Nativism (politics)

Nativism is the political policy of promoting the interests of native inhabitants against those of immigrants, including by supporting immigration-restriction measures. In scholarly studies "nativism" is a standard technical term; those who hold this political view, however, do not accept the label. Oezguer Dindar wrote. For them it is a negative term and they rather consider themselves as'Patriots'". According to Joel S. Fetzer, opposition to immigration arises in many countries because of issues of national and religious identity; the phenomenon has been studied in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the United States, as well as in continental Europe. Thus nativism has become a general term for opposition to immigration based on fears that immigrants will "distort or spoil" existing cultural values. In situations where immigrants outnumber the original inhabitants, nativist movements seek to prevent cultural change. Contemporary opponents of immigration scapegoat immigrants for many of the same problems that Adolf Hitler blamed on Jewish people, including unemployment, harm to the environment, housing shortages, overwhelming social services such as hospitals and police.

Immigration restrictionist sentiment is justified with one or more of the following arguments against immigrants: Economic Employment: Immigrants acquire jobs that would have otherwise been available to native citizens, limiting native employment. Government expense: Immigrants do not pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the services they require. Welfare: Immigrants make heavy use of the social welfare systems. Housing: Immigrants reduce vacancies, causing rent increases. Cultural Language: Immigrants isolate themselves in their own communities and refuse to learn the local language. Culture: Immigrants will outnumber the native population and replace its culture with theirs. Patriotism: Immigrants damage a nation's sense of community based on nationality. Environmental Environment: Immigrants increase the consumption of limited resources. Overpopulation: Immigration contributes to overpopulation. Many Australians opposed the influx of Chinese immigrants at time of the nineteenth-century gold rushes.

When the separate Australian colonies formed the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901, the new nation adopted "White Australia" as one of its founding principles. Under the White Australia policy, entry of Chinese and other Asians remained controversial until well after World War II, although the country remained home to many long-established Chinese families dating from before the adoption of White Australia. By contrast, most Pacific Islanders were deported soon after the policy was adopted, while the remainder were forced out of the canefields where they had worked for decades. Antipathy of native-born white Australians toward British and Irish immigrants in the late 19th century was manifested in a new party, the Australian Natives' Association. Since early 2000, opposition has mounted to asylum seekers arriving in boats from Indonesia; the Brazilian elite desired the racial whitening of the country to Argentina and Uruguay. The country encouraged European immigration, but non-white immigration always faced considerable backlash.

On July 28, 1921, representatives Andrade Bezerra and Cincinato Braga proposed a law whose Article 1 provided: "The immigration of individuals from the black race to Brazil is prohibited." On October 22, 1923, representative Fidélis Reis produced another bill on the entry of immigrants, whose fifth article was as follows: "The entry of settlers from the black race into Brazil is prohibited. For Asian there will be allowed each year a number equal to 5% of those residing in the country.". In the 19th and 20th centuries, there were negative feelings toward the communities of German, Italian and Jewish immigrants, who conserved their language and culture instead of adopting Portuguese and Brazilian habit, were seen as tendentious to form ghettos, had high rates of endogamy, among other concerns, it affected more harshly the Japanese, because they were Asian, thus seen as an obstacle of the whitening of Brazil. Oliveira Viana, a Brazilian jurist and sociologist described the Japanese immigrants as follows: "They are like sulfur: insoluble".

The Brazilian magazine "O Malho" in its edition of December 5, 1908 issued a charge of Japanese immigrants with the following legend: "The government of São Paulo is stubborn. After the failure of the first Japanese immigration, it contracted 3,000 yellow people, it insists on giving Brazil a race diametrically opposite to ours". In 1941, the Brazilian Minister of Justice, Francisco Campos, defended the ban on admission of 400 Japanese immigrants in São Paulo and wrote: "their despicable standard of living is a brutal competition with the country's worker; some years before World War II, the government of President Getúlio Vargas initiated a process of forced assimilation of people of immigrant origin in Brazil. The Constitution of 1934 had a legal provision about the subject: "The concentration of immigrants anywhere in the country is prohibited; the assimilationist project affected German, Italian and Jewish immigra

