87
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world 29 points 5 days ago

I feel like "illegal" immigration as a concept is inherently racist and being upset and anyone for not coming over the "right" way is also racist.

[-] asceticism@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

Even if the law bars say only pedodiles from entry? Just hung up on the word anyone here. I'm guessing there are some number of people we can all agree should be kept outside of a given sect of people. Even back in the day there would be exile's.

Then if we say some number of people should be bared there would be a "right" way.

I'm not saying immigration policy is good now. Far from it.

[-] LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Who decides if someone's a pedophile or not? How are you going to track that? Force people to take a test or something? Hell, currently we're in a world where queer people, especially trans people, are called "groomers" and "pedophiles" for the sheer act of being trans. So you call people you don't want to come in pedophiles and then they can't come in. Nope, no trans people allowed because we're all "pedophiles" according to the government.

Okay what, you're going to limit it to people who've been convicted of child sex crimes. Well, then they make the existence of people who they don't like count as sex crimes. Again, as is happening to trans people. Existing in public as yourself is a crime so you're charged and treated the same as a pedophile.

So we've already covered why your logic is completely broken and this idea is stupid. But let's push all of that aside. For the sake of argument, best case scenario, we are only talking about actual genuine pedophiles. Have they committed a crime? Are they in prison? Then they're not crossing any borders since they're incarcerated.

What if they haven't committed a crime yet? Well then we'd have no way of knowing they're a pedophile unless they admitted it themselves. And no these people shouldn't be punished just for having those sexual desires. For one, most people are able to control themselves despite sexual urges. Cases of rapes and sexual assault are the result of power dynamics, not random uncontrollable urges. And two, these people should be given help given this could cause genuine mental distress.

What if they've committed a crime but served their time? Well, what justification is there to stop them? What if they harm another child? Well what if they do it in their own country? That's not going to make a difference. And this also goes into the complex issue that is the prison system and how it's largely useless at doing anything other than containing people as a punishment rather than actually attempting to help reform people.

Anyway no, I don't think there's any justification for restricting any kind of "undesirable" from entering a country. Beyond anything else, it just ends up a loophole to punish any group of people you don't like by branding them as that undesirable. Same for every human right. If it doesn't apply to everyone then it applies to no one.

And if you're a special kind of dumbass who'd say "well what about nazis/the kkk/etc", the answer is that ideologies that are inherently intolerant of other people just for existing do not get the benefit of tolerance themselves.

[-] asceticism@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Not sure where the vitriol is coming from. Did I do something to personally offend you? I'm guessing you are just not fully comfortable with your ideas.

Force people to take a test or something?

"Would you have sex with this child holds up picture of child?" "Yes..." "Well, you are not allowed in." Yeah, I would be okay with that tbh.

anyone

“well what about nazis/the kkk/etc”, the answer is that ideologies that are inherently intolerant of other people just for existing do not get the benefit of tolerance themselves.

Oh so we agree as I said in my original post "Just hung up on the word anyone here" you would prevent some amount of people from coming over... So it's not inherently racist to make nazis/kkk immigration illegal?

[-] LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Ah so you are that special kind of dumbass.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 13 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

yes. the ones complaining about "immigrants" at all are the ones who made their lives shit in the first place.

let them in and fucking take care of them.

[-] stephan262@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

Short answer yes with an if. The long answer is no with a but.

I'd say it's racist if someone is complaining about illegal immigrants alongside a general contempt of 'foreigners' and not paying attention to the details of why it's illegal for them to migrate the way they did and what options are available for legal migration.

It's not racist to be opposed to those who are in violation of the law, as that is not a racial or ethnic classification. But it is important to be inquisitive as to why the law is the way that it is, and be willing to consider the possibility that just because something is against the law does not mean that it should be. Law has long been used as a tool of systemic oppression and racism, as well as many other horrific abuses inflicted on people.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 119 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Not intrinsically, but pretty commonly it is driven by bigotry over culture, religion or skin colour.

You know all the people up in arms over the wave of Ukrainian refugees? Oh wait, there's nothing of the sort? Well, there you go.

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 65 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I think it's very telling that it's not about "How do we allow them in legally" but it's about "Kick them out". If they were simply mad about illegal immigration then the natural discourse would be "Why do they not come over legally then?" The answer there is that of course it's insanely difficult to legally become a citizen of the US, and it can take years - even decades, but people have a family that's hungry now.

