Talk:Anti-immigration

Almost everyone who opposes immigration seem to take offense at being labeled either "anti-immigrant" or "anti-immigration," preferring labels like "immigration restrictionist" or "immigration reductionist." However everyone else continues to the "anti-" terms. A discussion of this disputed terminology should be attempted. 69.105.53.99 18:47, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Why does the "anti-immigration" page redirect to the "anti-immigrant" page, instead of the other way around? The term, "anti-immigrant", is used by those who favor completely open borders as a way of framing the issue to their advantage and engaging in offensive insulting and name-calling of people who understand why some restrictions on immigration numbers are necessary. Giving credence to that term does not reflect NPOV on the part of Wikipedia.

neo-nazism[edit]

Anti-immigration views are sometimes falsely accused of being associated with neo-nazism in Europe and the US.[1]

While not all people who hold anti-immigant views are nazis, virtually all people who are nazis hold anti-immigrant views. Can anyone dispute that? Willmcw 02:24, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yes, but you could also say that not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost every terrorist is a Muslim? The same goes for Irish nationalists, Republicans, members of the KKK, etc. So keep your small-minded views to yourself. --Wolfsangel 18:43, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, not every terrorist is a Muslim. Take your own advice. -Willmcw

I wasn't saying every terrorist is a Muslim. I was making a point, in that your remark is the exact same as mine. Both are unfounded and generalize unfairly. That's all. --General Heydrich 17:25, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. just because you're anti-immigration doesn't mean you're a Nazi. Whatever happened to being simply concerned about ethnic or cultural, or even social, heritage? That remark is offensive and unfounded. So you can APOLOGISE or just get lost. Both are good for me. --General Heydrich 18:48, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've added in the text that I was referring to in my original comment last year. The intent was never to call those with anti-immigrant views "nazis", but simply to point out that all (neo-)nazis are anti-immigrant, and therefore it is not a false accusation. -Willmcw 18:09, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it isn't a false accusation. You should have elaborated more in the beginning, that's all. --Wolfsangel 14:15, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Probably irrational[edit]

"the fact that the jobs being "taken" are typically menial and/or low paying positions which "natives" generally do not wish to perform" : This "argument (or counter-argument) looks very irrational : there is no such thing as a price of labor in itself. The price of labor results from a match between supply and demand. Of course, if you incresase the supplied work force, the price of labor goes down. If, because of the will to accept a lower standard of living, only immigrants accept these jobs, those jobs are indeed taken away from other citizens. True, this will result either in lower retail prices or enhanced dividends for shareholders. Unfortunately, the proportion of Americans who earn more from their stocks portfolio than they did from their work when they had work is indeed negligible :-( 81.64.199.181 22:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]