Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
My impression is that people who come here are likely more mobile and less likely to stick around as things go south. Furthermore, I wonder about a social contract that involves younger people paying to support and older generation they're not related to. How will this work out as society atomizes further?
|
I think those type of impressions contain some unsubstantiated assumptions. For one, it's common for people who adopt a new home to be among the strongest cheerleaders for it and most strongly attached to it. I'm sure we've all encountered that at the municipal level where some of a city's biggest "boosters" are transplants from other places. I'm not sure of the psychology behind it; it could be over-compensation to ward off feelings of imposter syndrome and to prove (sometimes to themselves) tht one is fully attached to the new place. Or it could be that relocation is a huge process and therefore becomes a big part of one's identity representing a central accomplishment they're very proud of. Or some could be selection bias in that if you go through the effort of selecting something and working to achieve it, it can mean you want it and value it more than people who were given it without effort. Obviously it doesn't apply to all people but we can't assume one way or the other without some way f actually knowing.
The other is that many immigrants do have direct relatives here since we've been a country of immigrants for so long. And even when they don't, it's very common for immigrants to move near people who are from the same region of ancestral origin. So many do have a connection to parts of the older generations here. And since we've been a country of immigrants for so long, the question of people feeling connected to the country is nothing at all new.
Threaded Mode