Skip to main content

View Diary: The last time someone built a really big wall to keep unwanted people out... (35 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  A few questions (0+ / 0-)

    It sounds to me that your argument is that the wall would be too expensive; and even if it weren’t, it would be ineffective; and even if it weren’t, it would be inhumane.

    I don’t want to put words in your mouth, so let’s take an extreme example, and you tell me where you differ from it:  Imagine an immigration policy in which we have completely open borders, where anyone from any country can come here at will, and begin benefitting from public education, health care, etc.  Furthermore, he can immediately apply for citizenship, and get it within a few years.  If this extreme position is not yours, where would you differ from it?

    To put it differently, suppose we were able to build a wall and maintain it with very little cost.  And suppose it was effective, significantly preventing people from coming here illegally.  And suppose it was maintained humanely, so that far fewer people died or suffered from attempts to cross the border.  Would you still object to the wall?  Somehow, I suspect you would, in which case, I refer back to the second paragraph.

    In other words, what I am trying to get at is your most fundamental position on illegal immigration.

    •  Thats my position and I don't think it's extreme. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      disinterested spectator
      Imagine an immigration policy in which we have completely open borders, where anyone from any country can come here at will, and begin benefitting from public education, health care, etc.  Furthermore, he can immediately apply for citizenship, and get it within a few years.
      It's how my grandmother became a citizen. Very low cost to maintain also. Just a few pencils and paper needed.

      Tracy B Ann - technically that is my signature.

      by ZenTrainer on Sat Jun 22, 2013 at 01:49:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Your example is a description of how (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      marty marty

      a whole lot of the ancestors of the same people now making the "I want a wall" argument themselves got here. Those who were not evicted from their own lands by transportation  or by the Clearances. In the eighteen forties, the signs may have said No Blacks or Irish, but those job available signs were here and so were the African Americans and the Irish. Asian workers were imported until Victorian mores started producing the IIRC first anti immigrant laws against them openly and specifically. The folk from Eastern Europe and Italy the same.

       If you were not in the disfavored group of the moment, you got in unless you hit Ellis Island being contagious with something visible. An awful lot of this argument is people tryng to slam the door behind them AFTER they get in relatively free.  Some of you may remember in the 2008 campaign the Irish groups who contacted HRC looking for support for their numbers who had come over before the Celtic Tiger rose up and then fell down again, who were and probably still are out of status, and there was no complaint that she was wickedly helping illegals.

      •  Do you also favor open borders? (0+ / 0-)

        I asked the diarist to clarify his position on immigration.  He has not responded, but Zen Trainer has, and I admit that I was surprised at her answer.  I postulated what I referred to as an “extreme position,” thinking that it was so ideologically pure that no one would actually espouse it.  I thought it would simply be a point of departure for the elaboration of one's actual views.  I was amazed that she freely embraced that position, taking exception only with my characterization of it as “extreme.”

        It is a quirk with me to want to know what others think.  So, I appreciated her candor on the matter.  Since reading her response, I have been wondering how many other people would advocate the open-borders position outlined above. Hopefully, the diarist will respond to my query.  In the meantime, since you have responded instead, I shall address the same question to you.  Are you for an unrestricted, open-border policy outlined in my original comment as Zen Trainer is, or would you qualify it in some way?

        •  Immigration is a multi routed process. (0+ / 0-)

          What has not been discussed in the current amnesty howling is, among other things, that so called legal immigration is subject to a plethora of processes in the nature of quotas by business need, by need to reunite families, by nation of origin and such,  and special deals such as for any Cubans, for those seeking political aSYLUM from events in the homeland, those admitted for meical specialty treatments, various varieties of overstayers, and the process of completing any one of those usually involves waiting lines because of an overall cap in 'legal' immigration and the relative inefficiency of the immigration agencies, so that one can go from the waiting and waiting line to the subject to deportation line without notice. Not to mention all the immigration messes which arise in respect of people here who may assume they are citizens but find out they are not and have to go through the entire process rather suddenly - Congressional member bills figure in this in some places.  

          One of the serious problems which arises in respect of all immigration is delay - this is never a process which is briskly completed, but can take years or decades to work through lines, whose rules and borders shift from time to time. It would be easier if the immigration facilities could get the paperwork moving and keep it moving, but we don't have that either.

          Simplification of the process and finding a way to move it briskly along would chage the entire nature of the issue, and is something which should be addressed.  I do not support admitting Mexican drug cartel members or Mafiosi or Russian gang members or tong members either, which means a basic look must be taken which is inconsistent with open borders.

    •  Only because some of the WHITEs don't want (0+ / 0-)

      minorities.  They are BEGGING people from Europe to immigrate here - hoping to put them in the GOP.  the GOP is terrified about minorities and losing their hold over government.  The more minorities come the more the GOP believe they will lose elections.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site