That is really shocking. A great guy, legendary classic tetris player and by far the most entertaining to watch. Can't even imagine how tough it must be for Heather.
But suppose that it is perceived by the public that the net benefit from mass immigration is negative. How should they organize into a political movement or even voice their concerns, such that they do not get accused of being racist, xenophobic, populist, fascist, far-right?
> Too much mass immigration to anywhere would be undesirable, but for economic and population density reasons. I am skeptical of the idea of the idea that culture is fixed and immutable.
There is clearly more to it than just economic and population density reasons. Culture matters. Consider, for example, that female genital mutilation is now a European problem. Or that Europe today has de facto implemented Islamic blasphemy laws - where people are afraid to criticize Islam publicly for fear of being murdered. Or that the number of rapes has gone up significantly in Sweden, with more than 80% of rape assaults being carried out by foreign-born individuals? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden) Or that 52% of British muslims believe that homosexuality should be illegal, and that close to half of British muslims believe that wives should always obey their husbands? (https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/publication/doc...)
So mass immigration can clearly change society for the worse outside of simply economic and population density reasons.
But narag was talking about immigration between countries: "...had more than a third of inmigrant parents, including Russia, Iran, South America (most) and Morocco". I understood narag's point as "that's a fast demographic change, but inevitable in any modern large capital city, as capitals tend to attract immigration".
My counterpoint was that there is nothing inevitable about it, and that it is a policy choice. Tokyo is a very large, very modern city with a massive economy, yet it has a very modest foreign population and is recognizably Japanese almost everywhere you go (which results in being really safe even at night, almost completely litter-free, and certainly a great experience of Japan for a visiting tourist).
12% in the most foreign-populated area still seems very low by European standards. Given that a lot of the foreigners are Chinese and Korean, to the European eye it looks even more homogeneous than that.
Seine-Saint-Denis, for comparison, had 27% residents born outside Metropolitan France, and that was in 1999. Marseille is 25% muslim.
I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that it was a deliberate policy of the French government after WW2 to invite them in. It is also natural that French-speaking people of the world would prefer to migrate to France.
But if French governments wanted to limit migration from Algeria or elsewhere, they could have done so. It was certainly not an inevitable consequence of colonialism.
Can you tell us more please? How would a regular person go about using bio-feedback to reduce anxiety and stress?
How have you observed people in the hedge fund industry using Propranolol? How would they acquire it, use it, and was there any talk of negative side effects?
Not all of Paris is like that. Those that can afford to tend to move out from such areas, resulting in a fairly segregated city. The politicians responsible tend to not live in such areas either.
It is not racism or xenophobia to want to preserve what is good about a nation's culture, and limit the import of other nations' and culture's problems.
Could you please answer the following questions:
1. Is there a limit at which you believe mass migration into France would be undesirable?
2. If you believe that there is such a limit; what would a legitimate movement to argue for limiting mass migration look like, such that you would not be accusing them of xenophobia and racism? How would their arguments differ from core-questions'?
But what Paris has become is not somehow a direct consequence of colonialism. Those were two separate decisions, and should be criticized and judged separately.
Japan is a fairly ethnically and culturally homogeneous country. It is natural that they would expect Parisians to look and behave a certain way. When they don't, it is of course a big negative to many visitors - they come to Paris expecting a certain look and feel, a certain atmosphere and culture, but they are getting something else.
You do not need to be from Japan to feel that way when visiting Paris either. And I do not see anything wrong with pointing that out.