How to convince people that more immigration is good?

[Bombadil]

Australia might go through an interesting experiment in that a great deal of their farming is done by migrant workers and due to the epidemic there is simply not enough hands to pick all the fruits and vegetables growing.. meaning, one, farmers are going to have a terrible time unable to farm their crops and, two, Australia is going to be low on food this autumn.

Perhaps it will lend some support for immigration and migrant workers once the effects of the loss is felt.

[Novus America]

Australia might go through an interesting experiment in that a great deal of their farming is done by migrant workers and due to the epidemic there is simply not enough hands to pick all the fruits and vegetables growing.. meaning, one, farmers are going to have a terrible time unable to farm their crops and, two, Australia is going to be low on food this autumn.

Perhaps it will lend some support for immigration and migrant workers once the effects of the loss is felt.

Not all migrants are immigrants. Most those workers were probably temporary guest workers, not immigrants. Guest workers are a related but different matter. Because they only arrive temporarily for a certain purpose than leave, rather than to actually become full fledged permanent members of society. Someone could support more temporary workers and yet oppose more permanent immigrants, and someone who is a good guest worker is not necessarily qualified to be a full immigrant.

In some extreme cases like the UAE there are more temporary workers than there are citizens and permanent residents.

[Bombadil]

Australia might go through an interesting experiment in that a great deal of their farming is done by migrant workers and due to the epidemic there is simply not enough hands to pick all the fruits and vegetables growing.. meaning, one, farmers are going to have a terrible time unable to farm their crops and, two, Australia is going to be low on food this autumn.

Perhaps it will lend some support for immigration and migrant workers once the effects of the loss is felt.

Not all migrants are immigrants. Most those workers were probably temporary guest workers, not immigrants. Guest workers are a related but different matter. Because they only arrive temporarily for a certain purpose than leave, rather than to actually become full fledged permanent members of society. Someone could support more temporary workers and yet oppose more permanent immigrants, and someone who is a good guest worker is not necessarily qualified to be a full immigrant.

In some extreme cases like the UAE there are more temporary workers than there are citizens and permanent residents.

Sure, many were on a one-year work visa, but there was a similar sentiment of 'stealing muh jobs' around them, but a fair few were immigrants and exiles given it was a start on the ladder and fairly easy to get work. I picked apples with two brother refugees from Iraq among many others, pretty interesting to hear their tales but labour is often the stepping stone for immigrants into a new country.

[Neanderthaland]

Australia might go through an interesting experiment in that a great deal of their farming is done by migrant workers and due to the epidemic there is simply not enough hands to pick all the fruits and vegetables growing.. meaning, one, farmers are going to have a terrible time unable to farm their crops and, two, Australia is going to be low on food this autumn.

Perhaps it will lend some support for immigration and migrant workers once the effects of the loss is felt.

Australian xenophobia always seemed slightly surreal to me:

"We were forced against our will to live in this hellish land of dust and venom! It even bursts into flame randomly. Woe is me!"

"Oh, well... we'd very much like to move there, can we come?"

"No! It's OURS!"

[Region of Dwipantara]

Japan. Though, there is an argument to be made that Japan is going for an economy based on AI and robots, eventually turning it into somekind of self-sustaining islands state. At that point, large population became less important. Outside of that, Germany shows how immigration can be very beneficial, such as the Gastarbeiter.

Australia might go through an interesting experiment in that a great deal of their farming is done by migrant workers and due to the epidemic there is simply not enough hands to pick all the fruits and vegetables growing.. meaning, one, farmers are going to have a terrible time unable to farm their crops and, two, Australia is going to be low on food this autumn.

Perhaps it will lend some support for immigration and migrant workers once the effects of the loss is felt.

Not all migrants are immigrants. Most those workers were probably temporary guest workers, not immigrants. Guest workers are a related but different matter. Because they only arrive temporarily for a certain purpose than leave, rather than to actually become full fledged permanent members of society. Someone could support more temporary workers and yet oppose more permanent immigrants, and someone who is a good guest worker is not necessarily qualified to be a full immigrant.

In some extreme cases like the UAE there are more temporary workers than there are citizens and permanent residents.

Ah yeah, 89% of UAE population are temporary migrants. You probably don't wanna go that far.

[Solvokina]

No, bugger off. Get citizenship, show a passport, state business or fuck off

[Atheris]

Why not?

Was the Boston Marathon Bomber good? Obviously not.
Each immigrant is unique, so you cannot say immigration is good not bad without further clarification. Some immigrants are good, other immigrants are bad, because some people are better immigrants than others. Because people are unique individuals not a fungible commodity.

This.

