Occupied Aztlan

[KSFreeman]

Art, today's "millions" of illegals that refuse to assimilate? Does this include the Polish in Chicago? The Irish in Boston? Russians in New York City? Persians in Los Angeles? The Sengalese that have moved here down from Chicago? In my own state bunches of Germans refused to assimilate into the dominate English culture. The horror!

How are we harmed by people speaking different languages or eating different foods? Never have been then, are not harmed now. The "solution"? Do nothing! The "problem" will take care of itself, just like with the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the Jews, the Germans, etc, ad naseum.

We could dismantle the welfare state. But it would be native-born people who would oppose this, not those awful immigrants.

As far as the government enforcing it's own laws, Art, I thought you were old enough not to believe in fairy tales? The government exists to prosecute you, not protect you. The U.S. Attorney has discretion to enforce which laws he will enforce. Immigration laws were founded upon fear and ignorance, witness the quotas. Pushed on by anti-freedom politicians who traded our freedom for their enrichment with the exact same anti-immigrant arguments we read on this thread.

But, Art, be of good cheer. There's nothing the government can do, but there's nothing the government should do.

[Bob Locke]

But, Art, be of good cheer. There's nothing the government can do, but there's nothing the government should do.

I'm going to respectfully disagree. The Constitution (Article 1, Section 8) states:

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Seems that the government should do something about it, yes? They've set the rules, now they should enforce them.

And it appears to me that the people who are talking about illegal immigration not being a real problem don't live in the middle of it. It's one thing when it's a relative handful, but a totally different matter when it becomes a fourth of the entire community.

[gdhillard]

Windsor County White Race = 97.7 %. I think that ties us with Ivory Soap. Please send us your Mexicans, Blacks, and a good deal of Asians, too. We will be willing to export an equal of Christmas trees and quart jugs of maple syrup.

Seriously, try teaching about the civil rights movement to a class of 10 and 11 year olds who have never met a black person, or an Asian, or a Latino. Gary, cheerful as always, but very ready for a little racial diversity in the beautiful state of Vermont.

[nemesis]

I don't know what gdhillard is on but it must be good.

Has it occurred to my esteemed colleague that we are not condeming immigration but are alarmed at illegal immigration? May I presume good ole boy gd would consider an uninvited intruder in his home at night as a chance for expanding the culture of his community?

Let's get real folks. We are talking about a tidal wave of people arriving illegally, working illegally or performing illegal tasks; we used to call that crime. These people don't want to be American. They don't even consider this America. To them, it's Aztlan; a part of their country taken illegally and rightfully theirs.

They don't come here to assimilate. They bring their own society and values with them and they can live here for years but they don't speak the common language of America and they continue to consider themselves Mexicans.

When gd and KS become second class citizens in their own country, when the Mexican flag is flown first and highest and when the country of alleigance for (possibly) half of the County is a foreign nation; perhaps they will come down off their soapboxes and listen to what we are saying without glossing over the facts with condescending drivel.

[gdhillard]

Soy milk and toll house cookies! I prefer Edensoy Extra, plain, and make the cookies with a mix of half margerine and half butter. Also about 3/4 of a cup more flour than is called for, and make them big, dough balls bigger than a ping pong ball. Bake em at 350 until they are light brown on the outside, and still a little soft on the inside. Pecans are a nice addition, and I try to buy Hershey's chips because their company is quite a bit nicer than Nestle's. That and a nice full moon is all I need to bliss out. Gary

[nemesis]

Actually, it's margarine. We don't need any mooning around here, however. Enough of that has already been displayed.

[gdhillard]

nemesis, are you talking about bottoms, here out in public on the internet? I don't think thats very nice. Gary, still trying not to think about those Canadians

[ahenry]

[Rant on]

On numerous occasions I have put forth my suggestions on how I this problem should be solved. How about some of you do so? The only other people I can recall having done this was Dennis and to a much lesser degree longeyes, and both of them wanted more or less the same thing; the military on the border. They had some valid points and some points I disagreed with, but at least they had a freakin’ suggestion. I remember a Navel officer that used to tell his navel science class that they could complain about anything they wanted, as long as they had some sort of a suggestion about how to improve the situation. There is lots of wisdom in that rule. Illegal immigration comes up for discussion about once every other month here. These threads usually become big long drawn out things about how “yes it is a problem” and "no it isn’t, you’re just a racist”. Well I am sorta sick of it all, and I’d sure like to see some people do something other than bitch and moan. Come on, you have a complaint? Lets hear your solution. You wanna end illegal immigration? Lets hear how you think we can do it. If you can’t provide something at least a little constructive then you oughta just shut the hell up.


[Rant off]

[ronin308]

So what exactly is the problem with illegal immigration? It seems to me that most people have a problem with people who hate them benefiting from their hard earned tax dollars. Well that's the nature of the Nanny State. I don't see why so many people hate the immigrants. You should direct your focus to our government which provides them so many benefits on your dollar. If the government didn't provide all the "social" services they do, America would be a far better place.

[ronin308]

ahenry- My solution? No more taxes. Privatize government services. You want food? You pay for food. You want edukayshin. You pay. You want national defense? You pay for a rifle and go to Thunder Ranch. Needy people would be taken care of by private charity. The LAST thing we need is more government sponsored aggression.

