrants fought back by establish defacto ghettos in major cities, places know as China Town, Little Italy and so on. Now some dont exist in the same way today, but some do.. China Town is a good example. The language spoken here is not English.

There is no difference between so called multicultraism and a "melting pot".

Pete-- the differences have been explained to you before. You may not have the capacity to understand, but that does not mean there is no difference.
 

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,901
Reaction score
1,729
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Ok Red Dave...

Are you feeling OK with the gross implications of a mixed population??

Well firstly we don't have unbridled immigration, except within the EU (something I am in favor of renegotiating when/if we leave), hence why so many people subvert the system and come here illegally. Considering how many people want to be in the UK but cant can't I think its fair to say that if we did have unbridled immigration we would know about it.

New law demands £20,000 salary to marry a foreigner | Mail Online

BBC News - The Britons leaving the UK to get their relatives in

I think its fair to say that if our stance on immigration is so tough that we are forcing our own citizens out then its pretty tough.

Now I would agree that there are issues with integration (especially in the Muslim community) and that something has to be done about this. I would also agree that immigration puts pressure on parts of the UK where there is little work. However given our aging population, the dire situations people are fleeing from (some of which are our fault) and the fact that I simply see do not see why someone should be more entitled to a job because of where they are from, I don't support a UKIP style solution imposing a 5 year freeze on immigration and basically turning us into a telegraph readers' North Korea.This would devastate the country both demographically and economically.

However if we except that there have to be limits (which i agree with wholeheartedly) then we should be free to determine those limits ourselves and should prioritize

A Those that we need:

1 People with skills that we lack

2 Rich and/or gifted students: lets face it if we won't fund our education system we may as leave it to the Saudis and Chinese

3 International adoptees (third world countries have too many chilldren, we have too few, kinda a no brainer)

B Those that need to come here:

1 Those fleeing persecution

2 Those in a particularly dire situation back home.

Rather then our current system which simply prioritizes EU membership. Something that has been shown to be against the interests of many poorer countries.

I could just as well ask you how comfortable you are with the fact that the biggest generation in history is retiring and will live for longer then any other, while the rest of the population is declining?
 
Last edited:

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Pete-- the differences have been explained to you before. You may not have the capacity to understand, but that does not mean there is no difference.

Oh then tell me what are the differences, since I dont remember you explaining them before... you mostly avoid any and all sort of debate and stick to the usual "i dont like X" excuses.
 

Artevelde

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
698
Reaction score
194
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Obviously "unbridled" immigration is a disaster for any country.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
What do you think it is about the United States that encourages people to integrate more?

Do they integrate? To me its more a myth than anything else.

Take any ethnic or religious minority in the US and many still clammer to their "old ways" far far more than their new homeland. Hell quite a few dont even speak English.

What is the most spoken language in say China town, or Little Havana? It aint English.

How is that any different than what is happening in the UK or elsewhere?
 

Arcana XV

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
6,405
Reaction score
4,811
Location
Geneva, Switzerland and Rochester, NY
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
LOL it is the same bloody thing. The only difference is that multicultuarlism started long ago in the US, where as it is relatively new in the UK and Europe. The US went through the exact same crap the UK and the rest of Europe is going now with their "minorities" immigrating. The main US immigration wave was in the late 1800s and early 1900s and the people who arrived there were all discriminated and hated by the "locals" on a massive scale. The new immigrants fought back by establish defacto ghettos in major cities, places know as China Town, Little Italy and so on. Now some dont exist in the same way today, but some do.. China Town is a good example. The language spoken here is not English.

There is no difference between so called multicultraism and a "melting pot".

