Author Topic: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments  (Read 1346 times)

guest5

  • Guest
Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« on: August 14, 2020, 07:51:01 pm »
Trump pushes anti-immigration message (AGAIN)
Quote
President Donald Trump is powering ahead with his anti-immigration agenda, even as voters say they are more concerned with the coronavirus pandemic and the economic destruction it has wrought.


No human gets to choose where they were born. Rightists love depicting their causes with predatory animal iconography. Non-humans migrate at will and are not beholden to any arbitrary human borders, even non-human predators. Rightists want humans to have less freedom of movement than non-humans, yet at the same time try and convince non-rightists that "freedom" is the primary goal of all rightist causes. Rightists are clearly liars. Rightists want "freedom" for themselves and oppression for all non-rightist non-whites in particular. 

Simply put: If you are not part of the rightist tribe rightist's believe you deserve oppression.

The only way rightists will understand what they have done to this world is when what they have done happens to them. Hopefully, that day is fast approaching!?


Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


guest5

  • Guest
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2020, 09:11:30 pm »
Debunking the Myth of the Middle Class
Quote
As tens of millions of Americans face unemployment, President Trump continues to claim that the economy has been the “strongest ever” on his watch. Economics reporter Jim Tankersley might disagree. His new book, “The Riches of This Land,” tells the story of what exactly has happened to America’s middle class. He speaks with Michel Martin about this, and explains the fallacy of restricting immigration to boost wages.

guest5

  • Guest
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2020, 12:11:30 am »
German politician Helge Lindh slams anti-Muslim hatred
Quote
German politician Helge Lindh has been praised for his speeches slamming racism and anti-Muslim hatred. TRT World spoke with Lindh about European leaders advancing anti-Muslim sentiments and the mainstreaming of far-right attitudes. #HelgeLindh #GermanIslamophobia #TurkishGerman

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11043
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #3 on: January 01, 2021, 01:42:51 am »
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/12/30/england-will-have-to-build-over-100k-houses-per-year-to-keep-up-with-immigration/

Quote
“The arrival of a new city from overseas every year cannot help but add hugely to pressure on communities up and down the UK to bulldoze countryside – even ‘protected’ green belt land — in order to make way for housing.”

“Tighter immigration control is necessary to tackle the housing crisis and to protect our precious green space,” the think tank added.

In preventing UK countryside from being bulldozed for housing space by forbidding immigration, countryside elsewhere will be bulldozed to build that very same housing. The total quantity of green space will still shrink by the same amount.

Just control reproduction! People who have already been born have to live somewhere. People not yet born do not have to be born at all.

guest5

  • Guest
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2021, 09:36:13 pm »
You cannot be a supporter of Hitler and be anti-immigration at the same time, nor can you be pro-German and anti-refugee either:

Why Did So Many German Officers Flee to Argentina after WW2?


A brief history of refugees who escaped to Germany
Quote
The current influx of refugees to Germany – with 1.5 million asylum applications since 2015 – is sometimes described as "unprecedented." But is that actually accurate? We take a look at the biggest previous refugee trends in Germany.

Germany - compared to other large European countries such as France and the United Kingdom - is a relatively young country. It wasn't until 1871 that the "German Empire" emerged by consolidating numerous smaller kingdoms, dukedoms and princedoms. The country saw the first large influx of refugees during and after the first  World War.

Russians escaping the revolution and civil war (1917-1920s)

After the communist revolution and the outbreak of a civil war in Russia, approximately 1.5 million people fled the country – among them royals, business owners, former public officials and politicians.

At the height of the Jewish diaspora, 600,000 Russian refugees lived in Germany in 1922/23, more than half of them in the capital Berlin. For most of these people, Germany was only a pit stop on their way further west. Five years later, in 1927, there were only 150,000 Russians still living in Germany. According to Mediendienst Integration, this was largely due to a restrictive integration policy and a lack of legal or economic support for the refugees.

