Yes, but that's the fault of the native people being hostile towards people they probably didn't like to begin with. The responsibility of fixing that doesn't fall on immigrants.
Woah there buddy, that's a bit presumptuous thing to say. Now before you say, "they show it", I'd say, "this is a response that has always happened with massive immigrations happening at a time."
See the Irish, Italians in the 1900s or for a different continent example, Greece with the Refugees currently.
That's not proof they would have done it anyways even if it wasn't due to a massive amounts going in. Is it possible, yes, but highly improbable. I doubt that the amount coming in and the hysteria going on as a result, isn't an important reason to that if not the major reason for it.
And now for my opinion to be thrown into the bonfire of the burning building.
Since apparently this hasn't been brought up, I think this a good time for me to put this out. I think giving money and whatnot for refugees is a good thing, I think that helping people getting out of these countries that are harming them is good. I'd want these to succeed. Here's the kicker, I want it to work, without it being forced upon the populace.
By that I mean, "Government shouldn't have the power to do that." They shouldn't have the power to get the money of the populace to spend on such things, since,
1) it can easily be abused
2) there are relief efforts out there that currently are helping.
Example 1
example 2
Before you say these are invalid or don't work, this is only to show some exist. Perfection isn't really existent for us right now.
3) When a right has been taken away it's very hard if ney impossible to get it back. You wonder, why so many peeps are against constitutional changes or other things, cause how freaking difficult it is to get such rights and things back for the populace at large.
Now I'm not saying that this is justification for people not to help. I'm saying that you cannot
force someone to aid without meeting heavy resistance. If you think everyone that is going against the illegal stuff is a racist or against immigration, I'm sorry, but sit down. I have a problem with people that deny what immigration does for us to. It's is a great thing for countries like America, Canada and others, but it needs to be analyzed for a proper course of action to take place.
I will say if your only argument to getting doctrines that force people is that "well they don't need it" then perhaps you should look over some things. A lot of the class stuff got to where they were cause of the industrial part and the standard of living improving with the west.
I don't hate immigration. I want it to work, which is why I think policy needs to make immigrating legally easier and some assimilation would be ideal, like what Ninetails said. How much assimilation? Well that's up for debate.
If you think people saying, "you can't force them to do this" means they support not doing this, take a chill pill too. They say not to judge books by covers and this is one of them. You can agree on an idealistic viewpoint "Government shouldn't force this on the states" and still be for something. It's called not letting it go to high, just as you wouldn't let it go too low.
If this makes you dislike me or whatnot, fine whatever. But understand when I say this I'm not saying nothing should be done or these people not taken in. I'm saying that when it comes to national policy, keeping the government in check is ideal and that when a society has to have the government come in and "force" them into something, that's the sign of an overly dependent society.
Moral of the story kids, don't be a greedy asswhipe nor a willy nilly "government for the win always" salutor. If in a perfect world these things could be done without something going wrong, I'd be for that. But we don't live in that world, and the solutions will come slowly. All I wanted to say, no real response to anyone, "save for that start thing with Trev as minimal as it was."