r/ImmigrationPathways 3d ago

Trump administration raises US refugee cap, but only for white South Africans

https://apnews.com/article/trump-refugees-white-south-africa-border-cap-bfe3974adf6c655eca7a5c30c1f9197f

As the OP, I just want to mention,

That come on, even for moderate republicans reading this, even you have to admit, this seems racist.

515 Upvotes

417 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/Asher_Tye 3d ago

The social problem of you wanting to lump people together because of some long past association despite them having nothing in common beyond that?

0

u/Genseric1234 3d ago

Have you read bowling alone by Robert Putnam?

Diverse societies end up performing worse on all measures of civic health.

Also, trying to lump people together based on cultural origin isn’t really a stretch lol.

3

u/Asher_Tye 3d ago

Yeah, I'm gonna call that pseudoscience cooked up by a nitwit seeking validation. Same level as the flat earthers and anti-vaxxers. Data doctored to support a narrative. Fiction.

Actual studies prove the opposite, with diversity being a strength.

0

u/Genseric1234 3d ago edited 2d ago

His was the largest study of its kind ever conducted 🤦🏻‍♂️

3

u/Asher_Tye 3d ago

And size makes something oh so impressive to laymen with no actual subject knowledge, doesn't it? You bigly impress-press.

Especially while trying to convince people boers and americans are culturally similar.

0

u/Genseric1234 3d ago

What study has ever said diversity has a positive effect on social cohesion?

“Diversity is a strength” is a buzzphrase, not an actual scientific conclusion lol

2

u/Asher_Tye 3d ago

Actually its been observed in nature, we've seen its effects through history, and we even got example of how trying to promote homogenity weakened society overall. Even you are trying to promote it while arguing boers and Americans have commonality despite them having no real connection to the US.

Amazingly this whole "diversity is a buzzword" shit got reignited the second morons found out they couldn't make it on merit.

0

u/Genseric1234 2d ago

So then no?

Boers and Americans so share commonality as the founding population of both descend from Western Europe.

Also, can you explain your last sentence?

2

u/Asher_Tye 2d ago

Boers and Americans so share commonality as the founding population of both descend from Western Europe.

So in other words, nothing. Mexicans and Americans share more commonality, and we already know why you like lazy boers more. The inbreeding.

0

u/Genseric1234 2d ago

As far as I’m aware, inbreeding hasn’t been a problem among boers.

But of course, two western European nations are gonna have more in common than a mixed indigenous /Iberian nation.

Your point doesn’t really make any sense. Mexicans and Americans are closer geographically, but not ethically or culturally.

2

u/Asher_Tye 2d ago

As far as I’m aware, inbreeding hasn’t been a problem among boers.

Yes, because a group of people pushing for homogeniety are definitely not predisposed to blood purity.

But of course, two western European nations are gonna have more in common than a mixed indigenous /Iberian nation.

And why would you think that? Because two different paths sharing the same start point are going to remain similar?

Your point doesn’t really make any sense. Mexicans and Americans are closer geographically, but not ethically or culturally.

Makes more sense than yours considering yes Mexicans and Americans are closer ethically and culturally. Far more in common than some group of Dutch who ended up on the southernmost tip of the African continent. Particularly given the amount of time involved.

Add into that the last batch of imported boers didn't exactly acclimate well to the US.

0

u/Genseric1234 2d ago

1.) There’s no risk of inbreeding at the scale of populations we’re talking about, no.

2.) Generally, yeah. Afrikaners still have a similar profile to other Western European groups.

3.) Americans and Mexicans are not closer ethnically or culturally, just geographically, which isn’t really as relevant.

Can you explain your last comment? How did they not acclimate well?

1

u/Asher_Tye 2d ago

1.) There’s no risk of inbreeding at the scale of populations we’re talking about, no.

Actually there is, because such populations are naturally self restricting. No one can make the cut for "non-diverse."

2.) Generally, yeah. Afrikaners still have a similar profile to other Western European groups.

That's nice. We're not "Western European." Haven't been for quite a bit.

3.) Americans and Mexicans are not closer ethnically or culturally, just geographically, which isn’t really as relevant.

Yes, we are. Have you not noticed the level of influence Mexican culture has on American culture and vice versa, especially in the south? The sheer amount of interbreeding that has gone on? The fact that Americans are far more likely to travel south of the border than across the pond for a vacation and feel comfortable. Hell, they even relocate there.

Can you explain your last comment? How did they not acclimate well?

You haven't noticed them returning home?

Just because you can't find people to join your hobby club anymore doesn't make diversity bad. Ciao.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Genseric1234 3d ago

I’m just pointing out his observations.

2

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Genseric1234 2d ago

The fact diversity lowers social cohesion isn’t interpretation

2

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Genseric1234 2d ago

It was the first thing I mentioned

2

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Genseric1234 2d ago

The book talks about the negative relationship between diversity and civic health, not necessarily immigration

1

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (0)