Eastern European Jews escaping persecution (until 1920s)

In the early 20th century, Jews escaping discrimination and persecution in Eastern Europe often fled to and through Germany, with many hoping to eventually settle in France or the US. Violence against Jews in Russia, for example, was already rampant under the Zsar regime and continued – though not officially sanctioned – under the communist regime. 90,000 Jews from Eastern Europe were living in Germany in 1925 – that's 15 percent of the total Jewish population, according to German newspaper Zeit. Under Germany law, Jewish people were equal to Christians until the Nazis took over in 1933. However, anti-semitism had already been a problem in Germany before 1933.

During the Nazi reign from 1933 until 1945, roughly half of the over 500,000 Jews who were living in Germany fled their homes to escape persecution and concentration camp deaths. Only 34,000 of those who stayed in Germany survived.


World War II left over 12 million Germans - many of them children - internationally displaced

Quote
Internally displaced Germans (1945-1949)

Think over a million refugees in Germany is unprecedented? Well, think again.

In the aftermath World War II, over 12 million Germans were internally displaced. Most had lived in the Eastern parts of Germany that Russian troops took over. After World War II, the European map was permanently redrawn and Germany lost many territories that had long been disputed in the East. East Prussia, for example, became part of Russia, Poland and Lithuania. Silesia is now largely part of Poland and the Czech Republic. This is why, after World War II, the population density in the now much smaller Germany was twice high as it was before the war started.

Germans fleeing from East to West Germany (1949-1989)

From the end of World War II until 1990, Germany was divided into two countries: West Germany, a democracy and market economy, and East Germany, a communist country with close ties to Soviet Russia. Between 1949 and 1961, 2.7 million people left East Germany for West Germany. In 1961, East Germany closed the border to the West to keep people from leaving, putting up the famous "wall" in Berlin virtually overnight.

Even though it was illegal and very difficult for East Germans to cross the German-German border, 5,075 people managed to cross the wall in Berlin alone between 1961 and the fall of the wall in November 1989. According to Mediendienst Integration, 700,000 East Germans total left the country for West Germany between 1961 and 1989, many of them illegally.

People escaping the communist Soviet regimes to West Germany (1950s-1991)

Even though it was often difficult to leave the countries of the Soviet Union – the most Western of which, East Germany – bordered on West Germany, quite a few escaped to West Germany during the Soviet reign, which lasted until 1991.

According to Pro Asyl, West Germany took in 13,000 politically persecuted asylum seekers from Hungary after the anti-Soviet uprising in 1956 failed. After the bloody end to the "Prague Spring" in 1968, the western countries took in 100,000 escapees from what is now the staunchly anti-refugee Czech Republic. More than 10,000 of them filled for asylum in Germany.

East Germany also took in political asylum seekers, specifically from countries where communists or socialists were persecuted, including several thousand Chileans after the Pinochet coup in 1973.

Quote
"Boat People" from Vietnam (mostly late 1970s)

In late 1978, the German government made the decision to take in refugees from Vietnam trying to escape the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the communist regime, mostly by ship. The suffering of the so-called "boat people" had caused outrage worldwide. Germany took in 40,000 people.

People escaping military coups in Poland and Turkey (early 1980s)

Military coups in Poland (1981-83) and Turkey (1980), along with the Islamic revolution in Iran (1979), the Lebanese Civil War (1975-90), and a escalating conflict between the Turkish government and the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) caused an upsurge in asylum applications in the 1980s. In 1980, the number of asylum applications per year in Germany exceeded 100,000 for the first time.

People fleeing the Yugoslav Wars (1990s)

After the fall of the Soviet Union, a series of ethnically-based wars broke out in the former Yugoslavia, displacing millions of people from the Balkans. Wars in Croatia and in Bosnia and Herzegovina led to an upsurge of asylum requests in Germany, with 438,000 first-time requests in 1992. Back then, 80 percent of all asylum requests filed in Europe where filed in Germany.
Quote
During the early 1990s, anti-refugee and anti-migrant sentiments surged in Germany. Violent far-right attacks shocked the country. In 1991, two Lebanese girls were injured severely when their refugee home was set on fire by neo-nazi youths in Hünxe. In Mölln (1992) and Solingen (1993), right-wing extremists set the homes of Turkish migrants on fire, leaving three and five people dead.