Leicester's Commonwealth

Leicester's Commonwealth is a scurrilous book that circulated in Elizabethan England and which attacked Queen Elizabeth I's favourite, Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. The work was read as Roman Catholic propaganda against the political and religious policy of Elizabeth I's regime, in particular the Puritan sympathies fostered by Leicester. In doing so it portrayed Leicester as an amoral opportunist of "almost satanic malevolence", circulated lurid stories of his supposed scandalous deeds and dangerous plots; the text is presented as "a letter written by a Master of Art of Cambridge to his friend in London, concerning some talk passed of late between two worshipful and grave men about the present state and some proceedings of the Earl of Leicester and his friends in England". The title "Leicester's Commonwealth" was first used in the 1641 edition; the book influenced Leicester's historical reputation in the ensuing centuries. The book takes the form of a dialogue between a Cambridge scholar, a lawyer, a gentleman.

The lawyer, who professes to be a moderate "papist", expresses the view that religious differences do not undermine the patriotism of citizens, giving examples of religiously divided populations who have united to defend their country against external enemies. The text veers into an attack on the Earl of Leicester, making all kinds of accusations against him, most notably a number of murders, his first is that of his wife Amy Robsart, who according to the tract was found at the bottom of a short flight of stairs with a broken neck, her headdress still standing undisturbed "upon her head". Leicester's hired assassin confesses while on his death-bed, as "all the devils in hell" tear him in pieces. Meanwhile, the assassin's servant, who witnessed the deed, has been dispatched in prison by Leicester's agents before he could tell the story. With the expert help of his Italian physician, Dr. Giulio, Leicester goes on to remove the husbands of his lovers Douglas, Lady Sheffield and Lettice, Countess of Essex.

The Cardinal of Chatillon, Nicholas Throckmorton, Lady Margaret Lennox, the Earl of Sussex are dispatched in the same manner, by poison. After the murder of Walter Devereux, 1st Earl of Essex, Leicester pays Francis Drake to kill Thomas Doughty, who knows too much about it; the work reveals Leicester's monstrous sexual appetite and his and his new wife's lewd private lives, including abortions and other shortcomings. The death of their little son, which occurred shortly before the book's publication, is commented on with a biblical allusion in a stop press marginal note: "The children of adulterers shall be consumed, the seed of a wicked bed shall be rooted out."A born traitor in the third generation who has "nothing of his own, either of his ancestors, or of himself", Leicester is accused of systematically despoiling the lands the queen has granted him, of ruthlessly extorting money from those unluckily enough to be in his power. The mathematician Thomas Allen is said to be employing the art of "figuring" to further the earl's unlawful designs and of having endeavoured to bring about a match between his patron and Queen Elizabeth by the black art.

Leicester, a "perpetuall dictator" who hates and terrorizes the helpless queen, is to blame that England has no heir of Elizabeth's body since he has prevented her marriage to a foreign prince. This he did by falsely claiming to be engaged to her and showing her suitors' ambassadors "a most disloyal proof" thereof. Having failed to attain the supreme power through marriage, he—who is of no religion himself—is building up a party of misled Puritans that will assist him to dethrone Elizabeth in favour of his brother-in-law, the Earl of Huntingdon. On achieving this, he will place the crown on his own head. Leicester's immediate arrest and execution is recommended as the most beneficial act the queen could do to her country; as the book progresses, it becomes a defense of Mary Stuart's succession rights, which by 1584 had become imperilled due to her involvement in several plots to assassinate Elizabeth. The authorship of the pamphlet has been much disputed. Francis Walsingham, in charge of Elizabeth's secret service, thought Thomas Morgan, the exiled agent of Mary Stuart, to be the author when the book first surfaced in August 1584.

