Tuesday, October 02, 2012

New Atlantic column: the Alternative Asia Plan


I have a new column up at the Atlantic, about the benefits of large-scale immigration from Asia. Key excerpts:
For most of its history, America was the "Alternative Europe"..."Alternative Europe" was a winning strategy for us. But that strategy is mostly played out...The United States still needs people...But we're not going to get our new people from Europe... 
East Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia together have over half the world's population, but Asians make up only 5% of the United States. If our ethnic makeup was a portfolio of stocks, we would be severely underweight Asia. 
Asia is important not just because it is huge, but because it is growing rapidly...Geopolitics, too, will be centered on Asia... 
Adding diversity to our melting pot will speed up America's inevitable and necessary transition from a "nation of all European races" to a "nation of all races." The sooner that happens - the sooner people realize that America's multi-racialization is a done deal - the quicker our political debate can shed its current ethnic overtones and go back to being about the issues... 
But we need to act now, because the window of opportunity for large-scale Asian immigration will not stay open for much longer...We probably have only two more decades in which to transplant large numbers of Asians to our shores. (This is in contrast to Africa, whose high fertility levels will make sure it remains a plentiful source of immigrants for at least another century.)... 
This, then, is the "Alternative Asia Plan." America began as a nation of Europeans and Africans; it is now a nation of Europeans, Africans, and Latin Americans. It must become a nation of Asians as well.
Basically, the reasons for immediate large-scale targeting of Asian immigration is three-fold:

1. Immigration from Europe and Latin america has trickled off, while immigration from Africa will be available essentially indefinitely; the window for Asian immigration is short, and is now.

2. Strong ties with Asia are important for geopolitics.

3. Asian immigration will make our cultural and racial mix more representative of the globe.

20 or 30 years from now, expect to see me writing about the "Alternate Africa Plan"...

33 comments:

  1. Martin6:55 PM

    Noah, I really like your support for more immigration. Plus you give a very good argument for the sceptics: it's in their interests too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:12 PM

    Immigration from Latin America has not tickled off because of lack of interested migrants. It's been reduced by 20-year long wait times for those who follow the rules and draconian laws targeting those who don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is some of this, as my column points out, but look at Mexico's per capita GDP. It's over %15,000! That's almost twice China. And Mexico's export industries and high-tech industries are booming, especially in the south part of the country away from the border. Yes, there have been anti-immigration measures in the U.S. - and these need to end! - but most of those were there in 2005, and Mexican immigration kept going strong. Lots of stories I'm reading say that the good Mexican economy is the biggest reason immigration from there has slowed.

      Delete
  3. More immigration from Asia means more Asian doctors and lawyers in America; which means lower wages for American doctors and lawyers. Good luck trying to convince the protectionist policymakers in the US that lower wages for American doctors and lawyers is a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nate O2:57 PM

      Cheaper doctors would certainly help the long-term sustainability of Medicare and pensions.

      Delete
  4. PS I forgot to say in post, thank you for the various posts on immigration and population density. Without really thinking about it, I had unconsciously assumed that wide open spaces were an advantage - one reason for greater US prosperity even. Now I see it's not so simple.

    I live in the most crowded borough in the most crowded country in Europe apart from Andorra. (OK, I've cheated a bit by just including England, and not the rest of the UK.) 142.6 people per hectare. Something like 1 in 5 born outside the EU, and 1 in three outside England. So it's a topic of interest to me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "the quicker our political debate can shed its current ethnic overtones and go back to being about the issues..."

    I'm no historian, but I feel like even a casual reading of our history reveals its always been racialized, especially our political history.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm no historian, but I disagree with your casual reading...

      Delete
    2. Anonymous1:42 PM

      In those parts of the US where any sort of ethnic diversity did exist, US history has most certainly been racialized. Racial politics were strong in all slave-owning States, but also in those areas where white settlers and natives interacted for some time before the natives were removed or exterminated.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous2:59 PM

      Any phrase that begins with "I'm no historian, but. . ." should be added to the list of phrases uttered atop Mount Stupid.

