The right praising Japanese failures is a recurring theme. They often laud Japan’s restrictive immigration policy despite the fact that it is a huge contributor to Japan’s economic problems at the moment. Of course, they would respond that the protection of national culture/race comes first, but that philosophy is a pretty good way to ensure your culture will very literally die
The thing is, from what I’ve seen, the dogmatic economists and the liberals and all the lot yelling at them have overstated their case on just how big this problem is for their economy, and they’re going very hard on automation which is about to push many people out of work in the West over the next few decades, and while we in the West are told we need to “get used to” Islamic terrorist attacks, and will probably soon be told we need to ignore FGM, etc, in the name of cultural diversity… they don’t have to deal with that problem essentially at all. (And that isn’t the only factor - there are social Rules Japanese corporations follow that would not be feasible under mass migration, for instance.)
Why should we have to get used to terrorist attacks? What on Earth is so bloody valuable about Islam that we can’t get a similar advantage from taking Hindus, Buddhists, etc instead?
“while we in the West are told we need to ‘get used to’ Islamic terrorist attacks”
No, we need to “get used to” terrorist attacks generally, which will be an inevitable consequence of asymmetric military conditions and technological development and can’t be fully prevented by any reasonable means
“will probably soon be told we need to ignore FGM, etc, in the name of cultural diversity…”
No, you won’t, but you’ll find a few anecdotes of people saying that and then use them to justify the belief that it’s a popular social narrative
“What on Earth is so bloody valuable about Islam that we can’t get a similar advantage from taking Hindus, Buddhists, etc instead?”
A few things here worthy of note: terrorism is an asymmetric military tactic utilized by radical groups regardless of ideology and belief and there are groups of both Hindus and Buddhists who are currently using terrorist tactics; immigration is not a primary contributor to terrorism and those who claim otherwise have an extremely weak case that they’ve made seem legitimate by repeating it over and over; and if you genuinely think that terrorism is an intrinsically Islamic phenomenon you have a tenuous grasp of both the nature of terrorism and global demography
“…utilized by radical groups regardless of ideology…”
“…can’t be fully prevented by any reasonable means…”
How many deportations would it take to make the means unreasonable?
Yeah, see, here’s the thing, I haven’t been functioning well for a long time, so I don’t have reams of papers put out by my ideological peers about how “no really, this is how it works, nothing to see here, please move along” but I know the data like this is out there.
