Posted by Thomas Newfield on March 16, 2019, 3:55 pm, in reply to "Yes and no"
I don't accept your view(?) or at any rate the anarcho-trot view that movement of people, of me for example, anywhere, to settle and work, is some kind of right. I mean, I can ask to come and stay for a few months and you'll tell me to take a to do a length of the Humber. It disregards what we might (lazily) call the capital of human investment: in attachment to place, geography, neighbourhood, family, friendship groups; the care for the place, the prioritising of care for the place over narrower personal considerations. It disregards the stress that movement has on those already there and on the land. Inevitably the stress will be greater, the further away one comes from, geographically and culturally. Add to that the cheap aspect, and the stress is multiplied. Stress nudges you toward the grave.
"Foreign". I'm not against my own family, my daughter, wife, mother and grandparents who hail from Turkey, Germany and a couple of generations back jewish eastern Europe. Merely pointing out that foreign immigration demands more, exerts a greater burden, than less foreign immigration.
In passing, I tend to find that globalist fundamentalists tend to hail from more stable comfortable and culturally more homogenous backgrounds, the benefits of which are clear to the likes of me, not to them.