[ksajadi]

This is off topic, slightly but I think a good place to say this:

I wish the media outlets would mention the fact that at least one of the scientists in this post is an immigrant in the UK. (in this case I’m not sure 1st or 2nd gen)

In the current climate of anti-immigrantion rhetoric around the world, simple things like that might help a little with the perception of immigrants as freeloaders.

Just a thought.

[mjburgess]

This seems helpful, but I think the misattribution of a general "anti-immigrant" sentiment to immigration detractors is part of the problem.

Very few detractors in the west have any issues with highly qualified immigrants occupying scientific or research roles. Being opportunistic with which kind of immigrants one offers as Good is partly what's aggravating the issue. It's a radical kind of dismissiveness and denialism which is provoking people and ignoring their issues.

The broad western detraction against immigration at the moment is targeted at specific waves of mass immigration with specific compositions that have specific effects on the places those immigrants have landed.

People are primarily concerned about the ability of state, social and corporate institutions to absorb immigrants at this pace and scale without significant zero-sum effects. And, in addition, the significant amount of state support segments of those populations (eg., esp. asylum seekers) have to receive at a time when gov. are under inflationary pressures, debt pressures, etc. and cannot service their own welfare obligations.

Going, "oh but we get good cancer research from immigration!" is so dismissive to these concerns, that the backfire against this messaging is one of the major contributors to people's disaffection.

The idea that people need to be told that there are people who want to immigrate that are in our national interest to absorb, is just plainly absurd. This is uncontroversial and obvious.

[stinkbeetle]

This isn't addressing the main point of your comment, but a side issue:

> Very few detractors in the west have any issues with highly qualified immigrants occupying scientific or research roles. Being opportunistic with which kind of immigrants [...].

I'm not a detractor of any individual immigrant, certainly not a very skilled one. But I am dumbfounded when I hear people say how wonderful immigration is "for the economy", "for the health system", etc., because we can lure all these bright people over from poor countries with offers they can't get at home.

Like... Mozambique needs good doctors and nurses too. Sudan needs good engineers. Syria needs entrepreneurs.

I don't begrudge the immigrant one bit for moving to get more money or a better life or whatever it is that motivates them, and they sure do contribute to the place they move to. But harvesting the best and brightest minds from poor countries on an industrial scale isn't something that sits too well for me at all. The merits and effects could be debated and disagreed, but it certainly requires much deeper thought than just the greed driven "good for my economy, good for my healthcare, good for me" type quips.

I actually think of it as neocolonialism. The most valuable resource in this day and age is people, and wealthy countries are plundering the human capital from the poor ones like they did with resources in previous centuries. Throwing a bit of charity at them whenever the next outbreak or famine or civil war rolls around doesn't make up for it.

[eszed]

I'll point out that educational achievement and upward economic mobility in second-generation immigrants is generally excellent. That holds true regardless of their parents' education or income level.

Over a longer view, accepting a construction worker now, because his daughter might cure cancer later, might be an advantageous bargain.

[lkey]

"Very few detractors in the west have any issues with highly qualified immigrants occupying scientific or research roles." Laughable, these 'few' reside in the highest seats of power and exist among the 'advisors' to the cabinet.

"It's a radical kind of dismissiveness" People keep telling me I'm wrong in the wrong way, if they were nicer I'd consider their opinions. This is an irrational position to stake out, it should go without saying.

"The broad western detraction against immigration at the moment is targeted at specific waves of mass immigration with specific compositions that have specific effects on the places those immigrants have landed."

This is such a laborious way to say "poor, brown or both". Do you get tired of dancing around like this?

"People are primarily concerned about the ability of state, social and corporate institutions"

If you were actually "concerned", you'd advocate for punishing institutions that use cheap (or 'free' if you steal their passport) immigrant labor, rather than targeting those that arrived to fill those positions. Do you have an understanding of why this never happens?

It goes without saying that much of the 'specific immigrant labor' you despise is used to fill the welfare obligations related to care-taking that you are also deeply concerned about.

"dismissive to these concerns" I was assured that 'tone policing' was the domain of the 'woke', yet here it is a second time in the same comment.

"uncontroversial and obvious." You might want to speak to your fellow travelers about which are 'good' immigrants and which are 'bad'. It suffices to say that if they agree in general, but disagree about which group is good, then it is not actually 'uncontroversial'.

[Hasz]

I strongly disagree with this. While I am generally pro-immigration, injecting a political view into an article ostensibly about a new scientific discovery is how science loses credibility and objectivity. See the "trust the science" phrase weaponized during COVID in the US.

Let people draw all the inferences they want about the origins of the scientists involved, but a hamfisted paragraph about a.b scientist being an immigrant from y country does not have a place here.

[whatsupdog]

Also it sends a message that only scientists are welcome as immigrants. There's millions of immigrants who contribute positively to the society, who aren't scientists.

[JetSetWilly]

I have a feeling this migrant didn’t get off a dinghy with all the other engineers and scientists so probably isn’t raising a lot of concern for most. Conflating “immigration is too high” with “anyone who thinks immigration is too high is a racist who thinks they are all freeloaders” doesn’t work anymore, no amount of media propaganda will change that.

[ericmcer]

This is disingenuous.

There has been a strong push back against illegal-immigration in the west. The media has completely reframed the discussion to "How can they be opposed to immigration" because if they said "how can they be opposed to illegal-immigration" their argument would fall apart pretty quickly.

No one with a brain is arguing that immigration doesn't provide tremendous value.

[lawlessone]

>How can they be opposed to immigration" because if they said "how can they be opposed to illegal-immigration" their argument would fall apart pretty quickly.

Isn't this also disingenuous? A significant proportion of the groups against immigration are against any immigration and have been floating trial balloons for "remigration" for non-white citizens.