• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Immigration discussion

We're having a good faith conversation right now. It's totally possible.
I just think it makes some people uncomfortable to grapple with the concept of neutrality.
So they'd prefer to just not deal with it.
It's ok, really.
Good faith would also include willingness to challenge one's own opinions as opposed to criticizing the opinions of other posters.
 
The groups of people who have been considered white or black changes over time, the generational harms and trauma of black Americans defended from slavery has a defined impact on a fairly well defined subset of the population. This isn't to say that their behaviors can be generalized or not but to point out that there isn't such a defining characteristic that can be used to analyze a subset of the population that may be considered white as far as I'm aware
 
There are layers of subtlety that goes unexamined with this. Black people were originally here (USA) because they were enslaved and brought here by whites, subjected to trauma over generations that metastisized into a social cancer via addiction, abuse, poverty, Al along side the explosion of 20th century White excellence.

Black liberation reached a turning point during the civil rights era and while a modicum of rights were achieved, the greatest intellectuals and leaders of a generation were murdered young, leaving young people with fewer role models that were alive and who could be followed.

And then.. White people realized that crack could be useful as a chemical weapon, so the CIA brought it into Watts and Brooklyn in the early 1980s.
I think this is embellishing the truth a little bit though, it plays up to this narrative of oppression and utter helplessness as an excuse for the demonstrably poor behaviour within the communities. Behaviour that people know is fucked, but they refuse to take ownership of it in a positive way and rise above it and instead actually glorify it in a negative way (gangster culture, music, etc).

I always think about this clip of Patrice O'Neal when the topic comes up, because he paints it so brilliantly with his comedy. Saying it as a white man gets scorn or even labelled as a racist, but if a black man (Patrice) says it then it tends to penetrate past this cultural blind-spot we have.

 
I think this is embellishing the truth a little bit though, it plays up to this narrative of oppression and utter helplessness as an excuse for the demonstrably poor behaviour within the communities. Behaviour that people know is fucked, but they refuse to take ownership of it in a positive way and rise above it and instead actually glorify it in a negative way (gangster culture, music, etc).

I always think about this clip of Patrice O'Neal when the topic comes up, because he paints it so brilliantly with his comedy. Saying it as a white man gets scorn or even labelled as a racist, but if a black man (Patrice) says it then it tends to penetrate past this cultural blind-spot we have.


I've worked with a ton of people who've experienced generational trauma (their grandparents were traumatized which impacted how their parents were raised, who then experienced a mixture of that foundational trauma as well as new traumatic experiences from their communities, environment, racism, poverty, police violence, limited access to getting past this stuff - which then impacted what they were born into/raised within, and lead to their own baseline and contextual traumas) - the impact on what 'right/wrong vs. survival vs. risk/reward' is incredibly skewed.

That said - to your point, there is a level of accountability that can easily hide behind "but my trauma!" - I've had the benefit of working with people in therapy who are chosing to acknowledge this stuff and want to take action, but therapy can get such a bad wrap in poor/racially diverse/immigrant communities for a number of reasons (historic abuse by psychiatry, religious rejection of therapy, family secrets etc. etc.) that many folks never seek it out and have few options in how they deal with it. This leads to either a) acting out in self harm/substance use/despair/suicide, b) violence against family/community/crime c) violence against strangers (mass killings, random knife attacks, general anti-social behaviors

The way I see all of this is stems from a failure by the individual to address these traumas, and the failure of societies to acknowledge and meaningful address this despite putting these people in situations that are likely to lead to the repetition of trauma in the ways I've mentioned.

It's not an excuse - just my way of understanding the process.

Sorry for the long comment, hopefully it makes sense.

PS - Patrice O'Neal and missing white women syndrome was part of a presentation I gave to my social work racial justice class during grad school. The guy was awesome (RIP I believe)
 
what is an "sea"?

South East Asia(n)


A billionaire, an immigrant, and you sit at a table.

A plate of 100 cookies is brought to the table

The billionaire (eg. Elon Musk/Donald Trump) takes 99 cookies, and then turns to you and says "Hey, that immigrant is trying to take your cookie".

The claim can be applied to anyone in power, not just billionaires, not just conservatives. Best written would be to use 'Government/Authority'. DOGE is showing us how damn many cookies they've been stealing.
 
I'd really like if this thread could move away from the discussion of race in general. It's not productive.

I've worked with a ton of people who've experienced generational trauma (their grandparents were traumatized which impacted how their parents were raised, who then experienced a mixture of that foundational trauma as well as new traumatic experiences from their communities, environment, racism, poverty, police violence, limited access to getting past this stuff - which then impacted what they were born into/raised within, and lead to their own baseline and contextual traumas) - the impact on what 'right/wrong vs. survival vs. risk/reward' is incredibly skewed.

