Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by lahvak on Monday February 20, 2023 @04:54PM
(#34873469)
Many non-white people contributed to American culture and history as well. Why should it be only white peoples' country? My ancestors contributed nothing as well, but I am white. Is it my country or not?
Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by rayiner on Monday February 20, 2023 @05:31PM
(#34873832)
It’s also black peoples’ country. And in this context, “white” means British Americans (and their subgroups), Germans, Dutch, Norwegians, Swedes, Irish, and Italians. It doesn’t count white immigrants.
Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by lahvak on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @09:58AM
(#34881876)
I am totally confused by your selection of nationalities that are supposedly non-immigrant. What makes Poles or French or Spanish immigrants that does not make Germans or Dutch ones, too?
Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by rayiner on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @11:39AM
(#34883193)
* * *
Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by lahvak on Wednesday February 22, 2023 @09:06PM
(#34905816)
Thank you for the explanation, I can see your point now. I still think it is overly simplified, ignoring fairly large Spanish influence in the south and southwest and French in the north (all you need to do is look at names of towns and geographical features) and other groups like Moravians in the Midwest and Jews in the east. Also, "German" in the 18th or 19th century is not necessarily the same as German today, for example, lot of Austrians were included, and at that time that would be a fairly geographically large and culturally diverse area.
I was mostly objecting to your simplified division of people into those "correct" groups whose country this is and those who are foreigners that don't belong here (I know you did not use these words, but that's how your comments sounded to me). I come from a place that has a long history of sentiments like that, and as far as I can tell, there was never anything good coming out of them.
Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by dctoedt on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @05:49PM
(#34888831)
> By contrast my family came here on a plane [in] 1989. My ancestors contributed nothing to this country.
So when is the cut-off date for having "built the physical and political world of the country"? My ancestors (on different branches of the family tree) came here in the mid- to late-19th century and early 20th century — to what extent do their contributions count?
Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by rayiner on Tuesday February 21, 2023 @06:41PM
(#34889395)
The time increases as the country develops. The British obviously had the most impact. Germans had less impact but did greenfield development off a large swath of the country. At the other end of the scale, Asians will probably never have more than a superficial impact.
Re:The U.S. cannot afford to turn against immigration
by selimthegrim on Friday February 24, 2023 @07:26PM
(#34932273)
Some of us came a lot earlier than 1989 and had arguably more than a superficial impact. I commend to you Vivek Bald's book on Bengali Harlem.
People who share kinship ties and cultural ties built the physical and political world of the country. My wife’s family fought in the American revolution, and settled the Oregon coast. All the rugged frontier individualism that permeates American culture is her people. By contrast my family came here on a plane I. 1989. My ancestors contributed nothing to this country. This country’s culture, institutions, etc., bear none of their imprint. If they had, this would be a very different country. We have a whole country that they made but it’s not this one.