[Novus America]

Japan. Though, there is an argument to be made that Japan is going for an economy based on AI and robots, eventually turning it into somekind of self-sustaining islands state. At that point, large population became less important.

Not all migrants are immigrants. Most those workers were probably temporary guest workers, not immigrants. Guest workers are a related but different matter. Because they only arrive temporarily for a certain purpose than leave, rather than to actually become full fledged permanent members of society. Someone could support more temporary workers and yet oppose more permanent immigrants, and someone who is a good guest worker is not necessarily qualified to be a full immigrant.

In some extreme cases like the UAE there are more temporary workers than there are citizens and permanent residents.

Oh yeah, 89% of UAE population are temporary migrants. You probably don't wanna go that far.

Well the Japan situation is only a good argument if we assume the target country as a below replacement fertility rate, and that that is something that cannot be reversed and it already has and immigration rate insufficient to make up for net deaths.
If these three conditions do not apply, the situation is very different.

It applies in some place but not others.

And we again get to the real meat of the problem. It is not necessarily a simply a matter of more or less, but how do we choose which immigrants we want. It is a matter of quality not just quantity. A good immigrant for the US might not be a good immigrant for Japan.

Thus immigration is not a one sized fits all matter. It is very complex and what is the best immigration policy for one place is not best for another. The best immigrant for one place might not be the best for another. Some immigrants are a better fit certain places than other places.
Each immigrant is unique and each country is unique.

I do agree that the UAE policy is not one I would pick (being very extreme) but that is just to illustrate some of the complexities involved, and that immigrants and guest workers are related but not necessarily interchangeable or equivalent.

[Solvokina]

Why not?

Was the Boston Marathon Bomber good? Obviously not.
Each immigrant is unique, so you cannot say immigration is good not bad without further clarification. Some immigrants are good, other immigrants are bad, because some people are better immigrants than others. Because people are unique individuals not a fungible commodity.

This

[Ceranapis]

Also with convincing people. Try telling them that better immigration is good, and not more. It's a better argument than telling them you want more people instead of better people.

So this point in particular is interesting because it's the point that I was arguing against this morning. I am explicitly arguing for more immigration as a policy point. I'm fine with changing processes to make it "better", but I also want more immigration period, so simply making it "better" is not a substitute. Currently the US allows about 1M people in a year- some highly skilled, some refugees, some family reunifications. The entirety of the increase can be "better" (and we could change some of the existing visa allocation if that's an acceptable bone), but the argument is for more.

You're explicit in stating that you don't actually want any more immigration, so we'd be unlikely to come to a compromise if we had an argument about this, I imagine. But for others (or you, if I've misjudged!) that hit the "better" point- are arguments about allowing more immigrants, provided they meet certain criteria at all convincing?

For those of us who reside in European ethno-states (Greece in my case, or Hungary, or Poland) and who do not place materialism/economic growth/viability of social security as primary factor in our politics, you would have to persuade us that a) immigration would not alter the demographics of the country and that X ethnic group (Greeks, Poles, etch) will remain overwhelming majority, b) immigration would not affect the culture of the country and that people coming here will become Greeks/Hungarians/Poles/etch in everything (from language, to traditions, to converting to local denomination of Christianity).

It's funny that you mention Greece, since the "personal stories, with a dash of appeal to emotion" I told this morning was the story of my papou immigrating from Greece to the US. Obviously, the ethnic group thing isn't/shouldn't really be a factor in the states but Greece has a different identity and does things differently. I'm fine with, say, Greece or Israel doing things differently with regard to immigration than the US, since they're different countries with different histories. But for the US, I see immigration as foundational to our national character and identity as a people, so I get pretty fired up about the issue.

I guess, at the end of the day, it really all comes down to identity. Most of the tactics that The Economist mentions in the OP could be summed up as tactics to increase to help a person identify with immigrants.

Perhaps this applies more to the United States than elsewhere, but in my experience, one of the major factors that seems to entrench anti-immigration views is how often the rhetoric in support of immigration absolutely ignores the term 'illegal' when referring to illegal immigration, and treats immigration on either side of legality as the exact same discussion.

Yeah, this can be an issue. I think that our politicians don't help with this- they use illegal immigration as a proxy battle for legal immigration all too often. It doesn't help that a politician's stance on illegal immigration tends to reflect their stance on legal immigration, so everybody always gets cast in the worst possible light.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Wider choice of food in restaurants.

I'm serious. Immigration tends to come in waves (at least it does here), primarily from one country or region at a time. Some immigrants manage to set up eateries, giving many of the local residents their first taste of that country's cuisine.

