[quote=FlyerInHi]CAr, what I said is pretty factual.
Nativist. You’d probably admit to that.
Paranoid. You latch on to some words that some public figure spoke as evidence that there is a conspiracy to take over US territory.
If you believe that our system is so good, then why would anyone want to separate and join Mexico?
Xenophobia. Your insistence that people adopt your language and your culture show exactly that. In reality, culture is fluid and ever changing. Immigrants bring their culture here; and over time, they change and we change.
spd has a good understanding of nationalism. For example Italy used to be many independent states. So was Germany. Previously, the English could accept a foreign king or queen. People could accept their leaders speaking foreign languages and eating foreign cuisine.[/quote]
Those aren’t the words of some random public figure. This is a major movement within the Latin American community, and it’s particularly powerful among those who advocate for “immigration reform.”
No, I don’t believe that it’s wrong to want to maintain one’s culture and way of life. The vast majority of humans would prefer to maintain their culture and way of life, or improve upon their way of life. Nobody (except you, apparently) wants to lose their position in the world’s cultural and economic hierarchy. This is perfectly normal.
And if you want to take a look at the Germans, consider the fact that the Germanic peoples are far more alike than Native Americans are to European-Americans or to African-Americans or to Asian-Americans. Yet, there is still friction among the Germanic people. How can you expect to have people who are far more diverse live together in a harmonious way in a world of finite resources? Can you name an example when/where this has ever worked out in the long run (and example where the REALITY matches the ideology of a truly peaceful and harmonious coexistence)? Has there ever been an instance where the majority population of a host country was dramatically outnumbered and overwhelmed over a few decades by a very disparate population and everything evolved without some sort of conflict? Oftentimes, the conflicts lead to major wars.
But, more than anything else, it’s about economics: WE DO NOT HAVE THE RESOURCES TO TAKE CARE OF THE WORLD’S POOR. We can handle a limited number at any given time, but a major and continuous influx is totally unworkable, IMO.
