>In the long run, however, successful immigrant societies have overcome such fragmentation by creating new, cross‐cutting forms of social solidarity and more encompassing identities. Illustrations of becoming comfortable with diversity are drawn from the US military, religious institutions, and earlier waves of American immigration.
If you look at other parts of the world, the development of more encompassing identities is anything but guaranteed. From the Bosniaks, Uyghurs, or Roma, groups can live side by side for centuries, without developing joint identities, or developing very fragile ones.
Besides, I'm not sure how applicable the examples given in the study are to a modern nation state. (You can't run a nation like a military, and religion and nationalism are on the decline, so those are probably not sources of future social cohesion either.)
I want to stress that the large majority of people coming into the US are probably good people, but that doesn't mean we are free to ignore the possible systemic effects of mass immigration. Good intentions can often lead to negative outcomes when we don't look beyond the immediate future and our idealized conception of things.
It doesn't help that any discussion around reducing immigration is immediately slandered as racist. How deluded have we become when even attempts at reducing illegal immigration are ridiculed and rejected?
This claim is flat out wrong.
I guess they usually don't die...
I want it to stay that way.
A large number of deported migrants are not running from any nation at all - many of them were raised from a young age in the country that will deport them once they become adults. They have known nowhere else; it is cruel and arguably immoral to send those somewhere else.
Some of them will be surprised, as they won't know they were from somewhere else.
Another large number are people from different countries who simply fell in love and want to be together in spite of law preventing them from doing so legally. It is cruel and arguably immoral to prevent them from being together.
A third large class are not breaking any law at all, it is the authorities breaking the law by not applying their own rules correctly or consistently. See also "deport first, appeal later" legal systems, where of course you can't really appeal once deported as it is impractical to do so.
A fourth class are people for whom the law is simply arcane and insane. For example people deported because one of their bank accounts dipped briefly below some threshold for a moment and there is an arcane rule saying it is not allowed. Or for not having long held a class of insurance that nobody knew about until one day people were being told to leave for not having it, and nobody can say how to obtain it anyway. Or for correcting a minor error caused by their accountant in their tax return, as encouraged by the authorities, and then being labelled a terrorist and threat to nations all over the world due to abusive misapplication of "bad character" law that wasn't created to be used that way.
And then there is the fact that nations of laws change their laws from time to time. Causing people who were once legally entitled to permanent residency to become unwelcome overnight.
> In the short run, immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. In ethnically diverse neighborhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down.’ Trust (even of one’s own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9477....