I think what Gardener means is that in some European countries the government approaches immigration with a multiculturalist attitude focused on several cultures existing side by side, rather than a melting pot attitude focused on new arrivals integrating seamlessly into the local culture. There is a difference. The UK does follow a multiculturalist approach in this sense that it allows other cultures to keep their identity in ways that can result in conflict with the indigenous population. Switzerland is more in tune with the melting pot attitude where new arrivals are welcome as long as they integrate into Swiss society as quickly as possible. France tries to walk the line between the two, by striving to keep its national identity, while making some small ammends for the large Muslim population. The difference is not in the fact that several cultures come together in any given place, it's in how each government/society chooses to deal with the inevitable conflicts between new immigrants and long established populations.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
18,957
Reaction score
25,106
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Do they integrate? To me its more a myth than anything else.

Take any ethnic or religious minority in the US and many still clammer to their "old ways" far far more than their new homeland. Hell quite a few dont even speak English.

What is the most spoken language in say China town, or Little Havana? It aint English.

How is that any different than what is happening in the UK or elsewhere?

Actually you mistake language as an indicator of integration when it comes to Chinese. Most groups who immigrate attempt to assimilate, and all groups learn to speak english eventually. In chinatowns many who refuse are the old guard who immigrated but still think of China as their country. Their children do not and speak both english and chinese, and as the generations continue their great-grandchildren focus on english at the expense of their original language. The rest are recent immigrants who gravitate to a chinatown in order to fit in faster. Their grandchildren will be english as a first language speakers.

The USA is also a very large nation with vast territories to migrate within. This allows for cultural diversity without too much clashing. The UK is relatively small and insular, so cultural clashes are more likely. :twocents:
 

Arcana XV

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
6,405
Reaction score
4,811
Location
Geneva, Switzerland and Rochester, NY
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Do they integrate? To me its more a myth than anything else.

Take any ethnic or religious minority in the US and many still clammer to their "old ways" far far more than their new homeland. Hell quite a few dont even speak English.

What is the most spoken language in say China town, or Little Havana? It aint English.

How is that any different than what is happening in the UK or elsewhere?

It's not a myth. They do integrate much faster than they do in Europe as a general rule. Of course there are pockets of immigrants who never do, but like the previous poster said they tend to be newly arrived immigrants, or first generation immigrants who found it unnecessary to learn the local majority language. The vast majority of immigrants eventually find their way into the melting pot, not matter where they originally came from.
 

wolfie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Messages
3,229
Reaction score
461
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
2 Rich and/or gifted students: lets face it if we won't fund our education system we may as leave it to the Saudis and Chinese

3 International adoptees (third world countries have too many chilldren, we have too few, kinda a no brainer)

B Those that need to come here:

1 Those fleeing persecution

2 Those in a particularly dire situation back home.

Rather then our current system which simply prioritizes EU membership. Something that has been shown to be against the interests of many poorer countries.

I could just as well ask you how comfortable you are with the fact that the biggest generation in history is retiring and will live for longer then any other, while the rest of the population is declining?

Those that we need:

People with skills that we lack!!....

For every 30 University graduates graduating from a British University, only one of them manages to get a job within the first year...the rest stay on benefits whilst seeking work or some of them take minimum wage jobs making them the most intelligent sausage packers in Britain..

International adoptees..

Third world countries who produce unwanted children should be educated and have access to free birth control...not taken from their homelands and used to satisfy the needs of infertile couples!!

Those fleeing persecution.


We have a number of Eritrean and Ethiopian refugees who have claimed asylum due to their political views expressed in their country of origin, however, it does not stop them going back for month long holidays to see their families!!

I smell a rat!!
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I think what Gardener means is that in some European countries the government approaches immigration with a multiculturalist attitude focused on several cultures existing side by side, rather than a melting pot attitude focused on new arrivals integrating seamlessly into the local culture. There is a difference.

Come on...there is no freaking difference. The "new arrivals integrating seamlessly into the local culture" does not happen anywhere! Certainly not in the US LOL! If that was true, then there would be no Little Havana in Florida or high concentrations of Chinese in LA, SF, New York and Seattle areas. If they seamlessly intergrated into the local society, then they would be far far more spread out across the country.. but they aint. It is no different in the UK, France or Denmark. Minorities tend to group up together in defacto "ghetto" areas.