Today, "Lichtenhagen" - the name of a neighborhood in the city of Rostock - is still synonymous with a siege of an asylum home by right-wing radicals and locals that took place there in 1992.

In 1993, the parliament changed the German constitution and imposed stricter requirements for asylum seekers in Germany. This caused the number of asylum applications to drop drastically in the following years. Since then, people are technically only allowed to file for asylum if they did not travel through another country considered to be safe to get to Germany. 
https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/8463/a-brief-history-of-refugees-who-escaped-to-germany

Right-wingers are ignorant ignoble morons as are the false-leftists who go along with their gibberish! 

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2199
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2021, 08:17:13 pm »
Tweeter gives sound advice for racists complaining about immigrants stealing jobs:
https://twitter.com/k_z187/status/1151531048963960833?s=19
Funny Funny x 1 View List

guest5

  • Guest
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2021, 08:48:05 pm »
Tweeter gives sound advice for racists complaining about immigrants stealing jobs:
https://twitter.com/k_z187/status/1151531048963960833?s=19




rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2199
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2021, 10:52:35 am »


Another stupid argument is that we can simply replace immigrant laborers with robots. Any good rebuttals to this?

guest5

  • Guest
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2021, 01:45:27 pm »


Another stupid argument is that we can simply replace immigrant laborers with robots. Any good rebuttals to this?

Robots use more energy from the energy grid, which clearly has many problems itself these days, especially if we take what's currently happening in Texas with the rolling blackouts into account. Secondly, who is going to maintain the robots? Are they going to maintain themselves? To create a self-maintaining robot workforce would take massive amounts of energy and money would it not? You would need robots making robot parts non-stop and robots to deliver those robot parts to where they are needed. Definitely a lot more energy and money draining than simply allowing immigrant workers to migrate freely. 

These are Western capitalists we are speaking of though. Efficiency and capitalism are definitely not best friends....
Agree Agree x 1 View List

guest5

  • Guest
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #9 on: March 06, 2021, 01:12:28 am »
Let's talk about Abbott, Neanderthal thinking, Biden, and immigrants....

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2199
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #10 on: March 16, 2021, 02:15:43 am »
I wanted to elaborate on this post:


There are tons of these types of comments:
Quote
My friend who’s a Vietnam vet is sleeping in his car.  How come he doesn’t get the needed help while illegals takes Priority?!?!

Maybe tell your bum friend to get a job instead of going to other countries to murder "non-Whites" lol

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11043
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #11 on: September 13, 2021, 09:51:17 pm »
Our enemies think this is an argument against accepting Afghan refugees:

https://vdare.com/posts/afghan-evacuees-filling-hospital-beds-in-northern-virginia-americans-turned-away

So let's scale this down. If I set fire to my neighbours' house, should I then complain if my neighbours get access to the first aid kit in my house before I do?

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11043
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2021, 11:17:56 pm »
Our rightist enemies are officially Marxists now:

https://vdare.com/articles/marx-got-it-right-mass-immigration-wrecks-wages-why-won-t-america-s-resurgent-communists-admit-it

Quote
Communist theoretician Karl Marx anticipated a key economic argument against mass immigration that VDARE.com has made since its beginning: Unfettered immigration depresses wages for host-nation workers.
...
On immigration, Marx was on the right side of the debate, if not necessarily for the right reasons. Oddly, America’s resurgent Communists don’t seem to have noticed.

So why call today's leftists "Communists"? We are patently not! You have literally just admitted that you agree with Marx more than we do!

Quote
Yet the Left, which so concerns itself with immigration and labor exploitation, thwarted President Trump’s modest efforts to protect American workers with immigration controls at almost every turn. Where is the traditional patriotic constituency within the egalitarian Left to resist not only the exploitation of wage-lowering immigrant workers, but also lobby on behalf of American workers whom mass immigration harms?

Answer: Nowhere. Now that The Great Replacement is underway, the Left, almost exclusively focused on race, feels no obligation for those workers because most of them are white.