Dudley believed that Mary was involved in its conception: "Leicester has told a friend that he will persecute you to the uttermost", she was informed by one of her spies. The Jesuit Robert Persons soon became popularly associated with it and it was published under his name in editions. Scholars now believe that Persons was not the author. Ralph Emerson, a Catholic activist, was arrested in possession of several copies, but could not or would not identify the author when questioned; some modern scholars have suggested that there was no single author, that several members of the exiled Catholic community based in France wrote the text as a group effort. The original intention of the text is linked to a factional struggle at the French court, it favoured the party of the Guises, supporters of the Catholic League, against those with a more positive attitude to Elizabeth and England. The work was welcomed by exiled Catholics

Nea Salamis Famagusta VC

Nea Salamis Famagusta VC or Nea Salamina Famagusta VC is a professional volleyball team based in Ammochostos, Cyprus. It has been a refugee club since the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus, when Turkey occupied the northern part of the island; the club is temporarily based in Limassol. The team is part of the Nea Salamina Famagusta sports club, founded in 1948. Nea Salamina Famagusta VC is one of the most powerful teams in Cyprus. With 9 championships, 8 cups and 8 Super Cups it is the second team in trophies after Anorthosis Famagusta FC; the ground of the team is in the indoor athletic arena Spyros Kyprianou Athletic Center. Nea Salamina cultivated the sport of volleyball from its foundation. Since 1954, Nea Salamina organized every summer amateur leagues and cups, which attracted large crowds. In the tournament Took part teams from the province. After the invasion and refugees in 1974, Nikis Georgiou in 1975 proposed the creation of volleyball team in Limassol, in order to maintain the entity of the club.

In Limassol there existed since 1974, much of the fans of Nea Salamina. The volleyball team created in 1976, it is one of the 20 founding clubs of the Cyprus Volleyball Federation in 1978. In their first inning in Cyprus Volleyball Division 1 finished in second place; the same position occupied in 1981 and 1983. In 1981 lost the championship to the difference set. In 1983 won the first cup final in winning Anorthosis 3–1, it was the first final the first trophy in club-level men. During 1989–90 won the first championship in its history. At the same time won the cup for the second time; this was followed by one cup the season after. Since 1998 and until 2003 they achieved something amazing since the dominated of Cypriot volleyball by winning 6 consecutive Championships, a record for the competition's history; the last four championships were four consecutive treble by winning the championship, the cup and the supercup. Coach of the 6 consecutive Championships was Antonis Constantinou; as a result of this success the team is nicknamed as the Queen of volleyball in Cyprus.

Overall, the volleyball team won 8 cups and 8 shields. Took the second place 6 times and was finalist of the cup 6 times; the home stadium of Nea Salamina in the volleyball is Spyros Kyprianou Athletic Center in Limassol. The team has many European participants. Greater success is the qualifying in the round of 16 in Challenge Cup, winning in the Cypriot civil, with two victories, over the period 2011–12, it is considered as the greatest success of Cypriot teams in Europe Cups. Men Cypriot Championships Winner: 1989/90, 1990/91, 1997/98, 1998/99, 1999/00, 2000/01, 2001/02, 2002/03, 2012/13 Cyprus Cup: Winner: 1982/83, 1989/90, 1991/92, 1999/00, 2000/01, 2001/02, 2002/03, 2010/11 Cyprus Super Cup: Winner: 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2011, 2013U19 Championships: Winner: 1994/95, 1998/99, 2004/05, 2005/06, 2006/07, 2007/08, 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13 Cup: Winner: 1996/97, 1998/99, 2005/06, 2006/07, 2007/08, 2009/10U17 Championships: Winner: 1991/92, 2002/03, 2004/05, 2006/07, 2009/10, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2016/17U15 Championships: Winner: 1991/92, 2002/03, 2005/06, 2006/07, 2011/12, 2013/14, 2016/17 Christou Nikolakis In 1978 it decided to create women's volleyball team in Limassol, with a view "first, girls to deal with volleyball and second to maintain the entity of the club", threatened after the displacement and dispersion of the fans of the team.

The first coach was Nikis Georgiou. In the period 1984–85, the Board decided to suspend the activities of the women's team for financial reasons. In their last period was a finalist of the cup. Overall, the presence of 7 years, the women's team was finished second three times and three times was Cup finalist. Indeed, the period 1981–82 had runners on first place with the AEL, but lacked in the proportion of sets in just two sets. Nea Salamina maintains sections U19, U17 and U15; the group of U19 has won the U17 7 championships and U15 6 championships. The U19 has won 6 cups. Official website