It doesn't always catch on. For instance I tried Mongolian cuisine once and I'm not a fan.

[The Romanian Confederacy]

You can't. It's not good, nor bad. It's a very complex issue that you can't label as black and white.

Agreed.just agreed

[The Alma Mater]

Wider choice of food in restaurants.

I'm serious. Immigration tends to come in waves (at least it does here), primarily from one country or region at a time. Some immigrants manage to set up eateries, giving many of the local residents their first taste of that country's cuisine.

It doesn't always catch on. For instance I tried Mongolian cuisine once and I'm not a fan.

While true, it is not enough if it is offset by negative things.

E.g. while people may very much enjoy couscous and kebab, they may still think negatively of muslim immigrants if the news keeps reporting them robbing purses and assaulting ladies.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Wider choice of food in restaurants.

I'm serious. Immigration tends to come in waves (at least it does here), primarily from one country or region at a time. Some immigrants manage to set up eateries, giving many of the local residents their first taste of that country's cuisine.

It doesn't always catch on. For instance I tried Mongolian cuisine once and I'm not a fan.

While true, it is not enough if it is offset by negative things.

E.g. while people may very much enjoy couscous and kebab, they may still think negatively of muslim immigrants if the news keeps reporting them robbing purses and assaulting ladies.

Sure, it's not a silver bullet. But it can be the turning point if someone prejudiced against that ethnicity can be talked into eating their food (or just invited without telling them), and they like the food, find the proprietor or (their daughter) the waitress speaks good English, supports the same football team etc.

Even refugees sometimes speak good English. Maybe they learnt in refugee camp aiming to come to an English-speaking country. Or maybe they learned in school. We are lucky enough to speak a language widely taught in other countries, it gets us above average grade immigrants (ie they were good in school or they work hard).

[The Blaatschapen]

Wider choice of food in restaurants.

I'm serious. Immigration tends to come in waves (at least it does here), primarily from one country or region at a time. Some immigrants manage to set up eateries, giving many of the local residents their first taste of that country's cuisine.

It doesn't always catch on. For instance I tried Mongolian cuisine once and I'm not a fan.

While true, it is not enough if it is offset by negative things.

E.g. while people may very much enjoy couscous and kebab, they may still think negatively of muslim immigrants if the news keeps reporting them robbing purses and assaulting ladies.

Ugh, carbs and meat

[Punished UMN]

I'm not even anti-immigration, but the assumption that immigration is a good thing isn't going to do you any favors in trying to convince others that it's a good thing.

[The Blaatschapen]

The causal arrow is in the wrong direction. It's not necessarily that immigration is good. But that immigration happens when your country is doing well.

[Punished UMN]

Also, while immigration is generally beneficial in many ways, emigration is usually harmful to the country of origin. This can produce sometimes a visceral reaction of hatred towards those who emigrate as they do not feel loyalty to their home country.

[Purpelia]

To answer the OP you can't because it isn't. More people is NOT always better. It can be better. Or it can be worse. It depends on the people in question as well as the state of your economy. So for a start stop treating a nuanced difficult issue with complex variables as if it was some sort of moral choice with a right and wrong answer.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

The causal arrow is in the wrong direction. It's not necessarily that immigration is good. But that immigration happens when your country is doing well.

While interesting, you're not actually addressing the issue of the thread.

I'm also not sure it's true. While most emigrants may prefer the "doing the best" countries of the West, a significant number stay in a country neighbouring their origin. Even if that's not so great either, it's not as terrible as where they left. And there's something to be said for establishing themselves nearby: they can be host to friends or family who may follow them, also they can more easily visit and re-establish themselves if their origin country improves.

"The destination country is doing better than the origin country", I could agree with that. But the destination country is not always the best an immigrant could hope for; sometimes it's just the best that is accessible to them.

I may have generalized the situation of refugees, to all immigrants (of which refugees are just a part). Sorry about that.

[-Astoria-]

It should be noted that some people want to use immigration as a form of demographic warfare and a cheap way to get votes.

Everybody, drink.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Immigration does many good things for our society. Both the Godfather and Scarface wouldn't have happened at all without two waves of immigration.

[The Reformed American Republic]

It should be noted that some people want to use immigration as a form of demographic warfare and a cheap way to get votes.

Everybody, drink.

Well, I guess the truth hurts.

[-Astoria-]

Everybody, drink.

Well, I guess the truth hurts.

If we're in a different reality; in the real world, that is just laughable.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Well, I guess the truth hurts.

If we're in a different reality; in the real world, that is just laughable.

In the real world, I have seen partisan articles praising how immigrants were going to turn red areas blue. I am living in the real world here. Denial is the alternate reality.