The questions asked in your WHAT IS IT tag beg a host of others, many with ethical implications. The world is very different to that which existed when my ancestors came to America. My own ethnic, racial and cultural background is diverse, ranging from Wales and the British Isles, to the Netherlands and Germany, as well as native American people right here in the USA. My family considered itself American first and the rest second, third, fourth and so on. There was no quibbling or squabbling over such questions as are now international news. Religious differences were secondary in nearly every instance because family matters were bigger than those. Yes, I come from simpler times and am most grateful for that reality. I am most certainly grateful for the life I have been given; trying to make the most of it without imposing my values on everyone who will listen.

I do not suggest that current circumstances might adapt themselves to antiquated views, custom or tradition. However, those who come to America, somehow expecting her to bend to their every whim and need, may be in for a rude awakening. Maybe even more than one. There is much being made of the "strength" of a new crop of legislators. Some of them are from other lands and one or two have been outspoken, getting on some folks'nerves. I hope they will not be too badly bruised by their own outspokenness. Much has also been made of the divisiveness we see today; with plenty of blame to go 'round. The thing about America is this: at bottom, one size fits all, multiculturalism notwithstanding. Also worth considering: there are many millions more of us now than there were in the 17th and 18th centuries. It is not the wild west, in the sense that people once thought it was. We have no need for dissension and malcontent. Inclusion is the new paradigm. But those who would BE included,need to want to be included. The street goes both ways.

首先，我想知道宋博士所说的移民有义务融入社会是什么意思。整合是什么意思，它与同化有什么不同?

Second, I heard her say that immigrants' opinions have nothing to do with culture. What?? Did I hear wrong? If not, I don't get it because such opinions have everything to do with culture.

Now, she said that something to the effect that immigrants deserve full participation in America, and that this entails the right to change the culture. This is precisely where things become fraught. Again, what is "integration"? How much integration do we have a right to expect? What kinds of changes become intolerable?

我纠结于这个问题，我想知道其他人是怎么看的?

A discussion about immigration can't be complete without referring to the research by Tajfel and many others around in/out groups. The innate sense of superiority for those in the in-group was perhaps an evolutionary strength - it may have helped to bond tribes more closely together to win/retain resources. Today, though, our base instinct of loyalty to an in-group, I argue, is the root cause of many of the problems we see in public discourse around immigration. Morally or ethically or rationally speaking, why should one believe to be superior to others, based on pure chance of where we were born and to whom?

If I were Tzar of immigration, my first order of business would be to institute a new practice of "Get Over Yourself-ism". The central tenet - "Don't judge others except for their actions directly impact others." One of the hosts mentioned the challenge when deciding how to set the line for exclusion. He mentioned categories such as homophobia or racism. In "Get Over Yourself-ism" - you would be free to enter and assimilate so long as your beliefs do not negatively impact those around you.

听!听!(或者是:这里!这里! ?)我们这些阅读和热爱哲学的人知道，存在并且一直存在着“哲学问题”，即使那些问题的解决方案是永远无法解决的。可以说，无论如何，在这个时候，移民是21世纪的问题。我希望我的评估不要太过浮夸。Beactive提出的关于整合与同化的问题非常适合本次讨论。冒着过分简化的风险，我认为许多人在谈论这个话题时，可能会交替使用这两个词。这种说法并不完全正确，但区别可能不大。 Ganesh goes to one root of the problem by reference to tribalism. But these are thought starters only. I am not a social scientist---only an opinionated, social critic. Someone's got to do it. I have been wondering, just for grins, is there really a material difference between ETERNITY and INFINITY? Just asking...

阿富汗人在塔利班狂热分子的统治下节节败退。美国总统说他们必须为自己而战。如果这是现在的事实，那么多年前就已经是事实了。俄国人几年前在新月下，鼻子流血，屁股被踢了。本好书。当领导层认识到这条道路时，美国的利益就失宠了。移民和多元文化主义不应该同时出现在同一个句子中。除非他们同时出现。例如，在加拿大，移民和多元文化是相辅相成的。或使用。 I have not been there for awhile.

Anyhow, we finally recognized the folly of Viet Nam. Now, later, Afghanistan. There have been other places where we should not have stuck our nose. Consult your history books if you have doubts. Don't rely on your parents or grandparents. They bought the lie. Because they wanted to be good Americans. Many later regretted it.

Have been ruminating over the matter of multiculturalism. Less over immigration. There are language issues afoot here. I will showcase some. Black folks make up their own versions of words.
动词不是“我会问他”，而是“斧头”。我的一个老同事以前想说具体的时候就会说太平洋。此外，还有无处不在的p.o -lice而不是警察。然后，num说，在你知道我在说什么吗?后来，当对“谢谢”的回答变成了“没问题”时，语言礼仪发生了扭曲。部分原因可能是多元文化。或者,黑人英语。或者，懒惰:斧头说起来容易，问起来难。否认合法性是没有问题的:它说，感谢是虚假的，失控的。一般来说，人们在试图混淆视听时语速会很快; have nothing to say, or wish to cloud that fact. Many cons use this artifice, race, color or national origin, notwithstanding.
Many will not raise these questions, fearing repercussions---political correctness, and so on. I have no such trepidations. No worries about employment jeopardies. Tell it as I see it. Lies are as they seem.

All good and well-reasoned, Tim. You are a repository of logic and tolerance, much more than I ever could have been. i respect and admire that. (Is admiration envy's little sister?). Anyway, my bluntness is honestly earned. I have often said things which offend. Big mouth and all. So, it is more than probable I shall always be censored.
Respects,
HGN

同化，迁就，价值观和传统。这些都是流动的术语。只要所有人都理解并遵守规则和责任，移民对所有人都是有益和有益的。我们的司法制度绝不严厉。然而，作为东道国，提供居住和/或公民身份的机会，美国没有义务对其规则做出无数的例外，只是为了让更多的移民有这些机会。其他国家也有规定，有些比这里的规定更严格。他们可能会，也可能不会为了这样或那样的价格而改变规则。未来的移民可能不希望搬到这些地方。现实是残酷的。所以，不，这个国家没有义务欢迎任何人，欢迎所有人。 That aspect of exceptionalism is no longer mandatory.

我想在这里补充一个想法。注意:我不是人口统计学家。早在20世纪70年代，加拿大似乎在移民和多元文化主义方面取得了舒适的平衡。多伦多是一个繁荣的大都市，是多个民族和民族的大熔炉。就像今天的情况一样，加拿大的人口比美国少，我认为只有美国人口的十分之一。没有猖獗的失业，也没有持续的大规模公共援助网络。他们负担不起。人们相处融洽。种族分歧可能存在，但这从来都不是新闻。有些事情变得更糟了，但有一个因素基本不变:低人口压力。 Canada was not utopia then, nor is she now. But, all things considered, she is still a good place to live. For anyone.