Where would you rather live: Pacific Islands or Russia?

[Anglo-Celtic]

The Appalachians and foothills overall have much lower crime (due to less blacks) than the flat areas of Southern states.
Knoxville is dangerous, but I don't know what ethnic group commits the crime there.
(In Minneapolis the 8% black population is responsible for 76% of homicides).
Crime also went way up in woke Asheville.

I remember that 10 years ago, maybe this has improved since then,
there was extremely high crime in the region of eastern Kentucky and southern West Virginia,
a large rural area, many counties. This was by far the most dangerous white area of the US,
also the poorest part of Appalachia and the US, some 40% of the population below the poverty line in some counties.
I don't know what was going on there, maybe meth labs.
Otherwise rural eastern Tennessee, western Carolinas, etc are very safe.

Drug abuse is a problem among some people, but there isn't much violent crime, especially compared to inner cities. Leftists skew stats when they claim that Red states are more violent than Blue states because they're not honest enough to admit that most of the violent crime occurs in the Blue cities in the Red states, but why be honest and break their streak of lying.

[Aldaris]

I don't agree with everything that Europeans did (like slavery)/ do on those Pacific islands to the natives.

But stopping the cannibalism is absolutely indisputable, a great thing. It is even more disturbing because on some islands, like in Vanuatu, they were killing and eating even the children.
The last case in Vanuatu's island of Malakula of cannibalism happened quite recently, in 1969.
In this video a native talks about cannibalism at minute 19:19

While colonialism is often demonized for its negative impacts, it's important to acknowledge the positive changes it brought about - and there were many. The eradication of practices like cannibalism, especially among vulnerable populations, is one such example.

[Tooting Carmen]

While colonialism is often demonized for its negative impacts, it's important to acknowledge the positive changes it brought about - and there were many. The eradication of practices like cannibalism, especially among vulnerable populations, is one such example.

Granted, but the point is that, just as Europeans resent being invaded by hordes of non-Europeans with their alien languages and cultures, so the other way round works too.

[Aldaris]

Granted, but the point is that, just as Europeans resent being invaded by hordes of non-Europeans with their alien languages and cultures, so the other way round works too.

The other way round hasn't worked for a few centuries, as far as I've noticed. Comparing historical colonialism to contemporary immigration dynamics oversimplifies complex issues.

[Tooting Carmen]

The other way round hasn't worked for a few centuries, as far as I've noticed. Comparing historical colonialism to contemporary immigration dynamics oversimplifies complex issues.

I know it is not the same, but there are parallels nonetheless. And crucially, Europeans are not being forced to speak Arabic, Urdu or Turkish like non-Europeans were over time forced to speak English, French, Spanish, Dutch or Portuguese. Furthermore, as I often say, movement between the West and the Global South even today is NOT as one-way as many people seem to think: while there are certainly far more Mexicans in the US than the other way round, equally one million Americans living in Mexico is not a figure to be sniffed at, and there are loads of Westerners living in countries in Arabia and SE Asia in particular.

[Aldaris]

I know it is not the same, but there are parallels nonetheless. And crucially, Europeans are not being forced to speak Arabic, Urdu or Turkish like non-Europeans were over time forced to speak English, French, Spanish, Dutch or Portuguese. Furthermore, as I often say, movement between the West and the Global South even today is NOT as one-way as many people seem to think: while there are certainly far more Mexicans in the US than the other way round, equally one million Americans living in Mexico is not a figure to be sniffed at, and there are loads of Westerners living in countries in Arabia and SE Asia in particular.

Yes, I implied there are parallels between historical colonialism and contemporary immigration as well as the differences. In the rest of your post, you're pointing out that while there are indeed large numbers of individuals from countries in the Global South migrating to Western countries like the United States, there is also significant migration in the opposite direction. Sure, contemporary migration patterns are more diverse and multidirectional than often portrayed.

[Zanzibar]

I know it is not the same, but there are parallels nonetheless. And crucially, Europeans are not being forced to speak Arabic, Urdu or Turkish like non-Europeans were over time forced to speak English, French, Spanish, Dutch or Portuguese. Furthermore, as I often say, movement between the West and the Global South even today is NOT as one-way as many people seem to think: while there are certainly far more Mexicans in the US than the other way round, equally one million Americans living in Mexico is not a figure to be sniffed at, and there are loads of Westerners living in countries in Arabia and SE Asia in particular.

Agreed. Btw to add to your comment, it seems a lot have this misconception that Africans are trying to invade the West. But from what I have search, it seems most just migrate to other countries within the continent and never leave the region:

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2...than-to-europe
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2...-close-to-home
https://www.npr.org/2023/02/20/11365...-africa-europe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intra-African_migration

[Tooting Carmen]

Agreed. Btw to add to your comment, it seems a lot have this misconception that Africans are trying to invade the West. But from what I have search, it seems most just migrate to other countries within the continent and never leave the region:

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2...than-to-europe
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2...-close-to-home
https://www.npr.org/2023/02/20/11365...-africa-europe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intra-African_migration

Economic migrants are trying to invade the West to some extent, yes. But most refugees from war or famine go to nearby countries, that's right. (Same with Syrians and Afghans btw. It is their neighbours that bare the brunt of them, not Europe).

[Tooting Carmen]

Any more opinions about the OP? I want to try to steer away from the off-topic from now onwards please.

[Petalpusher]

Besides Tahiti and maybe Honolulu, Russia.