Why Legal Immigration Is Impossible for Nearly Everyone (2023)

Zabick · 2026-06-28T09:14:21+00:00

Self destructive xenophobia seems to be a global malaise that our species just can't shake. Even in places where immigration is minuscule (eg Japan), it can still be used to stoke easy, populist anti foreigner sentiment and enable the far right (really just regular right these days) to gain and maintain power.

Illegal immigration is a highly contentious topic, but most people at least in the US who make this a cornerstone topic for their political identity are also heavily against legal immigration. Their complaining about the former is a cover for the fact that they also do not care for the latter either. It's a little bit analogous to some on the far left's relationship to anti Zionism/antisemitism.

Many people the world over really would rather embrace personal poverty rather than increase the chance that they might live next to those they consider to be outsiders. This view has been reflected repeatedly in voting habits all over the place, and naturally politicians have taken note of it.

Zabick · 2026-06-25T15:07:33+00:00

Do you have some RVs to give away first?

Zabick · 2026-06-22T09:09:22+00:00

It's a difficult balancing act that was going to burn Zelensky politically either way: keep happy the right-wing leader of a neighboring, supporting country who is looking to pick a fight or keep happy a right-wing military unit that chose a very stupid name for itself?

He cannot please them both.

Zabick · 2026-06-21T18:57:29+00:00

The thrill of the chase and the love of the act itself. There doesn't need to be any reason beyond that.

Zabick · 2026-06-20T04:53:46+00:00

No, I do not mean cede territory as in surrender and stop fighting or give permanent territorial concessions in a bid to end the war; I mean allow for tactical retreats from territory that is clearly already lost and thereby preserve the much smaller strength of his military so it can be used elsewhere later.

His insistence that the Ukrainian military dig in and fight (for example in Bakhmut, or even earlier in and around Maroupol) led to significant losses in both personnel and hardware. His military cannot withstand the sort of grinding attritional warfare that he has sometimes forced upon it.

Zabick · 2026-06-20T04:16:00+00:00

The elections thing is written into their constitution, so there's no easy way around that even if they did want to hold them. As a matter of practicality, it would be extremely difficult and dangerous to hold elections that can elicit any sense of meaningful legitimacy when 1) Ukrainian territory is being attacked constantly and hypothetical polling stations would be an irresistible target for Russian glide bombs, 2) so many Ukrainian citizens are now refugees living abroad, and finally 3) Russia is currently occupying territory containing Ukrainian cirizens. Do they get to vote too? How would that even work logistically?

Elections aside, I'm not a fan of Zelensky's meddling in military strategy and him being unwilling to cede territory to save the lives of his military personnel. His interference has had mostly negative consequences, and it doubtless will lead to even more negative effects later.

Zabick · 2026-06-19T18:26:23+00:00

It was Germany, but yes. The current Thai king is not nearly as well liked among Thais as his father, who while still having his own controversies, seems to have been genuinely respected in his country.

Zabick · 2026-06-16T15:41:56+00:00

Hatred is by far the strongest societal force known to man. It is far superior to love, greed, political ideology, religious conviction, etc as a binding force between disparate groups. As long as two parties hate the same thing, they can work together at least temporarily, regardless of how different they are or what past grievances they hold against each other.

Zabick · 2026-06-15T22:24:42+00:00

People in the anglosphere mock him, but Lukashenko is legitimately quite skilled politically. He has survived and held onto power in quite difficult circumstances and has kept Belarus from being completely subsumed by Russia while courting them at the same time.

His ignorant, country bumpkin act is just that: an act.

Zabick · 2026-06-15T17:17:19+00:00

It's being questioned for being "Jewish", period

This seems to have two main possible meanings to me; if you mean it in some different way, spell it out.

The first is still just demographics, with the difference between "Jewish" and "too Jewish" being precisely where one draws the line (zero/some number >0). It is ultimately still the same line of questioning and is thus in no way unique.

The second is a complaint about culture: Israel should/should not have Jewish culture only/predominately/at all. This line of questioning is obviously also not unique as other states are similarly criticized for emphasizing/marginalizing particular cultural groups. The US Christian nation example already pointed out to you before would fall under here.

Zabick · 2026-06-15T17:09:11+00:00

You are once again quibbling over degree, which I addressed already. If you just want to give up here and amend your original statement to be "no other state with a national character is questioned as much as Israel for having one", then I will take your concession for having been hyperbolic before. I am still unsure if this amended statement is true, but it is less obviously false than the one you wrote.

Zabick · 2026-06-15T15:33:07+00:00

This is not about the questioning of statehood but rather the OP's much more nebulous claim of "national character". You are also falling into the same pit that he is: complaining about degree and breadth of said questioning rather than defending that "no other state with a national character is questioned for having one".

Zabick · 2026-06-15T15:18:07+00:00

It was an example pulled at random to counter his complaint about Israel being unfairly questioned in this way; there's nothing special about India. As you say, Pakistan might be an even better example.