The discourse going to "Kick them out" shows that it's not about legal immigration at all, it's that they don't want a specific type of person around them. Otherwise we'd be having fairs and events to help people get their citizenship right now. After all they want to be here, the even want to pay taxes. If they just need to come in legally then the vast majority would, if our process allowed it.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 6 days ago

The answer there is that of course it’s insanely difficult to legally become a citizen of the US, and it can take years - even decades, but people have a family that’s hungry now.

Same for other places. Even Canada, which is apparently one of the best destinations, has a system that's poorly designed to the point of maliciousness.

[-] Witchfire@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

It took my dad about 15-20 years in the US to get citizenship. It took my friend about 10 in Canada. Both are fucking terrible, but the US is a special kind of processed garbage

[-] Tujio@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago

Exactly. In and of itself, criticizing illegal immigration is simply criticizing an illegal act. However, it is usually steeped in racist logic and arguments. Talking about how people who come over our southern border are genetically inferior and prone to crime is racist as fuck. Adding roadblocks to immigration for brown people while simultaneously streamlining immigration of white South Africans (the guys who did Apartheid) is racist as fuck.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] pixeltree 16 points 4 days ago

I wouldn't say it's racist to oppose illegal immigration, but it makes me suspect you might be and also makes me think you have very little empathy.

[-] socsa@piefed.social 27 points 5 days ago
[-] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 22 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

being a nazi should be illegal

deport musk

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 79 points 6 days ago

Every time I meet someone who opposes illegal immigration but claims to support legal immigration I ask one question. If the law changed so that all immigration was legal, you'd be fine with it, right?

Nobody so far has been fine with it. I conclude that the question of legality is a dodge for people who are embarrassed about their actual motives.

[-] SippyCup@lemmy.ml 25 points 6 days ago

Oh my God the HEMMING and HAWING when suggesting easier immigration to one of these bigots.

They will do anything to avoid answering that question. It's really disgusting

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] rowinxavier@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

The term is a little racist. It is like defining someone as an excon, or ex convict, rather than someone who has spent time in prison. Or as disabled rather than a person with a disability. You define people as a simple thing rather than as a whole person with a feature. It flattens people into less than they are and makes them less than human.

So opposing people who flaunt the rules is a separate question to opposing illegal immigrants. You don't dismiss their humanity, you don't discard them, you say "You breeched the rules and here are the consequences."

The second layer is whether you believe in the rules. Do you believe people from other countries are fundamentally different to you? Are they less because of where they come from? If so, yes, racist. If not, then probably not.

[-] rising_man@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago

Considering the high proportion of the population with ancestors who were illegal immigrants, there's also a question of what you consider as acceptable.

If illegal immigrants in the US are all white Christian beautiful women filling jobs that locals don't want to do in healthcare, is it different than Pedro from Honduras who works in construction but looks like he could be a drug mule.

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

OP did not mention the US.

[-] Ibaudia@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

It's not racist to take issur with illegal immigration.

It's just not right to oppose the immigrants as people, or say that their situation is the result of some moral failing. These people make the best decisions for themselves and their families.

It becomes racist when you start attributing characteristics or behaviors to their race as fundamental attributes.

[-] itztalal@lemmings.world 18 points 5 days ago

No, race doesn't have anything to do with it.

If you oppose illegal immigration, though, you should ask yourself why.

If it's solely that you don't want people coming over to your nation illegally, then it's very likely that they aren't able to because of how complicated and exclusive your nation's immigration system is.

[-] Pika@rekabu.ru 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

There could be many reasons to be opposed to it, not necessarily racist ones.

You can support the rule of law - that's not racist. You may want to support legal immigration, while closing illegal ways that commonly lead to abuse of migrants - this is straight up progressive. You may consider illegal immigrants more dangerous as they didn't go through screening procedures - that's up for debate, but not necessarily racist, etc. And generally, if you consider that same rules should apply to everyone, this is not racist.

However, it's worth considering the laws of your area and the way they can affect legal migration. Going against illegal immigration and at the same time voting to complicate legal one, especially in relation to certain nationals, likely signals of racism (or, rather, ultranationalism). It is one thing to want to make the process transparent and legal and the other - to build more barriers.

[-] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 12 points 5 days ago

It really depends on why you oppose them. There is no real answer to that question.

[-] cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world 50 points 6 days ago

No, but it is racist to assume that a person is an illegal immigrant based solely on their race.