Those workers too are free to emigrate to look for a job in other countries. This is the whole point. Letting everyone look for a job wherever they can find one means more choices for everyone and thus a greater likelihood of more people finding the most suitable job for themselves. The existence of xenophobic "white" workers who would rather not look for a job elsewhere even though they are allowed to is not our fault.

Quote
Carl Horowitz [Email him] is a veteran Washington, D.C.-area writer on immigration and other issues

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11043
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2021, 02:41:30 am »
More stupidity from our enemies:

https://gatesofvienna.net/2021/09/our-citizens-owe-afghanistan-nothing/

Quote
The following video features a member of the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany) speaking in the Landtag, or regional parliament, of North Rhine-Westphalia. His remarks refer to the Green Party’s demand that Germany admit thousands of new Afghan “refugees”.
...
Video transcript:

00:00         Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the Green Party couldn’t have made it clearer
00:06         than with this motion as to what Germany will be facing following the upcoming national elections.
00:11         They want to open the door wide to anyone who is attracted to our country,
00:17         and are currently using the situation in Afghanistan as the hook.
00:21         The Green Party creates the impression that that we owe this country something.
00:26         Why?
We didn’t install the Taliban. They came to power there before our presence
00:33         in Afghanistan, decades ago. Since 2001, the German taxpayer
00:38         has dumped at least 20 billion Euros into the Hindu Kush, but not only that!
00:44         Several dozen German soldiers have lost their lives there.
00:48         The youngest being just 21 years old. Honestly, I think it is sad that none
00:55         of the previous speakers mentioned a word about that, ladies and gentlemen.
01:02         Others came home mentally and physically crippled.

So again, let's scale this down. If I set fire to my neighbour's house, do I owe my neighbour nothing just because I paid for the arson equipment and because I suffered burns myself in the process?

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11043
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking Rightist Anti-Immigration Arguments
« Reply #14 on: November 22, 2021, 08:58:09 pm »
OLD CONTENT

Here is Laura Loomer (Jew) pretending not to understand what private property is:

www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/01/laura-loomer-and-illegal-alien-actors-storm-pelosis-yard-set-up-sanctuary-camp-video/

We get a lot of this, basically rightists claiming that if we are opposed to a wall to keep out immigrants from the country, we should "similarly" be opposed to walls to keep out immigrants from our own homes also. This is, of course, nonsense. Being opposed to a wall to keep out immigrants from the country merely means we want immigrants treated with the same standards that we treat natives in terms of freedom of movement. And, in general, we do not let natives into our own homes either.

This is one of many false equivalences that in intellectually healthier days used to be considered so stupid that it was unnecessary to debunk them, but the problem with rightists is that they do not stop using an argument because it is stupid, instead they keep using it regardless. And because of the absence of debunking, some people actually end up getting strung along. So it falls upon us to debunk every rightist argument we encounter. If you have come across a rightist argument on the subject that you want debunked, please post it below. Our aim is to gradually build up a comprehensive list of debunked rightist arguments here.

---

I want to eventually collect every anti-immigration argument currently floating around the internet, and debunk them all here, so that leftists can use this topic as a one-stop reference. Ultimately we can make it into a numbered list, and thereafter every time we see the argument posted elsewhere yet again, we can just quote the number and link to the appropriate debunking. This will save leftists a lot of time when debating.

---

"They're taking our jobs!"

Immigrants, just like everyone else, are consumers as well as producers. Immigrants may take jobs, but will also give custom to local businesses for the products and services that they need for daily life. These businesses, in turn, will have to employ additional staff in order to effectively provide these additional products and services. In short, jobs are taken, but jobs are also created.

(Additionally, freedom to migrate applies to everyone. It doesn't just mean that people from A, B and C can look for jobs in D, it also means people from D can look for jobs in A, B and C! All it really means is more opportunity for everyone.)

"They broke the law!"

