|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:48 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Satori wrote: |
| It's about supressing symbols of identity, and asserting the nationalistic dominance of the white american identity. |
I agree that what you present here represents one view of these complex issues.
Why must you force the debate to center around these views, though? And why must others accuse those of us of holding other views "racists" and "biggots"?
And can you not see that antagonistically waving a foreign flag in the natives' faces, whereever you are, is bound to offend some...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Satori wrote: |
| It's about supressing symbols of identity, and asserting the nationalistic dominance of the white american identity. |
I agree that what you present here represents one view of these complex issues.
Why must you force the debate to center around these views, though? And why must others accuse those of us of holding other views "racists" and "biggots"? |
I don't know why they do that. I wish to divorce myself from the more hysterical elements of the left.
As for forcing the debate to centre around certain issues, what would you like the debate to centre around?>
| Quote: |
And can you not see that antagonistically waving a foreign flag in the natives' faces, whereever you are, is bound to offend some...? |
I can actually, that's why it's a complex issue. But do you really think that banning flag will resolve the issue? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| As for forcing the debate to centre around certain issues, what would you like the debate to centre around? |
For starters, I would do it tediously, like a diplomatic conference: you tell me your view. I repeat your view to you in the most sympathetic language I can command. I ask you if you think I understand your view. When you agree, we move on to my view.
Then I tell you my view. You repeat my view to me in the most sympathetic language you can command. You ask me if I think you understand my view. When I agree, we can move on to differences in views and get down to business -- provided we keep our language dry and professional.
All views are welcome. All issues can be dealt with in their own terms.
And that is how you deal constructively with someone whose views you despise or cannot comprehend; that is the only way I have ever seen people actually change their minds, too.
Anyway, you asked; I answered. Time for someone to attack what I just said, I imagine... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'll start then, do you really think that banning thier flags will deal with the issue in any meaningful way? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| I'll start then, do you really think that banning thier flags will deal with the issue in any meaningful way? |
Great.
No, I do not believe that banning Mexican flags will deal with the issues immigrants -- legal and illegal -- pose in any meaningful way. I never meant to suggest that or endorse Pahrump's decision; I think their decision is, ultimately, illegal, by the way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Guys, foreign flags are not banned.
| Quote: |
| The town council voted last week, 3-2, to approve an ordinance that makes it illegal to display a foreign flag -- unless an American flag is flown above it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pligganease wrote: |
| ...foreign flags are not banned. |
Thanks for the clarification.
Satori? Do you still have an issue with Pahrump? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, forgetting about the flags for a moment, because, lets face it, the flag issue is just a surface issue related to a much bigger issue of immigration. I have to admit Im not very deeply read of very current on the immigration issue. Here's what I would want to know in order to talk about it seriously:
How many people are coming across the Mexican border each year illegally?
What kinds of problems are they causing? I don't count the fact that some americans simply dont like it happening, I'm talking about real tangible problems. For example, are they raising unemployment? Are they actually taking jobs that americans really want to do? One presumes that if they are illegal they arent getting any govt assitance so they are coming over and working. Who would be doing these jobs if they weren't coming over?
Are they causing other problems such as ghettoisation? Crime?
Why are they coming over illegally? What are the requirements that they cant fulfill?
My approach first up, bearing in mind I don't know the answers to the questions I've posed, would be two pronged. One, make it easier to come across legally, and two, make it less desirable to come across illegally. I understand that at the moment they are just caught and driven back over the border. They could be charged and jailed. This would encourage legal crossing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| How many people are coming across the Mexican border each year illegally? |
By nature, it cannot be determined.
My understanding is that they number in the millions -- annually, that is.
| Satori wrote: |
| What kinds of problems are they causing? |
Multiple and complex. I am not a borderlands expert; they are out there. But it is equally ridiculous to assert that they are causing no problems whatsoever as it is to claim that they are responsible for all that is wrong in the Southwest.
| Satori wrote: |
| Are they actually taking jobs that [A]mericans really want to do? |
In some cases, yes. In other cases no. Embedded in this question is their own propaganda angel however, all the way up to Fox: "we mean no harm; we just want to do the jobs that [lazy] Americans don't want."
Not exactly. They do jobs for prices that many informal American employers like to pay. They are selling themselves as an underclass, then.
| Satori wrote: |
| Why are they coming over illegally? What are the requirements that they can[']t fulfill? |
Hispanic culture does not have the same concepts Anglo-American culture does with respect to a wide range of issues, including standing in line, crossing on the crosswalk on a green light, following rules, etc.