I would say 'cultural' over 'racist'. Adults from the great depression developed habits of eating every last nibble, saving everywhere and anywhere, it was a mindset shaped by (traumatic) experience and subsequently passed down through generations despite such scarcity being overcome in America to the point where we have abundance and waste quite a bit of it. I can see the traces of that in myself, small but present, as raised by my parents, who were raised by the previous generation. Similarly, immigrants arriving from a brutal or very poor region will have a significant adjustment to western society - beyond the language barrier, but into how different groups of people regard one another and interact. Any white South African farmer coming to the US right now would likely be in fear of living in a mostly black neighborhood based on the trauma being carried out there compared to how outlandish such actions would seem here. They'd like struggle to understand police officers, black and white, working together and interacting with the public in the same manner as one another. Anyone's experiences, big or small, shapes who they are and how they see the world. Doesn't mean it is right or wrong, just different based on their life to that point. And, joining another culture/society inherently carries change, which brings fear.
 
I'd really like if this thread could move away from the discussion of race in general. It's not productive.
This approach to immigration discussion seems to be centered around the concept of "making conclusions and predictions of individual based on their reference group they have never had any chance to influnce at" and then argumenting for different treatment for people based on their real or perceived ethnic background and I consider it poor premise.

Also I raise my hat for what lovebandit said about backgrounds.
 
I'd really like if this thread could move away from the discussion of race in general. It's not productive.
The issue is that when we talk about immigration, we're usually not fixating on Irish immigrants or asian immigrants - even trump has indicated that these groups will not be targets of his ICE enforcement. South African afrikaaners are being specifically courted for refuge status while we deport hatian refugees who had been given legal status a year ago.

I just don't see a way to not consider race (and the sequelae of trauma that has lead to immigrant migration) when discussing this topic, just as we can also not separate class from race when thinking of systemic issues that impact people at the intersection of class and race.
I would say 'cultural' over 'racist'. Adults from the great depression developed habits of eating every last nibble, saving everywhere and anywhere, it was a mindset shaped by (traumatic) experience and subsequently passed down through generations despite such scarcity being overcome in America to the point where we have abundance and waste quite a bit of it. I can see the traces of that in myself, small but present, as raised by my parents, who were raised by the previous generation. Similarly, immigrants arriving from a brutal or very poor region will have a significant adjustment to western society - beyond the language barrier, but into how different groups of people regard one another and interact. Any white South African farmer coming to the US right now would likely be in fear of living in a mostly black neighborhood based on the trauma being carried out there compared to how outlandish such actions would seem here. They'd like struggle to understand police officers, black and white, working together and interacting with the public in the same manner as one another. Anyone's experiences, big or small, shapes who they are and how they see the world. Doesn't mean it is right or wrong, just different based on their life to that point. And, joining another culture/society inherently carries change, which brings fear.
I was homeless due to addiction for quite a while in the 00s - there is a basic foundational need that 'home' allows for - it's the foundation of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs. One can be poor (as in your depression example) but still have a domicile. This allows people to focus on other basic or intermediate needs (food/social affiliation, jobs, cultural affiliation) while making stuff like self-esteem and self-actualization (advanced human needs) remain inaccessible.

Folks that are immigrating, much like folks living in homelessness - struggle with surviving without a basic need met. It contributes to the development antisocial/pathological behavior patterns that are good for survival (stealing, self-defensiveness, paranoia/suspiciousness, deception) but terrible for adapting to a broader social contract (working for a living, waiting for payment, trust, openness, social acceptance and affiliation)
 
it wasn't that passive :)

but there's a truth in it surely? the poster bemoans the lack of women but thinks, and talks publicly, about them as ugly objects who should be doing his cooking. maybe there's a connection there?

could i have said it more politely? sure. does an ugly question tend to get an ugly answer. sure, too.

thanks for the comment.

alasdair
 
it wasn't that passive :)

but there's a truth in it surely? the poster bemoans the lack of women but thinks, and talks publicly, about them as ugly objects who should be doing his cooking. maybe there's a connection there?

could i have said it more politely? sure. does an ugly question tend to get an ugly answer. sure, too.

thanks for the comment.

alasdair
It's just good to be careful of the ends not justifying the means, so to speak. I'm as guilty as anyone at making little jabs at others out of turn. Poor electrum has been on the receiving end of a few snipes over the years from me

<3

No harm, no foul
 
A lot of immigration talk is directed at the negatives my uncle and old man were immigrants first to UK I was first gen British born and am of sikh heritage my 2 grandads fought for the British one in Burma and my other in North Africa and the Italian campaign we then emigrated to US .
In the UK I own a catering company employing 56 full time and 20 more part time I pay a living wage .