      Delete
    4. I'm no historian, but that sounds about right.

      Delete
  6. Anonymous4:09 PM

    Noah - your paragraph in the Atlantic

    "For most of its history, America was the "Alternative Europe." Political and religious dissidents who were dissatisfied with the ruling regimes in their homelands, oppressed ethnic minorities, and poor people who couldn't get a good job -- all made their way to the United States. Here they found a place where their beliefs, their ethnicity, and their parents' socioeconomic status mattered far less than in the Old Country. America itself benefited greatly from the inflow, gaining a huge labor force, a constant supply of entrepreneurs and creative free thinkers, and a diverse ethnic makeup that helped us avoid the kind of brutal ethnic violence and fragmentation that plagued the European subcontinent"

    How can you even make that statement as some rose colored Utopia? Many of those entrepreneurs were slave traders, and that "huge labor force" was captured Native Americans and sea sick African slaves that faced even worse levels of brutality then what was experienced but the European immigrants back home in order to fuel that economic prosperity that you are so pleased about. The things put in place to support the racist policies and justification of slavery still plague this country today. There are people still alive who remember segregated drinking fountains.

    I can see your logic in making your statement of immigration and the benefits, but your opinion in the Atlantic was so irresponsible that it was not even funny. Immigration is a solution only to a narrow subset of problems, and it needs to be handled in such a way as people are treated with fairness and dignity to truly benefit the people AND the nation that hosts them. The last time Asians were brought in to work they were chased into the underground of San Francisco like rats to avoid angry mobs that viewed them as taking jobs, or were treated like cannon fodder with the Africans building the railroad, or imprisoned in internment camps during WW2.

    Currently there is a strong lack of motivation politically to be accommodating especially when Asian countries and the US view each other as sources of competition and not cooperation. If you see the treatment of Mexicans (just this year) as any indication of how this country handles issues of immigration. They you would be more responsible in your writing and propose that this country clean up its own act before inviting guests over.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MaxUtility1:45 PM

      Your comments about slavery are true, I just don't see what they have to do with immigration. Certainly part of what made the US attractive to immigrants at the time was the general success of the country that was partly built on slave labor, but I don't see how that affects what we should do now. I don't think anyone is arguing that the US' history is spotless and pure.

      If we are going to wait to have any immigration until all immigrants are accepted with open arms by every single person I don't think we're ever going to have any immigration.

      Delete
  7. The idea that allowing increased immigration from Asia would strengthen ties with Asia seems doubtful. The first generation - the one born in Asia - may feel an affinity for the land of their birth for about thirty years but the children born in the US will feel no particular affiliation or connection (at least that is my observation of the immigrant families I know, including my own).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MaxUtility1:49 PM

      Probably true on the individual or small scale level. But the more population you have from a particular region should help to foster closer economic and cultural ties and understanding, even if the people themselves don't feel a huge personal connection to their ancestors' countries. A couple hundred thousand people isn't going to make a huge difference, but it's not an accident that we have very tight cultural, political, and economic relationships with Europe and growing ones with latin america.

      Delete
    2. Orthodox11:40 AM

      German Americans (American born) went back to Germany to fight for Hitler, and that was back in the days when assimilation pressure was far greater. There's no need to assimilate anymore, America is sort of like a hotel. It's more likely foreign powers using their influence to shift American policy. So yes, ties will be stronger to foreign governments, but ties to the American government will be weak.

      Delete
  8. "Adding diversity to our melting pot will speed up America's inevitable and necessary transition from a "nation of all European races" to a "nation of all races." The sooner that happens - the sooner people realize that America's multi-racialization is a done deal - the quicker our political debate can shed its current ethnic overtones and go back to being about the issues..."

    Where do you get this high grade crack from and why don't you share it with the rest of the class?

    (1) Immigration isn't an end in itself, and (2), if you reduce the homogeneity of the population then you're obviously going to increase the potential for conflict along ethnic lines, not reduce it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous10:35 PM

    Noah Smith - just another anti-white racist asshole.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous6:44 PM

      I'm sure you would like to. This is nothing but Ashkenazi tribalism masquerading as benevolent globalism.