Map Gallery of Ethnic Groups in the United States

There are maps on the various ethnicities in the US.. it is quite telling. It gets better over time .. well not for the Chinese...but the newer the minority the more concentrated they are in specific areas. But it takes time.. a long time.

Now the difference might be that in Europe we try to help our new arrivals integrate with big government programs and ideas, and in the US they are just left to do whatever they fancy.. which in most cases means seeking out people of their own kind creating defacto ghettos. Where European countries try to avoid ghettos by forcing people to live in other areas (when on benefits), the US could care less, which in turn creates the very ghettos that can often cause problems.

The UK does follow a multiculturalist approach in this sense that it allows other cultures to keep their identity in ways that can result in conflict with the indigenous population.

And that is different how to how the US has handled it over the last 100+ years? When the Irish came to the US, they were hated and attacked for their "weird ways", so they like all minorities that are treated in such away.. they created their own areas where they could protect not only their physical lives but their traditions and "weird ways". Weird ways = Catholic btw. Look at the map.. even today, the Irish are highly concentrated in their "old hunting grounds"... 130 years after the first started to arrive. The funny one is the Danish one btw.. Utah and South Idaho wtf?

Switzerland is more in tune with the melting pot attitude where new arrivals are welcome as long as they integrate into Swiss society as quickly as possible.

Err that is exactly what every country aspires too. Those that dont integrate are the ones that are seen as the "problems". Integration is a two way street.

But integration into local society does not mean giving up your own traditions (as long as they are legal of course) and ways. Jews have for centuries integrated just fine in society while keeping their traditions.. and even legal systems. Vietnamese and Chinese in Europe have all integrated fine, learning the language and setting up shop.. but they have not changed their traditions and still celebrate Chinese new year and so on and not Christmas.

France tries to walk the line between the two, by striving to keep its national identity, while making some small ammends for the large Muslim population. The difference is not in the fact that several cultures come together in any given place, it's in how each government/society chooses to deal with the inevitable conflicts between new immigrants and long established populations.

I disagree. France does nothing different than other countries. It all comes down to the people being willing to integrate and in France you have a portion of the population who deep down regret backing the French in their North African adventures and being forced to live in France instead of back home in Algeria.

On top of that, you have the usual problems that happen during economic downturn.. blame the X for the problems of the country, and a person with a different colour, name or religion is much easier to blame (and see) than everything else. It is exactly what is happening in the UK now... where the right is blaming all the ills of the country on "eastern Europeans and illegals (read Asians)" because they are easy to pick out of a crowd. If Germany ever gets into trouble, I know for sure who is going to get blamed and hunted... the large Turkish minoirty.

Add to that, a small group of people who believe religion is an important factor in political and social life, in a country that is highly secular.. and you have a problem in the making. I commend the French and their stance on not letting religion into public life.. wish my own country would do something about that. They have just banned pork from public schools because it might offend the Muslims.. who could care less.. freaking left wing moron government.

Personally I think it all boils down to one thing... Islam and the traditions that are related to this. We had the same issue long ago with the whole protestant and catholic issue.. back when Christians were slaughtering each other. As usual religion sucks!
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Actually you mistake language as an indicator of integration when it comes to Chinese. Most groups who immigrate attempt to assimilate, and all groups learn to speak english eventually. In chinatowns many who refuse are the old guard who immigrated but still think of China as their country. Their children do not and speak both english and chinese, and as the generations continue their great-grandchildren focus on english at the expense of their original language. The rest are recent immigrants who gravitate to a chinatown in order to fit in faster. Their grandchildren will be english as a first language speakers.

Sorry but that is not the facts on the ground. Chinese have been in the US in large numbers since the early 1800s. They should have by now integrated, but we both know that they are not. But it does not bother anyone because they keep to themselves and as long as they supply the America public with Chinese food and sweatshops, then American society allows it . If you look at a map of the US where people of Chinese heritage live, then they are isolated to 4 or 5 major areas in the US.. 4 on the west coast and 1 on the east coast. The rest have very little Chinese (relative) living there.

