Make them pay reparations? Aside from the fact that many Latin American illegal immigrants are Amerindian mestizos whose poor economic conditions have been inherited from a violent European invasion and colonization of America and the centuries of racial segregation and discrimination that were to follow, recent history has been marked by governmental establishment of trade liberalization and the expansion of U.S.-based agricultural companies into Mexico that has uprooted and displaced farmers and associated laborers into urban areas, and then into the U.S. itself due to the vastly inequitable wage differentials between the U.S. and Mexico.
If the illegals were wrried about becoming citizens (and the liberals were't trying to extend them just about every right that citizend have), that might have some teeth.
The so called "line" is a joke when it comes to Mexicans and those further south. They are unwanted. It is all but impossible for a poor uneducated Mexican looking for work to get legal entrance into this country. For them, there really is no "line" to speak of.
While that is true to some degree, they sure do fill out the paperwork for amnesty when it's offered. I really don't see why we should want them or accept them if they do nothing for us. We are not the planet's welfare state, it's not our job to take everyone else's refuse.
Wow.Abolish all immigration controls and pay reparations to the families of those killed trying to cross the border, all those deported, assaulted, and harassed in the enforcement of insane laws based on the absurd notion that all people born here are chosen people of God, and all others (or perhaps merely all brown people not born in this country) are subhuman.
Oh, I know they don't care. Even if we give them amnesty and citizenship, they don't become Americans, they remain Mexicans living in America. They just want all the free social services we give and the jobs that we used to have so they can send billions back home to Mexico every month. Take that away and you'd never have anyone crossing the border.
The so called "line" is a joke when it comes to Mexicans and those further south. They are unwanted. It is all but impossible for a poor uneducated Mexican looking for work to get legal entrance into this country. For them, there really is no "line" to speak of.
Abolish all immigration controls and pay reparations to the families of those killed trying to cross the border, all those deported, assaulted, and harassed in the enforcement of insane laws based on the absurd notion that all people born here are chosen people of God, and all others (or perhaps merely all brown people not born in this country) are subhuman.
Abolish all immigration controls
Isn't that like being forced to pay money to the scumbag or scumbag's family who broke into your home?and pay reparations to the families of those killed trying to cross the border
all those deported
assaulted, and harassed in the enforcement of insane laws
based on the absurd notion that all people born here are chosen people of God,
and all others (or perhaps merely all brown people not born in this country) are subhuman.
This is utter horse****. Mexicans come here and assimilate themselves incredibly fast in my opinion, especially given all the obstacles they're up against.
no one is forcing you to be like another.If that is true then why are there bilingual government forms,ballots, street signs, police officers and many other things? I do not know what dictionary you are using but I have never heard of the word "assimilate" being used to refer to forcing of the native population to be like those who either immigrated here legally or those who trespassed into this country.
Should illegal aliens be offered Amnesty, semi-amnesty(paying fines or working for forgiveness), or not allowed amnesty.
This question is a redirect from here, where we have gotten way off topic and onto this: http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/57386-libertarian-issues.html
poll is up.
I am decrying the obviously racist nature of the law, and that makes me "a bit of a racist"? I am well aware that more than brown people are illegal here--that is what makes the hypocrisy and racism of the law so obvious. You don't see Lou Dobbs on every night ranting about all the Swedes with expired Visas, or the illegal Canadians. Nor are there white vigilante groups standing on the Canadian border with guns. The immigration restrictions are fundamentally about Mexico, Honduras, and the other places where poor, brown people come from.Hmm a bit of a racist I see? Just in case you didn't know this but there are more illegals here in the US than just "brown people".
My point is that border laws are based on asinine assumptions. The exclusion of certain people from the rights afforded to the American people assumes that we are somehow special, and the outsiders somehow unworthy. Otherwise it would be far more difficult to treat illegal immigrants like dirt, as the system must. If we were to think of them as truly human beings, the current system wouldn't be possible.And no one that I know of wants border laws because they think we are "the chosen people of God". This is an asinine comment to make and shows no understanding of economics or what limited resources are.
Apparently in your estimation they exist in order to exclude people from basic human rights and to exploit their poverty for economic means.It also shows that you have no understanding of why countries exist.
no one is forcing you to be like another.
no one is forcing you to be like another.
I am decrying the obviously racist nature of the law, and that makes me "a bit of a racist"? I am well aware that more than brown people are illegal here--that is what makes the hypocrisy and racism of the law so obvious. You don't see Lou Dobbs on every night ranting about all the Swedes with expired Visas, or the illegal Canadians. Nor are there white vigilante groups standing on the Canadian border with guns. The immigration restrictions are fundamentally about Mexico, Honduras, and the other places where poor, brown people come from.
My point is that border laws are based on asinine assumptions. The exclusion of certain people from the rights afforded to the American people assumes that we are somehow special, and the outsiders somehow unworthy. Otherwise it would be far more difficult to treat illegal immigrants like dirt, as the system must. If we were to think of them as truly human beings, the current system wouldn't be possible.
Limited resources?? Is that the justification that is used to allow one man to own two television stations, 12 factories, 8 homes, three yachts, 50 vintage cars and another man to own nothing? For one man to have all the abundance to feed a ten thousand people and to squander it on his own luxuries? The capitalist system, long ago, abolished the necessity of poverty, starvation and material want of any kind with its high levels of production. All of these horrors are maintained in order to maximize profits, not because there isn't enough to go around.
As for economics, my solidarity is with the working class of Mexico, the working class of Honduras, the working class of Bolivia, the working class of Ecuador, not with the ruling class of any of these, nor of the ruling class of the United States.
