this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
68 points (78.3% liked)

Ask Lemmy

34855 readers
8 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] stephan262@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day 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.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day 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.

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Not really, but the racist part is opposing measures making it achievable and even simple to do so legally. Then all the terrible treatment along the way.

[–] Ibaudia@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day 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.

[–] pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 2 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.

[–] Pika@rekabu.ru 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day 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.

[–] rising_man@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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 3 points 2 days ago

OP did not mention the US.

[–] LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (6 children)

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.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 28 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Why do you oppose them?

  • The crime they don't bring?
  • Economic losses they don't cause to citizen workers?
  • Economic gains to domestic businesses?
  • The contributions to social security & medicare they don't get back?
  • Because they're not white?
  • Because outsiders are convenient scapegoats for politicians to blame & flex power?

It's important to pin down clear, substantiated reasons.

From The Business of Migrant Detention covering the history of anti-immigration policies & its disparate treatment of white & brown immigrants

ARABLOUEI: OK. If federal government's spending all this money to detain and then deport people and a lot of times they're coming back in the country, and it's not actually achieving anything economically in terms of supporting American workers and it's actually hurting American companies, why? Like, why are they doing this if there's no material benefit to the economy or to protecting workers?

NOFIL: To me, it is a core question of sort of who is an American. Immigration detention's roots are in this moment that is so blatantly racist, that sort of - you know, the Chinese Exclusion Act pulls no punches about what it is doing. It is targeted to a specific group of people. But that is where we get the legal precedents that undergird this entire system today. It is a system that has only really ever, to my opinion, receded. Immigration detention is only really ever rolled back when it is seen as threatening whiteness. And it is a system that has, you know, continually expanded and gained public support by, you know, targeting racialized people, by targeting people who Americans are encouraged to imagine as maybe kind of criminal anyway, right? It is doing political work, and it is doing work that I think is, like, really revealing about how the nation sees itself.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rowinxavier@lemmy.world 7 points 2 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.

[–] Fedditor385@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

No,

because it doesn't even fit the definition of racism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

Illegal immigrants are of absolutely all sorts, so there is no single human trait that is uniquely only found in illegal migrants. Also, people don't oppose illegal migrants, they oppose illegal migration as a general thing. Illegal migrants are not the problem, they are simply the cause, and people hate the problems that arise in a society after to much illegal migration.

People need to stop calling everyone they disagree with racists, its so watered down that it completely lost any meaning and weight behind it. Didn't get up to a granny on the bus? Racist. Driving a white car? Racist. Using an iPhone? Racist.

There is a version of illegal migration that I would support and truly leave an open door for everyone: You must adopt the culture, you must learn the language, you must find a job, you won't get any welfare or housing and you can't ask for anything in our society to be "like it was at your home". And voila! Everyone welcome.

[–] socsa@piefed.social 24 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

being a nazi should be illegal

deport musk

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago

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

[–] itztalal@lemmings.world 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] steeznson@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Their mode of entry into the UK was illegal but any asylum claims they make will be assessed as being potentially valid. I think you were saying the same thing but not sure.

The reason people are particularly pissed off is that Farage and co. have framed the debate as an issue of fairness. Essentially the charge levelled at the irregular migrants is queue jumping, which we don't look upon fondly in our culture.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

On our side of the pond, it’s becoming more apparent how many ways immigrants can end up undocumented. Of course it’s always framed as drug cartel member sneaking over the border at night to rape the women, or whatever bs stereotypes they can use to frighten people, but

  • sometimes it’s a college student who dropped out of school and didn’t leave
  • sometimes it’s a tech worker who got laid off and hasn’t yet found another sponsor
  • sometimes it’s someone struggling to do the right thing and missed something. Maybe a paperwork thing a decade ago
  • sometimes it’s an ambush when they are doing the right thing
  • sometimes they’re refugees from horrible circumstances.
  • sometimes it’s someone just trying to work
  • sometimes they’re just trying to live as a family when a cruel system would separate them

If your system, like ours, uses the worst stereotypes to scapegoat all undocumented aliens, deprives them of their rights, uses racial profiling to decide who to attack, “officers” hide their faces and identities and don’t even seem to know the laws they’re supposedly enforcing, use escalating violence for infractions that have always been civil issues, claim they’re deporting “the worst of the worst criminals” while setting ambushes at work sites and immigrant processing centers, then you too may be racist

We’re over here trying to set an example of what NOT to do, apparently.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 118 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (11 children)

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 63 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

no.

however, it is racist to oppose them because they're not your race.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 73 points 3 days ago (8 children)

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.

[–] lucg@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Does unrestricted immigration work?

I'm not aware that any country (that anyone would want to go to, not like a war zone) has completely free immigration. I'd be opposed to having no more borders from one day to the next for the simple reason that it's a big change. One that's worth trialing and working towards, of course, but not something we can yet know will work afaik. Especially if we're the first country doing this and 2 billion people decide the Netherlands would be a fine place to live in (it is!). I'd not be surprised if it turns out we need a lottery kind of system, or maybe an announcement system, at least for those not in mortal danger, so that we can build living spaces ahead of time. Supply and demand is currently such that the only way to afford a house (even for top, idk, ~2% of world incomes) is to have a house so you can sell it at the inflated price, and while immigration is afaik a net positive to a country's wealth and welfare, this effect is offset in time. The housing crisis will pass again, as it always has, but in general the solution should be sustainable and I'm not aware that it's as simple as "be in favor of unrestricted immigration or else you're a racist"

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

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.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago

Maybe. Depends. It's complicated.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] HereIAm@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Where are you coming from with "the reason they have to be illegal is racist"? If you wouldn't mind clarifying.

Kind of like how a lot of anti-poor laws in the USA were targeting former slaves without actually saying it, and poor-white people were collateral damage.

Why would they be migrating illegally when migrating legally would clearly be better for them?

load more comments
view more: next ›