The same goes for many minorities in the US.

The USA is also a very large nation with vast territories to migrate within. This allows for cultural diversity without too much clashing. The UK is relatively small and insular, so cultural clashes are more likely. :twocents:

On this we can agree some what... and then again. When there are vast areas to migrate too people tend to migrate to areas where they dont stick out. Hence you theory falls apart, since a new Hispanic migrant will tend to go to areas with fellow Spanish speaking migrants, just as a refugee from Haiti will flock to other Haitians, and Cuban will head to Florida or Southern California.

A Hispanic migrating to say Iowa would stick out like a sore thumb and that would make both sides feel uncomfortable. Even to this day, there are plenty of areas in the US where having a black person move in will make house prices fall..

Integration takes time.. many many generations and that is only if they want to integrate. And Europe's immigration wave is not even 40 years old, so we are still dealing with first generation issues, let alone 2nd and 3rd... where as the US is in 5+th generation in their major minorities.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
It's not a myth. They do integrate much faster than they do in Europe as a general rule.

Based on what? Immigration to Europe is a relative new thing, where as in the US it is quite old. Sure the older the ethnic minority is, the better integrated they are, but it takes time. It took almost 100 years for Irish Catholics to be some what accepted.. and that took the election of a Catholic President to do.

In Europe we are still in the 1st generation cycle, meaning the original wave is still alive and dictating quite a bit. Sure it gets better and better with each generation and they get more and more integrated, but it takes time and wont improve much before the first wave dies off. This is especially evident with immigration from North Africa and Turkey, where we sadly got a lot of the worst backward peoples of those 2 areas. Once the first generation dies off, and the next generations are not forced to live by ideas that are not even practice in their homeland any more.. then we shall see progress.

Of course there are pockets of immigrants who never do, but like the previous poster said they tend to be newly arrived immigrants, or first generation immigrants who found it unnecessary to learn the local majority language.

Yes I agree

The vast majority of immigrants eventually find their way into the melting pot, not matter where they originally came from.

I agree, but that is my point. You cant compare the US and Europe on immigration without taking into consideration when those immigrants came here. We in Europe still have 1st generation immigrants running around, where as the biggest immigration in the US happened over 100 years ago and those peoples are much better integrated now.

Look up the history of Irish immigration to the US and see how they were treated by the local population when they arrived and how long it took for them to get accepted and integrated... and they did not have the language barrier to contend with!

And look at the new immigration in the US ... where do these new immigrants go? Spread across the US? Of course not.. they find people of their own kind and create mini ghettos in major cities. Look at Cuban immigrants and refugees.. they are concentrated in 2 to 3 places in the US.. with the biggest concentration in South Florida, and they are not exactly rushing out to learn English.. nor are any of the other Hispanic migrants entering the US.

No the story of migration and immigration is pretty much the same across the world ... it is hard and takes time for these peoples to integrate.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
18,957
Reaction score
25,106
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Sorry but that is not the facts on the ground. Chinese have been in the US in large numbers since the early 1800s. They should have by now integrated, but we both know that they are not. But it does not bother anyone because they keep to themselves and as long as they supply the America public with Chinese food and sweatshops, then American society allows it . If you look at a map of the US where people of Chinese heritage live, then they are isolated to 4 or 5 major areas in the US.. 4 on the west coast and 1 on the east coast. The rest have very little Chinese (relative) living there.

No, sorry. The USA has a constant influx of chinese and they gravitate to Chinatowns all across the nation. As newcomers they retain their language and find English as hard to master as would an English speaker trying to adapt to Cantonese, or Mandarin. Residing in a community where they can find fellow immigrants is understandable.

That's the case in many "ghettos" if you are using the term as a gathering-place for people sharing a similar culture. But if you live here, and frequent places to dine or shop in Chinatown, you'd find many who do speak english. Most of their second and third generation residents are fluent in both. Go further down the generational chain and you'll find english becoming the primary and chinese a weakened secondary language until you get to a point where the kids can't speak more than a few words of whichever chinese dialect their grandparents used.

