RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $2120Goal: $3500

Talk:Illegal immigration

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg

This sociology related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


Is there no article for legal immigration?[edit]

I'm interested in immigration policy in general. Immigration redirects here, even though there's links on this page to immigration, hinting that maybe there used to be a regular immigration page?

What about Australia?[edit]

I would have thought that with all of the "boat people" issues and sending them to islands and stuff that's happening in Australia, it would have been mentioned here, especially considering it's one of the big issues for this election. (talk) 05:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

45,000 a year sex slaves[edit]

"The Central Intelligence Agency estimates that 45,000 women [over age 18] and CHILDREN [!!] are smuggled into the United States each year with false promises of decent jobs....." That would be 2,250,000 in just the last 50 years! Capitalists are sick for causing this! Men are sick! They think men NEED sex slaves! http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/09/opinion/modern-day-slavery.html Klop789 (talk) 03:33, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

"Conservative views" section is poorly rationalized and contradictory[edit]

The first sentence of this section reduces white American culture and the desire for those people to preserve an identity as just "white supremacism." The next sentence mentions a book about the issue of illegal immigration and how it affects the native population of the country, which is then called racist with no further comment. No counter-arguments, just the implication that they should be seen as wrong.

Then, two paragraphs down, it says "Such illegal invasion into native lands has actually happened, complete with systematic destruction of native races, customs, social norms, and culture overall" with a link to the destruction of the Native American people, which is included as a "gotcha" for Conservatives somehow instead of being seen as a supporting argument for the previously deemed "racist, xenophobic" belief that foreign cultures could destroy their way of life or replace them in their native land.

So what is this section trying to say? That native Americans were racist "Native Supremacists" who deserved what they got? That it couldn't happen to white Americans and to think that it could makes you a bad person? That it will happen to white Americans but that it's okay because they deserve it for being bad people? — Unsigned, by: 2600:8807:5402:5900:A5B8:B147:65A:4EEC / talk