12 pointsby barry-cotter34 minutes ago8 comments
  • Lucasoato21 minutes ago
    I think we can be more precise here: they don’t like massive, uncontrolled immigration of low-skilled workers. The most vulnerable part of the population fears that they might lose wages, because the low-skilled immigrants would do their same job for a lower salary.

    Nobody is against to highly trained, well-educated, rich immigrants (or nobody I’ve spoken to apparently).

    • solyina few seconds ago
      There are stories of Trump voters regretting their vote because it affected immigrants in their lives that they didn't consider one of "those ones". Whether that immigrant is highly skilled or not is besides the point. If a bigot has to deal with an Indian doctor, politician, maid, or Uber driver, they're not going to like them because they're a bigot. Their skills aren't relevant. They think immigrants are bad and shouldn't be here at all.
    • regentbowerbird10 minutes ago
      I'm pretty sure I've seen negative comments about H1-Bs on HN.
      • ReptileMan5 minutes ago
        Because due to abuses in the system a lot of them are neither highly trained, nor well educated, nor rich.

        Put a proper highly selective, blind, state department administered brutal exam before issuing the visa and you will see how in decade how will the opinion of them will change.

    • dudefeliciano11 minutes ago
      Ever heard of brain waste? That's the paradoxical situation that rises up when skilled workers can not get the qualifications necessary to practice their job in their new country of residence. That's how you get doctors and nuclear engineers driving taxis.
    • atoav12 minutes ago
      Ironically, we are in dire need of wo-called low-skilled workers, since the population often will not work the fields even if the wage was higher.
  • Joel_Mckay2 minutes ago
    Forced charity is simply theft with better public opinion.

    The fact is importing desperate workers burdens community support services, drives up costs for the vulnerable, and undermines living standards by bidding down income levels. =3

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Preacher_and_the_Slave

  • fooker24 minutes ago
    Immigration implies change.

    Of course people don't like change.

    Consider though that we are all descendants of immigrants.

    How would you want your descendant immigrants to be treated?

    • jabron23 minutes ago
      > Of course people don't like change.

      I'd say that depends on whether people are happy with their circumstances.

  • regentbowerbird20 minutes ago
    The elephant in the room that this doesn't address is racism. In the West expressions of racism are illegal or at least strongly condemned, so we are left guessing as to how it factors in far-right vote.

    We can't rely on "what voters say" like the OP suggests, because for some of them what they want to say is forbidden so they say other things instead.

  • eddythompson8016 minutes ago
    Not really sure what the point of the article is as it seems pretty dumb. The answer is simple; it’s the economy, stupid.

    People who are prospering don’t have much negative feelings about immigration or the homeless or drug addicts or any “them” in the “us vs them” dichotomy. People who are not are more anxious and stressed and feel uncertain about their own place. People in such condition have no capacity to welcome others they feel are competing with them on whatever little resources there is to share. It wasn’t long ago that people in cities villainized and hated rural migration into the cities within the same country. As wealth and prosperity increased in the cities those feelings dissipated.

    • joegibbs9 minutes ago
      The whole point of the article is that it’s not the economy, stupid.
  • dudefeliciano18 minutes ago
    > Some people took that as proof that the voters’ real grievances lay elsewhere. The economist Tony Annett even put the AfD’s gains down to rising inequality, austerity and the loss of cheap Russian energy.

    I guess Texans are suddenly in favor of immigration, when 2 years ago they hated immigration.

  • atoav14 minutes ago
    I grew up in a rural Austrian village, where people overwhelmingly voted for 5he anti-immigration party. The only person with a darker skin many of these people ever got to know was the local pizza baker, a black man, who was loved by everybody for both his character and what he did for the community. There were other migrants but they weren't valued less.

    So when I asked people who voted for right wing candidates how they square the love for their migrant neighbors with their vote, the explaination typically was to point to foreigners somewhere in the bigger cities, but the ones living here are okay. When asked to specify which foreigners and what specific experiences they had made it always turned out that it was just a very vague thing and they haven't made any experience, but read/seen a thing or two in the media. They often couldn't even point to one specific article.

    I live in a city now and to this day I will sometimes see (clearly fascist) rural tourists in the subway, that are shocked and scared because they see slightly more people with darker skin tones than they are used to, despite no tangible bad behavior happening.

    A lot what motivates anti-immigrant people happens in their heads. And if you're rich that is good. Keep the people divided by skin color, otherwise they may start to think about the other divide.

  • 27 minutes ago
    undefined