Also, they do not take "no" for an answer on these kinds of things. Tell them they cannot do this or that, and they go for the loophole everytime. I'll quote something from an expert on this, if you like.
| Satori wrote: |
| One, make it easier to come across legally... |
How many should we take then? Should there be limits? Do we have a right to set those limits? Or should we seek "the world's" approval?
How many people do you think would remain in places like Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, or Haiti if the United States "made it easier to come across legally"?
| Satori wrote: |
| ...and two, make it less desirable to come across illegally. |
Why is it always primarily the United States's responsibility to make things better in Mexico? Mexico and the rest of Latin America have suffered the same socioeconomic problems they suffer today since before Plymouth Colony.
| Satori wrote: |
| I understand that at the moment they are just caught and driven back over the border. They could be charged and jailed. This would encourage legal crossing. |
Yes, for those who are caught. Most are not caught, however. And that is why there are estimated tens of millions of illegals living in the Southwest and beyond today.
The issue I see is this: does a nation-state have a right to police its own borders and set its own immigration policies? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Satori wrote: |
| Why are they coming over illegally? What are the requirements that they can[']t fulfill? |
Hispanic culture does not have the same concepts Anglo-American culture does with respect to a wide range of issues, including standing in line, crossing on the crosswalk on a green light, following rules, etc.
|
I'm pretty sure that massive, bigotted generalisation (something Gopher fights against daily with the anti-American squad) is not what Satori was asking for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't get between a man and his chimichanga.
Last edited by VanIslander on Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:51 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
The issue I see is this: does a nation-state have a right to police its own borders and set its own immigration policies? |
This is something I think should atleast be true. If people want to attack America for it's foreign policies, go right ahead. There is plenty to do. But to tell another nation how to run itself inside it's borders is arrogant. If they want to keep people out, who is anyone to tell them they can't. I live a great life, I could possibly support a couple poor people in my house back home. I would be against others telling me I must though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| I'm pretty sure that massive, bigotted generalisation (something Gopher fights against daily with the anti-American squad) is not what Satori was asking for. |
Satori: disregard this. It comes from someone who knows nothing about the region, does not speak the language, has (I believe) never lived there, etc.
And I thought we already dealt with the "biggot" tendency, above, no?
Anyway, as I said, just say the word, and I will start producing expert testimony on the opinion I report (but do not invent), above. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| I'm pretty sure that massive, bigotted generalisation (something Gopher fights against daily with the anti-American squad) is not what Satori was asking for. |
Satori: disregard this. It comes from someone who knows nothing about the region, does not speak the language, has (I believe) never lived there, etc.
And I thought we already dealt with the "biggot" tendency, above, no?
Anyway, as I said, just say the word, and I will start producing expert testimony on the opinion I report (but do not invent), above. |
The fact that you don't think that sweeping generalisation and the ones you fight against daily are the same is disturbing (not to mention a lot of your views anyway). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Gopher"]
| Satori wrote: |
| ...and two, make it less desirable to come across illegally. |
| Quote: |
Why is it always primarily the United States's responsibility to make things better in Mexico? Mexico and the rest of Latin America have suffered the same socioeconomic problems they suffer today since before Plymouth Colony. |
Actually I didnt mean make it less desirable to cross by making life better in Mexico. I meant make it less desirable to cross by implimenting harsher punishments for crossing!
| Satori wrote: |
| I understand that at the moment they are just caught and driven back over the border. They could be charged and jailed. This would encourage legal crossing. |
| Quote: |
Yes, for those who are caught. Most are not caught, however. And that is why there are estimated tens of millions of illegals living in the Southwest and beyond today.
The issue I see is this: does a nation-state have a right to police its own borders and set its own immigration policies? |
Short anwer, of course they do.
Obviously having NO immigration across the boarder would not be right, as they do seem to be filling job positions. But having totally free immigration seems to be far too much. The country has the right and, it seems to me, the duty, to set a target number based on a whole bunch of factors that I couldnt even begin to get into, and then go about reaching that target. This is one of those issues where I break the standard liberal mould. I believe a country has a right to pursue an immigration policy that is beneficial to that country, not a policy that is essentially a hand-out or "aid" to another country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
