| > Speaking about France specifically, that's not true. People 50 years mostly knew how to recognize French from Italians. No, a second or third-generation french of italian origins is not recognisably non-french at a glance. At best they can be recognised as "not from the area" (which in some places is still a concern, but nowhere near the same). > is a bit like when people say asian people look all the same. It really is not. A second or third-generation french of african or middle-eastern or asian origin can generally be recognised at a glance. > Also, immigrants in France 50 years ago made more sacrifices to intergrate themselves (be it Italians, North Africans or Asians). […] That is not what is happening right now. I'm not sure of the causes, but things have changed. https://i.redd.it/7easdur0x7i51.jpg That's from 140 years ago. It might as well be from yesterday, with the nations of origin changed. And it's hilarious that you're now using north african immigrants as a model minority alongside asians as a cudgel to hit others. > The immigration was also more limited at the time, which allowed some people from North Africa, especially young women, to get away from their traditions and have a better place in society. Hundreds of thousands of italians moved to france during the first diaspora: the italian population in france went from 63000 in 1850 to 330000 in 1901 (this does not include seasonal worker). The country was barely 40 million people. And over a million non-pieds-noirs immigrated from northern africa between the 50s and 70s. |
I thought we were talking about first generation immigrants. I agree with you that second or third generation immigrants from Italy are hard/impossible to recognize, but that's not the case for others.
> That's from 140 years ago. It might as well be from yesterday, with the nations of origin changed.
There's rarely mentions of nations of origins in the news these days, journalists mostly talk about "young people", probably because pointing out the countries of origin would be racist, and also because sometimes the people mentionned have been in the country for a few generations.
> And it's hilarious that you're now using north african immigrants as a model minority alongside asians as a cudgel to hit others.
I wasn't hitting other minorities, I mentionned how some acted differently before. These days having to sacrifice your culture to integrate yourself in a country is seen as a bad thing. Before it was the obvious thing to do. I'm not passing judgment on any of those views, but highlighting that the mentalities have changed.
> Hundreds of thousands of italians moved to france during the first diaspora: the italian population in france went from 63000 in 1850 to 330000 in 1901 (this does not include seasonal worker). The country was barely 40 million people. And over a million non-pieds-noirs immigrated from northern africa between the 50s and 70s.
We have around ~150k people going in the country every year (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_en_France#Solde_mi...), with ~100k people becoming French each year. Considering the population didn't double since 1850, we now have more immigration in terms of percentage of the population compared to the two events you mentionned.
Again, I'm not passing judgment on anyone. I'm trying to understand why people felt that there was way more cohension in the 70s-90s (when my parents grew), and if their sentiment is true.