      Delete
    2. Haha.

      I have tribal loyalties, all right, but it ain't to the Ashkenazim. They're just a weird little relic Roman population with weird diseases.

      See if you can guess where my real tribal loyalties lie...

      Delete
    3. Noah writes: "They're just a weird little relic Roman population with weird diseases."

      I hope you're not serious.

      Delete
    4. Asher8:21 PM

      No. He's serious. Ashkenazi are mostly just European with a little bit of very ancient Jewish ancestry.

      Delete
  10. I also liked the argument that America's really "diverse" population prevented any outbreak of European-style ethnic cleansing "funny business"--because the problems there all stemmed from too much ethnic homogeneity.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous Soicankeepmyjob3:47 PM

    Aw, is that all? A good race-baiting post like this failed to generate ONE comment involving ethnic differences in IQ, Richard Herrnstein quote or reference to the odors of rice and curry? Post-academic PC has killed the fun in American conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  12. here is a a lead to the kind of literature on the subject modern population genetics I think Noah ought to familiarize himself with before he draws firm conclusions about the advisability of a multi-racial America brought about by mass immigration. I don't say it will change his mind but at least it will inform it and it might give him pause. And, of course, hbd*chick's blog. She's a fair-minded person I think, anonymous, lives somewhere in the Mid-West, full of curiosity, a child of immigrants.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous12:29 AM

    It is literally impossible to imagine anything as ignorant and moronic as this blog post. Wow.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is plenty of evidence that ethnically homogenius communities are best for human happiness. You ought to go look at it. In Scandinavia and Latin America for instance. And by all means read Putnam at Harvard. You have to read Putnam.

    Now you might argue that these are examples of ethnocentrism or racism. But if so they are kinds which are (or may be) built into human nature, and from which even you may not be immune. These kinds of empirical realities, to the extent they are supported by the evidence, cannot be safely ignored. Nor should they be if happiness and social peace and tranquility are among our policy goals. You will admit that much I presume.

    It's not fair to argue that you have seen no such evidence if you haven't tried to find it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Asher7:01 PM

      Victor David Hanson has written about his recent observations in the changes to the Central Valley in California over his life. Large areas are littered with garbage and human waste. Meanwhile, in San Francisco you can get major fines for washing a boat with the most mild, bio-friendly, nitrate-free soap. Over time, empires creates two distinct social environments: one in which human life is highly regulated, and one where it is almost completely unregulated. Samuel Francis called this state Anarcho-Tyranny. In France, large parts of metropolitan areas are no-go zones for the police and it is the first concern of most of the populace to avoid such zones. What the government does is use this concern to further regulate life outside of those zones.

      Anarcho-tyranny is an apt description.

      Delete
  15. Asher6:53 PM

    The thing that a multi-ethnic body politic needs to function effectively is the absence of all ethnic identity. You can't just sit back suppressing ethnic identity among the most dominant group but need to rigorously suppress it in all ethnic groups. I see vigorous suppression of white identities by the cultural elite but ethnic identities for minorities are actively cultivated.

    Ethnic identity in even one group creates an "other" identity in all other groups. Eventually, the suppression of ethnic identities is unsustainable unless it is actively suppressed across the entire population.

    That which cannot last, won't.

    Personally, I am not bothered by mass immigration, which will merely hasten the demise and collapse of the US empire.

    ReplyDelete
  16. For Noah, here's a good place to begin: http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/how-does-social-behavior-evolve-13260245

    ReplyDelete
  17. Also for Noah - here's a good blog on the subject of human biodiversity by a guy who is part Chinese and part African American (with a little Irish thrown in there too if memory serves. Like you he's a liberal (as am I btw) and he lives in New England. Very smart young guy like you are.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Here's a book Noah might put on his reading list. I haven't read it yet myself but the reviews are interesting.

    Not sure why I'm so interested in Noah's education. I think maybe because he reminds me of me when I was young -- a science jock who wandered into the humanities.

    ReplyDelete