Likewise, i think there is a deeper connection being made, that theres an assumption that an illegal immigrant is a bad person, and i also do not think that is a valid assumption.

To know if a person is a bad person, you have to know the person.

[-] matcha_addict@lemy.lol 36 points 6 days ago

I am yet to hear a justification for opposing illegal immigration that doesn't tie back into racism or racial prejudice, let alone a justification that actually makes sense if you take it apart.

Someone prove me wrong, and I'll change my mind.

load more comments (20 replies)
[-] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 5 days ago

Nothing makes you more racist than having a legal alibi to hide your racism.

This question reeks of asking if keeping slaves when they were "legal" racist? If it's legal, what's the big deal?

[-] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Is your opposition to ilegal immigration based on race or skin color?

If the answer is yes then, yes, you are racist. If the answer is no, then no, you are not racist.

[-] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago

Probably still xenophobic though

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 13 points 5 days ago

Usually, yes
Because usually the reason they have to be illegal is racist, and the person complaining about illegal immigration is fine with it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] fubo@lemmy.world 30 points 6 days ago

It's racist to use immigration law to maintain a racial underclass. For instance, many essential agricultural workers in the US do not have access to the courts or law enforcement to protect their rights. If a citizen assaults one of these workers, the worker cannot safely report the assault to law enforcement without being punished for doing so.

[-] fodor@lemmy.zip 22 points 6 days ago

In the US and many other countries, immigration violations are not crimes. Therefore, those immigrants are not illegal. It is actually a civil infraction, like a parking ticket... So, your question reveals hidden xenophobic bias. That alone is immoral. Is it racist in itself? Probably. It is very difficult to be xenophobic without also being racist.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Dorkyd68@lemmy.world 19 points 5 days ago

I feel like if you're asking then you're searching for validation. A sort of way to not feel guilty about being racist. Tell me, what bothers you most about immigrants? This country wouldn't exist if it weren't for immigrants

[-] rikudou@lemmings.world 8 points 5 days ago

What "this country"? Lemmy?

And I understand them searching for validation. It might be hard being anti-illegal-immigrant and everyone thinking you racist, even though your reasons are not racist nor xenophobic at all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Jhuskindle@lemmy.world 10 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Yes because this is all land stolen by illegals. Assuming you're in North America. Canada and United States both literally illegally migrated here. No excuse or logic that would make sense that others shouldnt do the same. The end.

[-] dnick@sh.itjust.works 19 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

No, not on it's own, but it's rarely on its own. In the US opposition to illegal immigrants and racism tracks nearly one to one.

One could imagine a country where illegal immigration itself was a distinct problem, where the society was balanced in such a way that legal immigration was at an optimal rate and additional people coming into the country had downsides that outstripped the positives, when though, for example, the immigrants were of the same culture/class/standing as the existing citizens.

The US, on the other hand, is nowhere near an optimal legal immigration rate, even though we benefit pretty significantly from both legal and illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants, for example, contribute significantly to the economy while not drawing 'as many' benefits away. Overwhelmingly the actual arguments against illegal immigration are grounded in cultural differences and language and, to put it simply, the desire for one class to want a reason to consider themselves better than another class by an easily recognizable yardstick.

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 days ago
[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

No.

You just don't want illegal immigrants. Forget skin color for a second, you could still have an illegal white immigrant and still oppose them.

It just happens to be that a majority of immigrants are not white, and that's the crux of the issue imo

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ieGod@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 days ago

Maybe. Depends. It's complicated.

[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)
[-] Fleur_@aussie.zone 4 points 4 days ago

Someone who immigrated illegally?

[-] prole 5 points 4 days ago

I guess nobody ever taught you that rule about not using the word(s) you're trying to define, in the definition itself?

[-] Fleur_@aussie.zone 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Are we seriously gonna play the "but what do these words actually mean" card for "illegal" and "immigrant?" Kinda stupid ass takes that give credibility to online age verification. My comment wasn't a serious definition, it was deliberately drawing attention to the absurdity of asking to define a phrase with a total of two words both of which are highly specific, unambiguous and descriptive of the very thing they mean. At the point where phrases like this need to be rigorously explained and defined, we're in a "learning the language for the first time and doesn't actually know what words mean" scenario

[-] prole 2 points 4 days ago

I didn't ask the initial question

[-] Fleur_@aussie.zone 2 points 4 days ago

I'm replying to you and what you said

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
87 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

34902 readers
1277 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS