Should we accept immigration? [ rename ][ ]

This article aims to expose all the pros and cons of the debate “Should we accept immigration?”, to allow everyone to form a critical and informed opinion. Further reading: Founding Principles

This debate is under construction The debates under construction are the debates that contain at least: a coherent plan; the most well-known “for” and “against” arguments; a beginning of writing. Unlike constructed debates, it may lack: arguments, justifications, objections; an accomplished introduction, an adequate bibliography, webliography or videography. . Arguments are missing or not written. The introduction and bibliography need improvement. Feel free to complete them.

This debate is sensitive. Arguments relayed on this page may shock. Reminder: these arguments are only relayed insofar as their presence can be attested in the public space. They are endorsed neither by the editors of the site, nor by the association which administers Wikidebates.

This debate is redundant. It duplicates another debate on the site. Choose the more comprehensive of the two and add interesting content from the other.

PROS Welcoming migrants is a humanist duty Populist solutions to limit immigration are inhumane, barbaric and ineffective We owe it to the people of the South Welcoming migrants is good for European economies Welcoming migrants is a cultural and social asset We can't stop immigration European and American imperialism have created the conditions for mass immigration as a result of the various bombings that have taken place. France and Europe welcome few migrants in proportion to their population Rejection of immigration is the hallmark of the racist far right The West practices a double standard depending on the origin of migrants Some countries have been rendered uninhabitable by the climate crisis Rejection of immigration is a form of resignation that absolves those truly responsible for France's economic and social crisis.

CONS We can't take in all the world's misery Influx of migrants lowers quality of life and increases violence Migrants risk destabilizing social cohesion Migration is a problem for migrants themselves We can't control immigration Welcoming migrants goes against the will of the people Migrants are not the ones in need, because you need enough money to leave your country. Given the number of immigrants already present, migrants won't be able to integrate well. Immigration fuels terrorism to a certain extent Immigration often conveys retrograde or even obscurantist values and lifestyles (homophobia, sexism, etc.). Migrants significantly change the culture of the host country

Keywords: Migrants, Borders, Welcoming, Immigration, gender equality.

To understand the debate

[ edit ]

No introduction has been entered yet.

[ + Add a link ] to a useful Wikipedia page to complement this introduction.

Pros

[ edit ]

What are the pros of immigration in France?

• Welcoming migrants is a humanist duty
• Populist solutions to limit immigration are inhumane, barbaric and ineffective
• We owe it to the people of the South
• Welcoming migrants is good for European economies
• Welcoming migrants is a cultural and social asset
• We can't stop immigration
• European and American imperialism have created the conditions for mass immigration as a result of the various bombings that have taken place.
• France and Europe welcome few migrants in proportion to their population
• Rejection of immigration is the hallmark of the racist far right
• The West practices a double standard depending on the origin of migrants
• Some countries have been rendered uninhabitable by the climate crisis
• Rejection of immigration is a form of resignation that absolves those truly responsible for France's economic and social crisis.

Cons

[ edit ]

What are the cons of immigration in France?

• We can't take in all the world's misery
• Influx of migrants lowers quality of life and increases violence
• Migrants risk destabilizing social cohesion
• Migration is a problem for migrants themselves
• We can't control immigration
• Welcoming migrants goes against the will of the people
• Migrants are not the ones in need, because you need enough money to leave your country.
• Given the number of immigrants already present, migrants won't be able to integrate well.
• Immigration fuels terrorism to a certain extent
• Immigration often conveys retrograde or even obscurantist values and lifestyles (homophobia, sexism, etc.).
• Migrants significantly change the culture of the host country

To go further

Bibliography

“Pro” side

• Lutte ouvrière, “L’immigration dans l’Europe en crise”, Cercle Léon Trotsky, 24/01/2014.

“Con” side

• Author not entered, “Challenge et l'immigration : derrière les fantasmes, encore des fantasmes”, Observatoire de l'immigration et de la démographie, 27/12/2021.

Neither “pro” nor “con”

• Stephen SMITH, La ruée vers l'Europe (la jeune Afrique en route pour le vieux continent), Grasset, 7/02/2018.

Webliography

“Pro” side

Template:Sitographic reference forTemplate:Référence sitographique pour

“Con” side

Template:Sitographic reference against

Neither “pro” nor “con”

Template:Site referenceTemplate:Site reference

Videography

“Pro” side

Template:Video reference for
1. REDIRECT Template:Référence vidéographique

“Con” side

Template:Video reference against

Neither “pro” nor “con”

• Debate: Should we welcome migrants arriving at the Greek-Turkish border?.