Suppose (strictly for the sake of discussion!) that we're being reasonable when worrying about immigration**. (This addresses, but does not require, the Great Replacement Theory.) What's the most effective, the most cost-effective, (not to mention the most humane, because that's apparently of no importance to those worried about immigration) approach?
Answering that requires answering the motivation question: Why do they come? The simple answer: economics and safety. Not macroeconomic generalities, but the microeconomics of individuals. Combined with, and overlapping with, the legal environment. There are other motivations, such as moving to be near family members, or even climate. But those are tiny in comparison.
So, the obvious solution to the assumed problem, is to reduce the motivation. If there are abundant economic opportunities for individuals where they are, most people will not take on the emotional and financial cost to emigrating; basically, they'll stay home. If they can live without fear, of criminal, governmental, or other attacks, people will mostly stay home. TL;DR: remove, or even seriously reduce, the motivation, and your assumed immigration problem goes away.
So, the blindingly obvious answer has two parts: 1) improve the economies of the places your immigrants are coming from. 2) improve the governance, specifically the rule of law, of the places your unwanted immigrants are coming from. Reducing to push to move.
Are we doing anything like that? Not any more.
What we do seem to be doing instead is addressing those issues by trashing our own economy, and simultaneously trashing the rule of law. Removing the attraction. It is, after all, the difference in those which provides the motivation.
If I'm understanding correctly, one big advantage is that this "spends the money here, not elsewhere." At least in the economically ignorant view to those driving it. It's bad for us, too, but either they can't see that or they just assume it won't impact them personally.
Oh, yes. The other motivation for immigration, in some cases, is that other places are just too crowded. If you improve the economy, somewhere population growth drops, or even disappears altogether. We've seen that extremely consistently. When people get richer, they tend on average to have fewer children. Another reason to improve economies elsewhere.
** Immigration has been an enormous economic boon to this country. The people already here have consistently objected to whichever group is perceived as comprising the current bulk of the immigrants. But those immigrants built the country even so. Both physically and economically. Still do.
but when I came back they were letting Ukrainians in but not Asian people, black or brown people waiting on the other side of the border who had traveled to Tijuana trying to come into San Diego and seek asylum or seek refuge.
... because Biden made it easier for Ukrainians to get in - because Russia was and is bombing them - right?
Geography nerds' quiz: Part of Alaska (the panhandle, including the state capital) is not an island, but can only be reached by car by driving thru another country. What other state includes that feature?
Hard to spot, but up in the NE corner of South America, French Guiana is no longer a colony but part of France. The 300,000 residents are French citizens and vote in French elections. Ask someone who thinks they are clever for their opinion on the EU's lengthy land border with Brazil :^) 15-20% of the economy is the Guiana Space Center, owned by the European Space Agency and operated by Arianespace.
They cover the reasoning for Ethiopia in a paragraph towards the end.
Given the source of the map, I'd venture that its inclusion is less a matter of rigorous argumentation and more a means of provoking a conversation. That's not unusual in a prologue - it's the academic equivalent of a clickbait headline.
Any guess (other than Africa being outside their area of study) why Ethiopia isn’t included in the “never colonized” group?
Over about 50 years, Italy claimed it as colonial property and significant numbers of Italians settled there. (See, Italian East Africa.) Post-WW2, it went through much the same sort of protectorate process that other European colonial holdings in Africa did, eventually gaining independence. Sorting out all the borders, many influenced by Italian colonial status, didn't get fully sorted out until the 1990s.
This is slightly related, not really enough for a post, but in regards to Tony noting the belief that Christians have a monopoly on decency, there was this Brooks and Capehart segment on the PBS newshour.
https://youtu.be/a2a7_mGi3yA?si=_we14pUU6ZV3FDgb
Brooks' had some audio difficulties, so it was mostly Capehart, but before his mike went out, he had this observation
And I have long thought, if Americans see deportations of respectable families, they will finally rebel against this regime, and not just the progressives and not just Democrats, but normal people who are like, what the heck is going on here? And so that's where we're headed.
I'm hoping that the implication that Progressives and Democrats don't count as normal people had someone in the soundbooth say 'fuck him' and shut off his mic.
Thank you nous. The NYT "transcript" is a totally unformatted wall of text. You have to figure out from context who is speaking any given sentence.
I've been aware of both Talarico and Crockett for a while now. I like them both, and one reason I'm glad I don't live in Texas is that I don't have to chose between them in the primary.
