One of the biggest supporting ideas for accepting immigrants
into Western countries is the rise of diversity and multiculturalism. For example, the United States is known as “the melting pot” of the world and is filled with different races, nationalities, languages and cultures. This high rate of diversity creates a unique opportunity for society to appreciate others. This tolerance for different cultures and perspectives can create so many new advantages, such as new foods, entertainment, customs and perspectives.
For each positive there is always a negative. For example, this rising rate of diversity results in the traditional national identity beginning to disappear. This is not a big problem in the United States. After all, the country was founded by an assortment of different cultures. However, this could be an issue for countries that hold a strong pride in their traditional culture and identity. A country’s traditional language, customs and practices will slowly begin to evolve and change as it becomes impacted by the new population of immigrants. Some may see this as a positive, while others may see this as an issue.
Canada is a perfect example of a country which is experiencing this struggle of preserving its national identity, while accepting an influx of new immigrants. Back in December, the Canadian province of Ontario began a unique legal battle that has affected relations worldwide. As home of the largest Asian population in Canada, Ontario lawmakers have begun working on a bill that would create a holiday to honour victims of a relatively unknown event to Westerners, the Nanking Massacre.
The Nanking Massacre took place in late 1937 at the end of the Second Sino-Japanese War. The conflict between the old Japanese Army and China continues to be argued to this day. China claims that after a bloody victory in Shanghai, the Japanese decided to attack the Chinese capital of Nanking. In anticipation, the superior military leaders and fighters were evacuated. However, this left untrained fighters and defenseless citizens to resist against a Japanese attack. Of course, the city was easily overtaken. China maintains that around 300,000 Nanking citizens were killed during the six weeks attack. On the other hand, Japan points out the many inconsistencies in China’s claims.
For example, an official list of victims only lists 16,000 names. Even more suspicious, the number of victims continues to rise even this long after the massacre. These inconsistencies have led many to argue the validity of Chinese claims. Others completely deny the Nanking Massacre ever happened. Critics use the killing of Jews during the pre-war Nazi regime as comparison to China’s massacre claims. Over the span of ten years, around six million Jews were murdered by Nazis. This figure makes China’s claim of 300,000 murders in six weeks seem a little implausible. Critics question how the Japanese would havef been able to do so much damage in such a small timespan. Among scholars, there are some who claim the evidences which China shows are fabricated
Despite the validity of the claims, Bill 79 is creating even more tension between Chinese and Japanese immigrants. As their home countries continue to deal with disputes, such as the territory conflict over the Senkaku Islands, this potential legislation is an example of how immigrants can affect their receiving country.
There are also several other pros and cons. Most of them have been argued a number of times. Some of the most common involve the economic impacts of immigrants, such as the availability of jobs and use of government resources. For instance, an immigrant is more likely to take on low-paying jobs, such as cleaning or food service positions. While this could have positive benefits, others argue that this means less opportunity for employment of poorly educated native citizens who rely on these low-paying jobs. Another common argument in opposition of immigrants entering the West is the use of government resources. These newcomers are most likely poor with little to no education or career training
. This means they will need to use government assistance and other programmes to survive. Critics argue that this will put an added strain on the receiving country.
These are perfect examples of how for every pro for immigration, there is a con. The debate of immigrants entering the West will never end. No matter what side of the debate you are on, immigration is an inevitable process of our world society. There will always be a conflict that results in a population needing to relocate. It is our job as a world society to find a way to effectively deal with these issues and work together to provide a safe place to live for all citizens.