In saying this they expose only their own disregard for the fundamental principle of law that the only people obliged to abide by any given law of any country are those who receive protection from the same law in return. For example, we are obliged to not steal because in return the state will protect our property. We are obliged to not run red lights because in return we get to use the safer roads that result from traffic lights. And so on. This principle breaks down when it comes to immigration, because those who abide by a so-called “law” that prohibits them from entering are not in any way protected by this same so-called “law”. On the contrary, they are simply left outside where the state need not care about them at all (and can even bomb them)! Thus so-called “laws” prohibiting immigration are not really laws at all, but tyranny.

"They're voting for big government!"
"They're leeching off of welfare!"

It is a valid political position to oppose welfare in general (for anyone). It is not a valid political position to oppose welfare for immigrants while supporting it otherwise.

---

vdare.com/articles/bernie-s-past-common-sense-on-immigration-will-haunt-him-in-2020

Quote
“If poverty is increasing and if wages are going down, I don’t know why we need millions of people to be coming into this country as guest workers who will work for lower wages than American workers and drive waged down even lower than they are now,” Sanders said in an interview with Lou Dobbs in 2007.

I want to address this very common rightist argument that "economic migration lowers workers' wages". What they are saying is migration adds workers to the labour market in the destination country, which causes a reduction in the value of labour there (as supply increases relative to demand). None of this is untrue. But by the exact same reasoning, migration raises workers' wages by subtracting people from the labour market in the origin country, which causes an increase in the value of labour remaining there (as supply decreases relative to demand). Every immigrant is also an emigrant. If a worker migrates from A to B, any wage decrease in B caused by this migration is accompanied by simultaneous wage increase in A. Thus it is false to say that economic immigration lowers wages. Only adding new people *coughOrbancough* to the labour market can do this. People already in the labour market moving around inside it can never do this.

(What rightists really mean, of course, is that they prefer others whom they do not care about to be the ones suffering lower wages. This is tribalism.)

Another similarly common rightist argument that "migration by criminals will increase crime" is similarly faulty. Again, every immigrant is also an emigrant. The total number of criminals is unchanged. Only the location of crimes are changed.

(And again, what rightists really mean, of course, is that they prefer others whom they do not care about to be the victims of crime. This is tribalism.)

---

I wonder if it might actually decrease the global amount of crime. If criminals move to a country with a better police force, they're more likely to be punished, right?

---

Yes!



(By the way:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Warmbier

Warmbier's family were advised to maintain silence about his Jewish heritage while he was under arrest )

---

Here is really stupid rightist "environmentalist" anti-immigration (or, more precisely, anti-"Third-World"-immigration) argument: supposedly, immigration from the "Third World" to the "First World" is bad because it results in more people consuming resources (and hence damaging the environment) at the "First World" level.

The problem with this argument is that it contradicts rightists' own other claim about "Third World" immigrants: that they will not start living like "First Worlders" just by immigrating, but will instead transform the "First World" country to which they have immigrated into another "Third World" country.

Both cannot be true. (As a True Leftist, I am hoping for the latter to be true, which will help the environment.)

Oh, well, at least rightists implicitly admit that "Third World" countries are better for the environment than "First World" countries.

---

Here’s another one: “Africa for the Africans, Asia for the Asians, White countries for everyone!”
Circa Bob Whitaker

---

Short answer: what "white countries"?

Bob Whitaker basically thinks that when "whites" should get to keep for themselves the lands they stole. But why should they? (Answer: the same reason Jews should get to keep Palestine for themselves.) Our response is:



More importantly, if it's OK for "whites" to live outside of Europe (as hundreds of millions currently do), it's OK for at least the same number of "non-whites" to live in Europe. (We need a graphical version of this latter point.)

This pretty much highlights how it is flat-out logically impossible for WNs to win the ethical debate. If they go with the position that migration is wrong (which they need for criticizing migration by "non-whites"), then they cannot avoid the conclusion that "whites" wronged "non-whites" first, and hence have no authority to complain. The only logical way to avoid incriminating themselves is to go with the position that migration is not wrong, in which case they have no reason to complain. Either way they are screwed.

Their only recourse is to declare that it is OK when "whites" do it but not OK when "non-whites" do it ie. ingroup/outgroup double-standards a.k.a. "It's OK to be white!" In other words, to declare that they do not care about ethics.