My father in US started a haulage with 400 odd company trucks and 200 od owner operators. Immigrants push up the birth rate and work hard. Im proud to hold US AND BRITISH citizenship and would die for both because of the opportunity and the freedoms to women US to practise our faith and prosper. Look at any of the charts we are near top of the charts in average house hold income home ownership and college graduates
 
I meet plenty of women. Here's my approach:
but there's a truth in it surely? the poster bemoans the lack of women but thinks, and talks publicly, about them as ugly objects who should be doing his cooking. maybe there's a connection there?
The problem is that there has been an unspoken shift in 'the game', as it were. Why should one have to go and frequent designated spaces to approach women? When and why was this actually agreed upon by the vast majority of women - it has, albeit a silent agreement. What if they don't want to go dancing, or to a trendy cocktail bar, art exhibition or library?

You can see the issue just by walking about. I see it everyday. Women either have headphones on or are head down in their mobile phone. It's like trying to get blood from a stone if you smile at them or just say 'Hello'. Many will just keep their gaze fixed straight ahead, as if you don't even exist lmao.. which is ridiculous, because it takes more energy to ignore someone than just to acknowledge their existence.

I know if I said this on Reddit you'd get the "tHe cOmMon dEnOminAtoR is YOU REEEEE".. but that's bullshit. Because I do get smiles, acknowledgements, or even conversations, from both sexes but only from women generally if they're 40+(?).

Something has changed with younger women, that is just a demonstrable fact. Not all of them naturally, but the majority. Personally I don't care that much from a dating standpoint or whatever, but just from a basic human being standpoint.. like come on, don't be an arsehole.. if someone acknowledged your existence the least you can do is smile back. There's just this combative, stuck-up attitude that pervades their aura.
 
The problem is that there has been an unspoken shift in 'the game', as it were. Why should one have to go and frequent designated spaces to approach women? When and why was this actually agreed upon by the vast majority of women - it has, albeit a silent agreement. What if they don't want to go dancing, or to a trendy cocktail bar, art exhibition or library?

You can see the issue just by walking about. I see it everyday. Women either have headphones on or are head down in their mobile phone. It's like trying to get blood from a stone if you smile at them or just say 'Hello'. Many will just keep their gaze fixed straight ahead, as if you don't even exist lmao.. which is ridiculous, because it takes more energy to ignore someone than just to acknowledge their existence.
I see guys do the same thing. It's easier to notice when the other is going something that pushes you out, much harder to look at the ways you're doing it yourself
I know if I said this on Reddit you'd get the "tHe cOmMon dEnOminAtoR is YOU REEEEE".. but that's bullshit. Because I do get smiles, acknowledgements, or even conversations, from both sexes but only from women generally if they're 40+(?).

Something has changed with younger women, that is just a demonstrable fact. Not all of them naturally, but the majority. Personally I don't care that much from a dating standpoint or whatever, but just from a basic human being standpoint.. like come on, don't be an arsehole.. if someone acknowledged your existence the least you can do is smile back. There's just this combative, stuck-up attitude that pervades their aura.
They're scared of men. That's what's changed
 
Us women go through alot. When I'm out for a walk i say hi to everyone but I'm in my 40's and was raised in a small town.
Sometimes saying hi to the wrong guy could get you followed as some men take it as flirting.
Women have a very different daily social experience than men, that's something a lot of us fail to recognize
 
Us women go through alot. When I'm out for a walk i say hi to everyone but I'm in my 40's and was raised in a small town.
Sometimes saying hi to the wrong guy could get you followed as some men take it as flirting.
As a guy, I don't have to worry where I park my car, and whether I feel safe getting to it ... is it too dark?

There are obvious examples we can all pull from that make us feel unsafe - but as a man I am, by default, not expecting unsafety. There's a toolbox that women have to use when parking their car on a dimly lit street, that I never even have to consider.
 
The claim can be applied to anyone in power, not just billionaires, not just conservatives. Best written would be to use 'Government/Authority'. DOGE is showing us how damn many cookies they've been stealing.
DOGE’s biggest “savings”!seem to just be Elon Musk not understanding how the code behind the social security database works.

Can you provide us with legitimate examples of DOGE saving a significant ($100M+) amount of $ from genuine waste?
 
I see it everyday. Women either have headphones on or are head down in their mobile phone. It's like trying to get blood from a stone if you smile at them or just say 'Hello'. Many will just keep their gaze fixed straight ahead, as if you don't even exist lmao.. which is ridiculous

absolutely ridiculous!

perhaps it should be illegal for women to wear headphones in public and illegal for them to not make eye contact with, or smile at, a man?

alasdair
 
Top