immigration is really hard and immigrants are incredibly brave people who are willing to face the unknown for a chance at a better future. they deserve our compassion and understanding of how hard what they're doing is. that immigration is actually common is incredible.
-
-
Replying to @danlistensto @MimeticValue
This is exactly why restricting immigration to Good Wise Submissive immigrants is bad, though.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @palecur @danlistensto
Nobody said submissive. Submissive is the opposite of wise. You need to embody the wisdom of your home culture, transmit it, and acquire the wisdom of the new culture. This takes boldness and struggle.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @MimeticValue @danlistensto
You're right. I'll retract it as an overstatement.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I continue to maintain that restricting immigration to a subset of 'people who can handle it,' however defined, is paternalistic and largely unimplementable, because the quality of judgement required to make it effective is unavailable at scale.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @palecur @danlistensto
Local problems can be pragmatically solved, there is no universal rule. Every community should let in the amount of outsiders according to its own needs and ability to handle the capacity.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MimeticValue @danlistensto
I feel that both needs and ability are pragmatically enhanced by completely open borders, personally.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @palecur @MimeticValue
I hope you understand the limits of that ideological position. It works only as long as the waves of immigrants are, as you said "good and wise" enough to be a positive sum to their new community. that isn't always the case. the degenerate case is literally a hostile invasion.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
pragmatically, it's amazing that we have a pretty good historical track record of that usually being the case (in the last 200ish years of American immigration history anyway). should we assume that will always be the case though?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @danlistensto @palecur
I say no. Population growth increases bureaucracy, which decreases
#SkinInTheGame, which increases fragility, which increases cumulative probability of collapse.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
probably correct but opens up an even harder pragmatic issue: how do you make these decisions? that's the reason there's controversy. if we had a Harry Potter sorting hat there would be no problem.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.