In the end, it doesn't matter whether we have a blanket amnesty or mass deportations with virtually zero immigration, because unless those are accompanied by other forms of massive government oppression, there are still going to be female, gay, and Black people on TV.
The politics of immigration are not about the border. They're not about…
In the end, it doesn't matter whether we have a blanket amnesty or mass deportations with virtually zero immigration, because unless those are accompanied by other forms of massive government oppression, there are still going to be female, gay, and Black people on TV.
The politics of immigration are not about the border. They're not about immigration. They're about people behaving contrary to "the way things ought to be." Like all fronts in the Culture Wars, they're a scapegoat, a way to avoid saying what the Culture Warriors really care about - the reinstitution of segregation, the subordination of women, and the eradication (or at least visible erasure) of anyone LGBTQ+.
It doesn't matter what you do about immigration or the border, one way or another - the Culture Warriors want the above and will continue to fight for it.
There's a faction of the electorate for whom the politics of immigration is about white supremacy. Whether or not they're a majority or not is open for debate, but there's a considerable faction for whom the concern is the border and a recognition that the situation on our southern border in recent years has been less than optimal. Conflate the two groups at your own electoral risk.
Historically, Canada has been a major source of immigrants to the U.S., including undocumented ones. Find someone who made a major issue out of white immigrants from Canada, and you might start to have even the merest semblance of an argument that bigotry against identifiably different people, primarily expressed as white supremacy, isn't the main motive behind the irrational hatred of immigrants and immigration. Though I will say that when a bunch of immigrants who need temporary housing provided directly by the city are dumped on said city by criminal governors of other states and nothing is done about that, that does engender some local opposition.
Given that the country is 39% nonwhite, speculating that the majority of the electorate's opposition to the immigration policy status quo is fueled entirely by white supremacy is reductive to the point of cartoonishness.
It's interesting that you seem to be carving out an exception for immigration opposition not being white supremacist exclusive to your localized situation. I can assure you that New York City and other jurisdictions that had asylum-seekers bused in by Greg Abbott aren't so unique.
If you're a renter in Springfield, Ohio, and can no longer afford your apartment because of a population surge of renters, then it's just as possible to be critical of immigration policy without being a white supremacist as it is in New York City. If you were a meatpacker in Storm Lake, Iowa, whose union was busted and pay cut by 50+% as they replaced you with immigrants, then it's also just as possible to be critical of immigration policy without being a white supremacist as it in New York City.
With population dislocations escalating due to everything from climate change to vastly improved global transportation and communication, expect immigration to continue to be at or near the top of voter concerns for the foreseeable future, with a decisive majority becoming increasingly hawkish. Dismissing these concerns as fueled single-mindedly by white supremacy will be the golden ticket to the political wilderness for those who partake.
Do you know of any objections to immigration from Canada? Anyway, no, it's not strictly white-supremacist. Note the phrasing "bigotry against identifiably different people, primarily expressed as white supremacy", and I do think that's the primary reason for opposition to immigrants and immigration in New York City, too. Anyway, I should have nipped this side discussion in the bud. The reason I posted the poll results was that they are interesting and relevant to voting, and that I'd like to know more about the pollster.
In the end, it doesn't matter whether we have a blanket amnesty or mass deportations with virtually zero immigration, because unless those are accompanied by other forms of massive government oppression, there are still going to be female, gay, and Black people on TV.
The politics of immigration are not about the border. They're not about immigration. They're about people behaving contrary to "the way things ought to be." Like all fronts in the Culture Wars, they're a scapegoat, a way to avoid saying what the Culture Warriors really care about - the reinstitution of segregation, the subordination of women, and the eradication (or at least visible erasure) of anyone LGBTQ+.
It doesn't matter what you do about immigration or the border, one way or another - the Culture Warriors want the above and will continue to fight for it.
There's a faction of the electorate for whom the politics of immigration is about white supremacy. Whether or not they're a majority or not is open for debate, but there's a considerable faction for whom the concern is the border and a recognition that the situation on our southern border in recent years has been less than optimal. Conflate the two groups at your own electoral risk.
Historically, Canada has been a major source of immigrants to the U.S., including undocumented ones. Find someone who made a major issue out of white immigrants from Canada, and you might start to have even the merest semblance of an argument that bigotry against identifiably different people, primarily expressed as white supremacy, isn't the main motive behind the irrational hatred of immigrants and immigration. Though I will say that when a bunch of immigrants who need temporary housing provided directly by the city are dumped on said city by criminal governors of other states and nothing is done about that, that does engender some local opposition.
Given that the country is 39% nonwhite, speculating that the majority of the electorate's opposition to the immigration policy status quo is fueled entirely by white supremacy is reductive to the point of cartoonishness.
It's interesting that you seem to be carving out an exception for immigration opposition not being white supremacist exclusive to your localized situation. I can assure you that New York City and other jurisdictions that had asylum-seekers bused in by Greg Abbott aren't so unique.
If you're a renter in Springfield, Ohio, and can no longer afford your apartment because of a population surge of renters, then it's just as possible to be critical of immigration policy without being a white supremacist as it is in New York City. If you were a meatpacker in Storm Lake, Iowa, whose union was busted and pay cut by 50+% as they replaced you with immigrants, then it's also just as possible to be critical of immigration policy without being a white supremacist as it in New York City.
With population dislocations escalating due to everything from climate change to vastly improved global transportation and communication, expect immigration to continue to be at or near the top of voter concerns for the foreseeable future, with a decisive majority becoming increasingly hawkish. Dismissing these concerns as fueled single-mindedly by white supremacy will be the golden ticket to the political wilderness for those who partake.
Do you know of any objections to immigration from Canada? Anyway, no, it's not strictly white-supremacist. Note the phrasing "bigotry against identifiably different people, primarily expressed as white supremacy", and I do think that's the primary reason for opposition to immigrants and immigration in New York City, too. Anyway, I should have nipped this side discussion in the bud. The reason I posted the poll results was that they are interesting and relevant to voting, and that I'd like to know more about the pollster.