Talarico's Christian schtick (not disparaging it; just can't think of a better word) may be exactly what's needed to win a general election in Texas -- or just what's needed to raise false hopes again. I repeat what I've often said before: I'm done chasing "electability", and anyway Texas Dems ought to be better judges of it than I am in this case.
I have a couple of reservations about explicit appeals to Christianity as a political strategy. First, it reinforces the lamentably wide-spread view that Christians have some sort of monopoly on decency. Second, I worry that Christ-like impulses like "judge not", and "turn the other cheek", and forgiveness of sins, may be impediments to the deMAGAfication the US sorely needs. But I absolutely accept that a Christian like Talarico is better able to weaken the support that Old Testament Christians have garnered from voters who think of themselves as devotees of Jesus.
The Klein shows are available on NYT, if someone has a gift link, I'll add it to the post.
For youtube stuff, click on the description just below and at the bottom of that, you'll get a computer generated transcript. I've occasionally copied the whole transcript and then asked Gemini to format it so I can read it, though that is mostly with japanese stuff.
I assume that the absence of Tibet is related to transitivity, in that Tibet is currently controlled by China so on a map that indicates current borders, it would be inside of China, which was partially controlled by Europe.
That also accounts for the grouping of the Koreas with Japan. Korea was a colony of Japan, which was never colonized by Europe, so gets the same color as japan.
can someone point to a transcript? I don't subscribe to the NYT but would be interested in reading. unfortunately I don't have time to watch the podcast.
People I love, respect and value keep sending me podcasts, videos etc which often last more than an hour. I feel like I absolutely cannot commit that kind of time (or even half that time) to something I know nothing about, no matter the recommender. That's why I am incredibly grateful to anything that releases transcripts. I am a really fast reader, and take in information much more easily by means of text!
First impression: Fascinating that Japan is grouped with North Korea as well as South. But Thailand? Where did that come from?
OK, I look at the key and get a glimmer. But it still seems pretty daft. Just for openers, it utterly ignores the realities of anything but current national boundaries.
For example, Tibet was never colonized, controlled, or influenced by Europe. And not part of China until well after European influence was being eradicated in the PRC. For that matter, all of Russia** east of the Urals should be "colonized by Europe", not part of Europe. Just like the Stans in central Asia.
** For that matter, a case could be made that even European Russia qualifies as "partial European influence" -- the cultural differences from the rest of Europe are pretty stark.
That really shows world domination clearly. And not coincidentally, many people are leaving those colonized parts of the world for because of the difficult living conditions.
I have been noticing incidents of cultural transfer possible because of the Internet. Have you seen/heard "Jerusalema?" It started with a South African musician using European musical instruments but his own language and music traditions who wrote a song about a Middle Eastern religion. He produced a video of people dancing in the style of his cultural background which because a global phenomenon of people doing watered down versions of the dance. The song is simple, addictive, and emotionally resonate, full of yearning. It is notable how much better the dancers are in the African videos!
Another example is Music for Change, tho they focus on songs that originate in the US, mostly.
If we are converging globally, I hope some of the better aspects of other cultures influence us rather than just us influencing them. I mean values, not just food and music.
indeed. i have the same problem with podcasts. i really want to have more of them to listen to, but i'm stuck with only three* because every other one i've tried has a speaker who can't get to the point.
and podcasts / YT channels with more than one person are just torture - it seems like most of them are only there to make stupid jokes with each other.
i need a certain level of information density: not too low (most podcasts / channels) and not too high (i need to be able to follow it while devoting some attention to driving).
*
The History Of The English Language
Strong Songs
Sound Opinions - even though it's two people, they have the ability to stick to the topic and not make it all about their cute nervous joking
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Rememory”
Suppose (strictly for the sake of discussion!) that we're being reasonable when worrying about immigration**. (This addresses, but does not require, the Great Replacement Theory.) What's the most effective, the most cost-effective, (not to mention the most humane, because that's apparently of no importance to those worried about immigration) approach?
Answering that requires answering the motivation question: Why do they come? The simple answer: economics and safety. Not macroeconomic generalities, but the microeconomics of individuals. Combined with, and overlapping with, the legal environment. There are other motivations, such as moving to be near family members, or even climate. But those are tiny in comparison.