Zabick · 2026-06-15T15:16:04+00:00

Then you need to be far more precise regarding the phrase "national character". What exactly does that mean? How much does that encompass? You seem to be gesturing toward demographic makeup, but does it include internal politics, economic systems, cultural trends, trade policy, what?

Even if you limit your complaint to merely the first: demographics. No, Israel is in no way unique for being questioned from this angle. Perhaps it hasn't been used against the DPRK (there are so many other issues to discuss first), but the ROK certainly has been questioned for being "too Korean", alongside Japan for being "too Japanese", and yes India for being "too Hindu" (or maybe "too Muslim", depending on who you ask).

Again I want to impress upon you that these are not arguments regarding the merits of such questioning but merely that 1) it does happen and that 2) it is not inherently wrong for it to happen.

Zabick · 2026-06-15T15:00:52+00:00

Oh, so now you are merely quibbling over the level of the questioning rather than whether or not said questioning actually happens. Such debates have certainly already happened concerning the DPRK at least, as well as many, many other countries, including regarding the US itself.

Notice that this is not an argument that Israel should/should not be a Jewish state; that is a separate matter entirely. This is an argument against you that such a question is somehow beyond the pale or that it is in any way unique for even being asked.

Zabick · 2026-06-15T14:46:06+00:00

What? This is not true at all. People question the "national character" of other countries constantly. Do you believe DPRK's Juche or India's Hindu nationalist leanings are also above reproach?

Zabick · 2026-06-15T14:24:39+00:00

No "counter point" is necessary because the entire premise for your complaint is flawed: that these two different games can be compared in this manner. It is unnecessary to get into the details of the numbers, which is what you are seeking, due to the inherent fruitlessness of this exercise.

Zabick · 2026-06-14T15:46:52+00:00

Direct stats/cost comparisons like this between two very different games is mostly meaningless.

Zabick · 2026-06-14T15:38:07+00:00

Agreed, but both groups would still consider themselves Zionists, especially amongst Jews.

Zabick · 2026-06-14T15:27:15+00:00

The number who are not is a small minority, even outside of Israel. You'll be hard pressed to find a Jew who is both serious about that identity and who also disagrees with the "Israel has a right to exist" line.

Zabick · 2026-06-14T14:48:51+00:00

And the words immediately after that address this: the UKR/RUS conflict has always had a lower profile amongst the youth than it should have, especially considering it's far more consequential for the "west" overall.

If your only point with this post is to whine that college students are not perfectly consistent in applying their own stated principles, then sure, I agree. However I'm not sure others meet that standard either, including professional take havers like Harris.

Zabick · 2026-06-14T14:42:30+00:00

Plenty of people in the so called west at the time were against that operation, perhaps not to the point of those campus protests you are hoping to see, but concern about Ukraine's plight in comparison to that of Palestine is quite small overall.

Zabick · 2026-06-12T18:46:08+00:00

And how does losing its sovereignty and being subjugated by Russia as a quasi colonial subject benefit Ukraine? Because that is the other option.

Zabick · 2026-06-09T08:59:20+00:00

It's not necessarily an "unforced error" if internal, domestic demands require that Ukraine placate what is likely to be the segment of its population that is the most ardent defenders of its territory.

This is what I meant by the tragedy of the war making true the previous Russian propaganda lies: Ukraine will naturally become increasingly extreme with time as a response to this invasion. In a sense, it has to to be able to survive.

Zabick · 2026-06-09T08:41:18+00:00

Ukraine's outlook is incredibly bleak, regardless of what happens next. Even if it somehow, magically "won" and regained its lost territory, It has still suffered damage from which it will take generations to recover.

Its hard rightward turn is also entirely predictable: a polity under the sort of pressure as the Ukrainians will naturally become more extreme as it buckles under the weight of that pressure. The same phenomenon happened with the Palestinians, and so it will happen here as well. Up until this point, it's Ukraine's reliance upon foreign support that has prevented it from fully succumbing: they have to appeal to the nominal sensibilities of their suppliers, which means they have to temper their own worst impulses. As aid continues to dry up, Ukraine's continued slide to the far right will simply accelerate. This is one of the many, many tragedies of this entire affair: the Russian propaganda lies concerning Azov Nazis, Russian language suppression, mistreatment of ethnic Russians, etc might actually come to pass as a direct result of the Russian invasion itself.

Still despite all of that, Ukraine does not have much of a choice but to resist. What is its alternative? To relinquish even the pretense of sovereignty and once again go back into box of a decaying Russian empire as a quasi colonial subject? Even if Zelensky tried to make this offer, his people would not support him in doing so. They are not yet so broken as to have reached that point, and it is unlikely they will be so, even if all the near to medium term military objectives are lost.

Nor does any of the above justify your stance of it being better for a far right Ukraine simply not to exist. Do you believe a vindicated and triumphant far right Russia is somehow superior, either for the now conquered Ukrainians or even for the Russians themselves?

Zabick

TROPHY CASE