Apparently in your estimation they exist in order to exclude people from basic human rights and to exploit their poverty for economic means.
The problem with this argument is it makes the exception the rule. Just because some laws can be stupid does not mean we should not have a general respect for the law.OK, then let's use a hypothetical example instead of an historical example: Suppose that everyone in Congress gets drunk one night and passes a law making it a crime for any non-citizen to wear T-shirts with silly phrases on them. When there are protests, some people say that the law should not be changed because it rewards lawbreakers.
Do you see any problem with this argument? It offers no rational explanation for why such a thing should be a crime in the first place.
It is more than that; it is a necessity. No society, culture or social association can take an environment of constant, rapid demographic and social change without coming under a lot of stress and tension. Certainly to believe such you'd have to hold society and social institutions to be relatively ephemeral to a view of mainly self-sufficient individuals.Um no. It is any nation's right to regulate who comes into the country.
The northern border is manned by 12 guys in booths. The southern border is a militarized zone complete with endless miles of walls, INS agents with night vision and helicopters, armed vigilante groups etc. Matter settled.The immigration restrictions apply to ALL our borders. Not just our southern border. And I challenge you to prove otherwise.
Limited how? Limited in that they are concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite class? To be sure. Most definitely not limited in the sense that they couldn't feed, clothe and house the entire world. They surely could. The obscene, maniacal excesses of the rich prove this.No it doesn't assume we are special. It assumes that we have limited resources.
Now that is a hell of an assumption.It assumes that other governments will take their responsibilities seriously and take care of their own people.
Do we really need the sarcastic thank you's at this stage of our maturity? I know what "limited resources" means. It means that you do not yet realize that current levels of production are more than adequate to abolish poverty, starvation and death by curable disease. It means that you haven't studied the economic realities of the current global system enough to realize that these horrors are a result of the priorities of capitalism, not the result of scarcity. Observe India, a country struggling with famine, EXPORTING and DESTROYING grain to maximize profits and you have capitalism in a nutshell.Thank you for showing that you have no understanding of what limited resources means.
Good point, there isn't much of a difference, they are all exploitative, all members of the ruling class and they are all interested in keeping the working class politically weak and divided. One difference is that our capitalists are the best. The best at making money for themselves and the best at keeping the working class weak and divided. But the similarities far outweigh the differences.As far as rich folks goes what is so different here than any other country? How many rich folks are there in Europe? China? Mexico?
You can't truly be concerned for one without being concerned for the other. Their interests are interconnected, indeed, the same.You can be concerned all you want about the working class of those countries. That's your perogative. My concern is with the working class of Americans.
Agreed entirely. Our country should start taking care of its poor as well.I would also submit that those countries should also be taking care of their poor.
The northern border is manned by 12 guys in booths. The southern border is a militarized zone complete with endless miles of walls, INS agents with night vision and helicopters, armed vigilante groups etc. Matter settled.
Limited how? Limited in that they are concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite class? To be sure. Most definitely not limited in the sense that they couldn't feed, clothe and house the entire world. They surely could. The obscene, maniacal excesses of the rich prove this.
Now that is a hell of an assumption.
Do we really need the sarcastic thank you's at this stage of our maturity? I know what "limited resources" means. It means that you do not yet realize that current levels of production are more than adequate to abolish poverty, starvation and death by curable disease. It means that you haven't studied the economic realities of the current global system enough to realize that these horrors are a result of the priorities of capitalism, not the result of scarcity. Observe India, a country struggling with famine, EXPORTING and DESTROYING grain to maximize profits and you have capitalism in a nutshell.
Good point, there isn't much of a difference, they are all exploitative, all members of the ruling class and they are all interested in keeping the working class politically weak and divided. One difference is that our capitalists are the best. The best at making money for themselves and the best at keeping the working class weak and divided. But the similarities far outweigh the differences.
You can't truly be concerned for one without being concerned for the other. Their interests are interconnected, indeed, the same.
Agreed entirely. Our country should start taking care of its poor as well.
The northern border is manned by 12 guys in booths. The southern border is a militarized zone complete with endless miles of walls, INS agents with night vision and helicopters, armed vigilante groups etc. Matter settled.
Do we really need the sarcastic thank you's at this stage of our maturity? I know what "limited resources" means. It means that you do not yet realize that current levels of production are more than adequate to abolish poverty, starvation and death by curable disease. It means that you haven't studied the economic realities of the current global system enough to realize that these horrors are a result of the priorities of capitalism, not the result of scarcity. Observe India, a country struggling with famine, EXPORTING and DESTROYING grain to maximize profits and you have capitalism in a nutshell. Good point, there isn't much of a difference, they are all exploitative, all members of the ruling class and they are all interested in keeping the working class politically weak and divided. One difference is that our capitalists are the best. The best at making money for themselves and the best at keeping the working class weak and divided. But the similarities far outweigh the differences.
You can't truly be concerned for one without being concerned for the other. Their interests are interconnected, indeed, the same.
Actually that is our tradition. Do you belong to the US? What exactly do you mean by everyone else's refuse? These are people. They're not garbage. If anything they're the pick yourself up by your bootstraps types. They're not some dumb tards who choose to just sit in squalor in a country that has zero to offer them. They risk it all for a better life rather than just sitting with their thumbs up their arse lamenting the fact that they were born somewhere sucky.
I freaking admire them. I know if I was poor and lived in a land of zero opportunity and all I had to do was have the balls and the courage to get across a line drawn on a map and birth my kids on the other side of said line in order to change the destiny of generations of my bloodline to come I'd do it. I'd do it proudly.
That is what you're up against.
You can't stop them from coming.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?