So, the obvious solution to the assumed problem, is to reduce the motivation. If there are abundant economic opportunities for individuals where they are, most people will not take on the emotional and financial cost to emigrating; basically, they'll stay home. If they can live without fear, of criminal, governmental, or other attacks, people will mostly stay home. TL;DR: remove, or even seriously reduce, the motivation, and your assumed immigration problem goes away.
So, the blindingly obvious answer has two parts: 1) improve the economies of the places your immigrants are coming from. 2) improve the governance, specifically the rule of law, of the places your unwanted immigrants are coming from. Reducing to push to move.
Are we doing anything like that? Not any more.
What we do seem to be doing instead is addressing those issues by trashing our own economy, and simultaneously trashing the rule of law. Removing the attraction. It is, after all, the difference in those which provides the motivation.
If I'm understanding correctly, one big advantage is that this "spends the money here, not elsewhere." At least in the economically ignorant view to those driving it. It's bad for us, too, but either they can't see that or they just assume it won't impact them personally.
Oh, yes. The other motivation for immigration, in some cases, is that other places are just too crowded. If you improve the economy, somewhere population growth drops, or even disappears altogether. We've seen that extremely consistently. When people get richer, they tend on average to have fewer children. Another reason to improve economies elsewhere.
** Immigration has been an enormous economic boon to this country. The people already here have consistently objected to whichever group is perceived as comprising the current bulk of the immigrants. But those immigrants built the country even so. Both physically and economically. Still do.
"
I took it as allowing the Ukrainians on the background of keeping out all the rest.
"
... because Biden made it easier for Ukrainians to get in - because Russia was and is bombing them - right?
that's not racism. that's humanitarianism.
On “An interesting map”
"Alaska, Minnesota, North Dakota, Vermont, and Washington are the US states with parts that can only be accessed by road through Canada."
US States Accessible Only Through Canada
"
"What other state includes that feature?"
Isn't there a piece of Washington State that also has that?
"
Minnesota
"
Geography nerds' quiz: Part of Alaska (the panhandle, including the state capital) is not an island, but can only be reached by car by driving thru another country. What other state includes that feature?
"
Hard to spot, but up in the NE corner of South America, French Guiana is no longer a colony but part of France. The 300,000 residents are French citizens and vote in French elections. Ask someone who thinks they are clever for their opinion on the EU's lengthy land border with Brazil :^) 15-20% of the economy is the Guiana Space Center, owned by the European Space Agency and operated by Arianespace.
"
I went looking for the references. The actual source for the map is here:
https://www.vox.com/2014/6/24/5835320/map-in-the-whole-world-only-these-five-countries-escaped-european
They cover the reasoning for Ethiopia in a paragraph towards the end.
Given the source of the map, I'd venture that its inclusion is less a matter of rigorous argumentation and more a means of provoking a conversation. That's not unusual in a prologue - it's the academic equivalent of a clickbait headline.
"
Any guess (other than Africa being outside their area of study) why Ethiopia isn’t included in the “never colonized” group?
Over about 50 years, Italy claimed it as colonial property and significant numbers of Italians settled there. (See, Italian East Africa.) Post-WW2, it went through much the same sort of protectorate process that other European colonial holdings in Africa did, eventually gaining independence. Sorting out all the borders, many influenced by Italian colonial status, didn't get fully sorted out until the 1990s.
"
Any guess (other than Africa being outside their area of study) why Ethiopia isn't included in the "never colonized" group?
On “Talarico”
This is slightly related, not really enough for a post, but in regards to Tony noting the belief that Christians have a monopoly on decency, there was this Brooks and Capehart segment on the PBS newshour.
https://youtu.be/a2a7_mGi3yA?si=_we14pUU6ZV3FDgb
Brooks' had some audio difficulties, so it was mostly Capehart, but before his mike went out, he had this observation
And I have long thought, if Americans see deportations of respectable families, they will finally rebel against this regime, and not just the progressives and not just Democrats, but normal people who are like, what the heck is going on here? And so that's where we're headed.
I'm hoping that the implication that Progressives and Democrats don't count as normal people had someone in the soundbooth say 'fuck him' and shut off his mic.
"
This seems to be a pretty reasonable (if edited) and readable transcript of the Talarico interview. Gift link:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/13/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-james-talarico.html?unlocked_article_code=1.FFA.H4qd.fA8B5EQEiib4&smid=url-share
"
Thank you nous. The NYT "transcript" is a totally unformatted wall of text. You have to figure out from context who is speaking any given sentence.
