I, too, am an immigrant, from the U.S. to Germany. I probably will
emigrate once again in my life.

The main problem in the U.S. is the hypocrisy of having an economy
which would collapse without illegal immigrants but sees these as
undesirable. In Europe this is also a lot of debate about
immigration, but the issues are different. (Most new immigrants are
political refugees of one sort or another who in many cases are not
allowed to work, so they definitely do not contribute to the economy.
Of course, we are talking about tens of thousands, not tens of
millions. There was a time when foreign labour was important for
the economy, particularly in Germany after the war, but that is no
longer the case today. These immigrants are legal, although the
problem there is that both they and Germany thought they would go
back after a few years, but they didn't, so the lack of assimilation
is a problem.)

One aspect which might in some sense be similar is the right of
a nation to decide who will enter it. Every nation has some sort
of policy like this, unless they allow anyone in for whatever reason
they want to come. Many left-leaning folks who see this as a moral
right of some Indian tribe in the rain forest would deny this same
right to other nations, as if the culture of that nation is not as
worthy of preservation as that of the Indians.

IF one accepts this right (and, if not, one has to be honest and
say "open the borders"), then one cannot just turn a blind eye to
illegal immigrants. That's not to say that there is no problem, just
to say that it should be addressed at the right place. For example,
there are certainly people who, through no fault of their own, are
born poor, just as those who, through no fault of their own, are born
in a poor country. However, would you say that this gives them the
right to rob a bank? If not, then the situation with illegal
immigrants is similar. Just as I can say that eradicating poverty
is a desirable goal and at the same time say that it is wrong to
rob a bank because one is poor, I can say that evils in the world
which cause people to immigrate should be eradicated and at the same
time say that illegal immigration is wrong.

Of course, even in an almost perfect world, some people would still
immigrate, but they would be "good immigrants" like you and I.

Just yesterday, there was a court ruling in Germany which said that
citizenship could be revoked if an immigrant had obtained it through
fraud. (Since Germany---and some other countries---generally requires
the old citizenship to be given up before the new is obtained, this
means the people then have no citizenship.)

In Europe, the idea of assimilation is more important than in the
U.S., which hasn't existed for very long and whose current culture
is the direct result of immigration. While there has always been
immigration in Europe, for thousands of years, most of the culture
of most countries is not the direct result of immigration.

Perhaps nations in Europe should not compare themselves with the
current U.S., but rather with the Indians. In other words, is there
a danger that immigration will essentially eradicate the "indigenous"
culture.

I certainly think that every nation has the right to say that all
immigrants must obey the laws and learn the local language and, if
they don't, then they risk being kicked out. One should then
essentially say that all are welcome if they obey these rules, or
else limit immigration to cases like allowing immigration for
couples with different nationalities etc.

In practice, countries choose which immigrants they want. However,
is this a good thing? If the good immigrants are building up
their new country, it means that they are not available to do so
in their own country. While this is fine if they voluntarily leave
their old country, and indeed such brain drain might give their
home country the idea that they should try to keep these desirable
people, I think it is rather a bad thing if developed nations actively
encourage brain drain from other countries, since this deprives these
countries of a resource they need and exacerbates the problem.

Discuss. :-)