Quote: (09-07-2015 01:14 PM)Phoenix Wrote:
Quote: (09-07-2015 01:08 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:
Quote: (09-07-2015 12:02 PM)LEMONed IScream Wrote:
^ And what practical measure would you propose? Pep talks are easy. Actual, useful action, particularly regarding this subject is more complicated. There are already movements and so far they've pretty much failed. And taking a stand against this is pretty much asking to be branded as a "Neo nazi" "christian fundamentalist", whatever.
From a practical policy point of view, It is KEY to drop any hint of racist arguments in the immigration dispute, and SOLELY focus on economic reality.
Advanced economies can't absorb tons of the uneducated without it hurting a LOT.
I disagree. The problem is that whenever dissidents go up against the left, they are immediately called racist, and they immediately fall onto their back foot in defending against the claim. So the leftist always defeats them. The correct move is a Hapkido-style "yep, sure, actually I prefer the title 'super racist'. Now, back to the topic of you destroying society, Leftist, ..."
Except "Leftist" is a more or less meaningless, lazy term which doesn't clearly define what exactly you want to do about a situation. It doesn't offer a way to establishing policy or procedures. It has as much intellectual specificity as saying "Sally has cooties."
I'm very liberal on a lot of issues, but pretty radically conservative on immigration. So if you think you'll get mileage by smearing this vague group of people as Leftist, it just doesn't work because no one wants their aunts' and uncles' Social Security taken away.
It's just an intellectually lazy term to use, which doesn't specify what you want.
What exact policy do you want? What are the economic reasons? What will it cost? These are the types of questions adults ask. Sarcasm and name calling don't help a lot towards establishing policy.