I've been aware of both Talarico and Crockett for a while now. I like them both, and one reason I'm glad I don't live in Texas is that I don't have to chose between them in the primary.
Talarico's Christian schtick (not disparaging it; just can't think of a better word) may be exactly what's needed to win a general election in Texas -- or just what's needed to raise false hopes again. I repeat what I've often said before: I'm done chasing "electability", and anyway Texas Dems ought to be better judges of it than I am in this case.
I have a couple of reservations about explicit appeals to Christianity as a political strategy. First, it reinforces the lamentably wide-spread view that Christians have some sort of monopoly on decency. Second, I worry that Christ-like impulses like "judge not", and "turn the other cheek", and forgiveness of sins, may be impediments to the deMAGAfication the US sorely needs. But I absolutely accept that a Christian like Talarico is better able to weaken the support that Old Testament Christians have garnered from voters who think of themselves as devotees of Jesus.
--TP
"
nous, ooo, nice catch! Thanks!
"
If you don't have access to the NYTimes, you can find a transcript here:
https://podscripts.co/podcasts/the-ezra-klein-show/can-james-talarico-reclaim-christianity-for-the-left
...scroll down.
"
The Klein shows are available on NYT, if someone has a gift link, I'll add it to the post.
For youtube stuff, click on the description just below and at the bottom of that, you'll get a computer generated transcript. I've occasionally copied the whole transcript and then asked Gemini to format it so I can read it, though that is mostly with japanese stuff.
On “An interesting map”
I assume that the absence of Tibet is related to transitivity, in that Tibet is currently controlled by China so on a map that indicates current borders, it would be inside of China, which was partially controlled by Europe.
That also accounts for the grouping of the Koreas with Japan. Korea was a colony of Japan, which was never colonized by Europe, so gets the same color as japan.
On “Talarico”
can someone point to a transcript? I don't subscribe to the NYT but would be interested in reading. unfortunately I don't have time to watch the podcast.
On “An interesting map”
Note to Sino-Platonic Papers: wj would like to be one of your outside readers for peer review. He has methodology questions. Hit him up.
On “Talarico”
People I love, respect and value keep sending me podcasts, videos etc which often last more than an hour. I feel like I absolutely cannot commit that kind of time (or even half that time) to something I know nothing about, no matter the recommender. That's why I am incredibly grateful to anything that releases transcripts. I am a really fast reader, and take in information much more easily by means of text!
On “An interesting map”
First impression: Fascinating that Japan is grouped with North Korea as well as South. But Thailand? Where did that come from?
OK, I look at the key and get a glimmer. But it still seems pretty daft. Just for openers, it utterly ignores the realities of anything but current national boundaries.
For example, Tibet was never colonized, controlled, or influenced by Europe. And not part of China until well after European influence was being eradicated in the PRC. For that matter, all of Russia** east of the Urals should be "colonized by Europe", not part of Europe. Just like the Stans in central Asia.
** For that matter, a case could be made that even European Russia qualifies as "partial European influence" -- the cultural differences from the rest of Europe are pretty stark.
"
That really shows world domination clearly. And not coincidentally, many people are leaving those colonized parts of the world for because of the difficult living conditions.
I have been noticing incidents of cultural transfer possible because of the Internet. Have you seen/heard "Jerusalema?" It started with a South African musician using European musical instruments but his own language and music traditions who wrote a song about a Middle Eastern religion. He produced a video of people dancing in the style of his cultural background which because a global phenomenon of people doing watered down versions of the dance. The song is simple, addictive, and emotionally resonate, full of yearning. It is notable how much better the dancers are in the African videos!
Another example is Music for Change, tho they focus on songs that originate in the US, mostly.
If we are converging globally, I hope some of the better aspects of other cultures influence us rather than just us influencing them. I mean values, not just food and music.
On “Talarico”
LJ, I was not complaining about you or your posts! I appreciate you watching stuff so I don't have to! And I appreciate you making posts.
"
indeed. i have the same problem with podcasts. i really want to have more of them to listen to, but i'm stuck with only three* because every other one i've tried has a speaker who can't get to the point.
and podcasts / YT channels with more than one person are just torture - it seems like most of them are only there to make stupid jokes with each other.
i need a certain level of information density: not too low (most podcasts / channels) and not too high (i need to be able to follow it while devoting some attention to driving).
*
The History Of The English Language
Strong Songs
Sound Opinions - even though it's two people, they have the ability to stick to the topic and not make it all about their cute nervous joking
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.