You also fail to realize that chinese don't all speak the same language, there are several dialects and they find it difficult if not impossible to communicate with each other unless they also speak mandarin or one of the main dialects. English becomes the bridging language after generational residence in the USA.

The same goes for many minorities in the US. People from the Indian Sub-continent gravitate into ghettos, Latin-Americans into their own locales, etc. Eventually they learn enough english to work here, and their children become fluent.

Again, the people you see sticking to their old language are either recent immigrants, or those who came previously and were too old and set to change their ways. There are even many who come just to make some money and then return to China (or Mexico, Honduras, India, w/e) wealthier for it.
 
Last edited:

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,082
Reaction score
13,627
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
No, sorry. The USA has a constant influx of chinese and they gravitate to Chinatowns all across the nation. As newcomers they retain their language and find English as hard to master as would an English speaker trying to adapt to Cantonese, or Mandarin. Residing in a community where they can find fellow immigrants is understandable.

Which proves my point that immigrants gravitate to areas of their own kind... considering the Chinese have been migrating to the US for almost 200 years.. then well.

That's the case in many "ghettos" if you are using the term as a gathering-place for people sharing a similar culture. But if you live here, and frequent places to dine or shop in Chinatown, you'd find many who do speak english. Most of their second and third generation residents are fluent in both. Go further down the generational chain and you'll find english becoming the primary and chinese a weakened secondary language until you get to a point where the kids can't speak more than a few words of whichever chinese dialect their grandparents used.

Which proves another of my points... the more generations the more integration there is. But as always, it is the first generation that is the problem, and that is exactly what we are dealing with in Europe.

You also fail to realize that chinese don't all speak the same language, there are several dialects and they find it difficult if not impossible to communicate with each other unless they also speak mandarin or one of the main dialects. English becomes the bridging language after generational residence in the USA.

And? The local language will learned eventually by immigrants next generations.. it is the same old story. But again, in Europe we are dealing with first generation immigrants still and they are the ones who do not integrate well, relative to 2nd+ generations.

The same goes for many minorities in the US. People from the Indian Sub-continent gravitate into ghettos, Latin-Americans into their own locales, etc. Eventually they learn enough english to work here, and their children become fluent.

Yes eventually... generations down the road.

And that is my whole point. What you and many American's see as a melting pot, is because your immigration has been going on for centuries. The larger the minority and the longer they have been migrating to the US, the easier and shorter the "integration" of new members is. A good example is Cubans. A cuban fleeing the island has an easier time now because of the large semi isolated Cuban-American community in Florida but it still does not mean that the first generation will learn English or integrate well.. the 2nd sure, but not the first. It just makes it easier.

The problem comes when the immigrants come from new countries that are not traditional in the US..

But in Europe we are in the first stages of immigration. We are what the US was in the 1800s immigration speaking, and have the exact same problems and it will take just as long to integrate these migrants as it has the US.

Hence there is no difference between multiculturalism and "melting pot"... other than time.
 

Arcana XV

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
6,405
Reaction score
4,811
Location
Geneva, Switzerland and Rochester, NY
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Godammit. Sorry, Pete, I had a whole reply typed up that addressed most of your post and the browser at work ate it all up. I HATE internet explorer. I'm just going to address the more relevant parts to what started as your exchange with Gardener, because I'm short on time now.


Come on...there is no freaking difference.

The way I see it, there is a difference. Multiculturalism = two or more cultures coexisting side by side and encouraging each culture to remain separate. Melting Pot = two or more cultures mixing up to create a brand new culture that borrows a little from each.


The "new arrivals integrating seamlessly into the local culture" does not happen anywhere!

Of course not. My statement was meant more as an ideal to strive for. Obviously, it's a complicated process and the reality on the ground struggles to catch up to that ideal. But it's a start.
 
Top Bottom