There's not much difference between the two these days.

and now this?

theyve really wrecked the value of immigration... it should be a good thing.. but theyve muddled it with unskilled labour and illegal border crossing

there're good and bad elements to immigration. governments as of late chose the latter and painted it as the former. people pick up on that lie and get antsy

its quite condescending when "left" media talk about immigrants like all they are good for is cleaning toilets and having babies.... they should highlight highly skilled immigrants especially specialists.. and should be promoting selective immigration

Being completely against immigration of any sort is an extremist position. The vast majority of the electorate supports regulated immigration, because it's easily supported by logic and data as being a net benefit to society. The regulation typically meaning some sort of numerical cap and also a requirement of being able to economically contribute to a modern economy.

The people who are against any sort of immigration are very small in number.

yeah and whats annoying is when media says "immigration is of net benefit" but dont include why that is, and when its not

@wacka the idea is not to lock the students in but to lock the shooter out. At least that is the theory. At least when i was in school, you would lock the door, be quiet, and hide out of view of the door. The idea being that if they started shooting the door, you'd be out of the line of fire. If they couldn't quickly get in the room, they would move on, and if you are quiet enough, they might walk by following any other noises.

Also means that you don't have students running out into the hallway for a waiting shooter, like in parkland

Uncontrolled immigration is conflated with regulated immigration in almost every instance where the topic is broached however. Other than on Fox news perhaps (and often even then) every television personality or columnist speaking about immigration refuses to distinguish between people actually going through the legal process (which the overwhelming majority of voters support), and people just wandering across the border.

lies by ommission

are still lies

its not even a lie of omission, its just a straight up lie. They basically say all immigration is the same.

Same problem with war refugees and economic migrants.

There's a pretty big difference between "if I stay in my country ISIS will kill me" and "my job is shit so I'm going to Germany for free stuff"

people are literally killing themselves to get through the channel tunnel from France to the UK .. several people die constantly... like... Ive been to France.. its not THAT bad

it is a lie by ommission, further information is ommitted, just a single, narrow grain of truth is revealed and elevated as "all the truth"

if they think france is that bad, they get little compassion from me

the country is pretty ruined compared to the 90ies already

thanks to them

I understand that there will always be a segment of the population that is blinded to reality by their open, compassionate nature. Some people have personalities dominated by and driven by empathy and that's not necessarily a bad thing. So I'm not concerned so much about the pathological altruists. I'm more concerned about those who are try to profit from uncontrolled immigration, both in terms of money and in terms of power.

In the US illegals are basically the new slaves.

it's not empathy

but to risk life and limb to get to the UK.. just to be shipped back to germany (at quite an expensive to the UK)

it is willful blindness to not accept the dark evils of the world to be true in the people you see. evil people are elsewhere, and you would never fall for them, right?

For some it is empathy, coupled with stupidity.

it is not compassion, it is pity, the dark cousin. the vice, not the virtue

it is not empathy, for then they would take into account the dark truths surrounding these people and their victims, but they don't. emphathy is a product of logos, not emotion

I'd say for the majority of people who support uncontrolled immigration it's simply due to the emotions they experience (regardless of what label you use for those emotions).

people use the word empathy wrong. we need some widespread education on that, and the differences towards solipsism and compassion

Those who support uncontrolled immigration for access to the new slaves are a bigger concern to me.

it's like people mixing up schizophrenia with split personality disorder

I guess its just the classic bourgeoisie vs proles

the bourgeoisie are not really affected by immigrants (unless they are highly skilled immigrants) whereas the proles are

And above the new slave owner class would be the Soros types who see immigration waves as power. Engineering crises through population change in order to expand their power.

nah crisis is bad for soros

a stable market gives him confidence... without it he could lose everything

dude, the genius knows how to exploit chaos

so crisis it is

crisis follow rules