[ahenry]

ahenry- My solution? No more taxes. Privatize government services. You want food? You pay for food. You want edukayshin. You pay. You want national defense? You pay for a rifle and go to Thunder Ranch. Needy people would be taken care of by private charity. The LAST thing we need is more government sponsored aggression.

Have you been reading my suggestions?! That is exactly what I have said from day one (except for the national defense part).

[Cal4D4]

Aheny is looking for a different approach on the border control. Argue away over military or civilian LEO, but it will be some time before that is resolved.

How about:
1. Children born here of illegal entrants are illegal entrants. Does this really involve a change in the Constitution?

2. Provide basic humanitarian aid such as emergency medicine. Let kids finish the school semester in public school before deportation.

Bill the country of origin for all services provided and the costs of deportation. Real money. calculated in USD and representative of the operating budgets of these departments. Not just bargaining chips for the State Dept. This money would go right back to the service agencies, hospital emergency rooms, schools, etc. Illegal immigration would be halted overnight because country of origin would decide it was cheaper to deal with their problems instead of foisting them off on the US taxpayer.

Any remaining invaders would be likely terror suspects, not just economic opportunists.

[LawDog]

How about:
1. Children born here of illegal entrants are illegal entrants. Does this really involve a change in the Constitution?

Well, that gets kind of sticky.

Jus soli is the legal principle that states that a person is a citizen of the country upon whose soil he is born.

The sticky part is that jus soli (and its sister jus sanguini) are established Common Law, thusly violation of jus soli is a violation of Common Law.

It is understood that at the Federal level, Common Law rules where the Constitution doesn't.

LawDog

[Cal4D4]

LawDog, sounds good but I have no background to challenge your statements. Is established common law always unmodified or sacrosanct?

If we are locked into citizenship for the kid, we can't exactly dump the folks back to the homeland can we? Guess the homeland will be billed for the costs of maintaining the folks here. Our costs in US $$, the full rate. Jailtime as needed at $25K/year or whatever the numbers are. Caseworker mandatory for the families, English and "civics" tutoring, too. No future citizenship possible if they claim citizenship for the child. Special class of resident/work permit and real background check paid for by country of origin. A new industry, gov't services and depts showing a profit from their balance of foreign trade.

My guess is most countries would stop illegal emigration to the US and start tending to the needs of their people.

[Skorzeny]

KSFreeman:

Having been a legal immigrant myself, I feel compelled to post on this topic. First of all, let me me state CATEGORICALLY that I oppose all forms of ILLEGAL immigration. I did everything by the book at great costs (time, money, frustrations, increased BP, etc.) to myself - I followed the rules. I cannot stand it when others don't follow the rules and then benefit from the violations. That just bothers me at the most primeval level.

Having said that, when people suggest that somehow current illegal (or legal) immigrants "hate" the Bill of Rights or that they don't attempt to assimilate while previous immigrants (mostly white and mostly ancestors of those who make this type of argument) fervently desired to assimilate and "loved" the American way of life, they are either being disingenuous or ignorant of the realities of immigration in the past.

By and large, most past legal and illegal immigrants, be they Irish, Polish, Italian, Jewish or Chinese, did not, in the main, immigrate to the US with lofty notions or understandings of our Constitution or some sort of fervent desires to become strict Constitutionalists or Libertarians. They immigrated largely because their lives were socially, politically and/or economically unbearable in their birth countries. Because of poverty, corruption, class hierarchy and polico-economic oppression (including forced military service) in these countries, they left and went where they could - largely based on convenience, family connections and the vaguest notion or rumor that the "New Land" (be it the US, Brazil or Canada) must be somehow "better."

When these (again, both legal and plenty of illegal ones) arrived in the US, they did not exactly try their best to assimilate either. They often lived in ethnic ghettos, spoke only their mother tongues and were greatly assisted by those politicians, often their ethnic compatriots, who provided "services" (read welfare) in return for political support and votes. If one were to visit an ethnic gheto in NYC of the period, say an Italian or an Irish one, one would find situations very similar to those that the current batch of nativists would describe in today's Latin immigrants - poverty, corruption, crime (including organized crime), a foreign tongues, socialism (or whatever alient, anti-capitalist, anti-democratic or anti-American ideology the native community can think of), an extreme distrust of or disconnect with the established, native community. Or so would the nativists of the period describe such ethnic enclaves. I am really struck by the remarkable similarity between the rhetoric of the current batch of nativists and that of the past nativist politicians who doled out similar scorn (dirty, criminal, foreign-speaking and completely ignorant of "our Way of Life") on their respective immigrant communities.

Sure there are differences. On the one hand, while past ethnic enclave bosses provided some services, or welfare, at the LOCAL level, our FEDERAL welfare state has become much more extensive since the 19th Century or before, with all the negative consequences one can imagine. Another change is the make-up of these immigrants, both legal and illegal. In the past, most immigrants (except for Asian immigrants who could not own land or bring wives) were white - Polish, Irish, Italian and Jewish, for example (of course, that did not stop the nativists of the period - "Anglo-Saxon Protestants" from heaping scorn on these - "no dogs and no Irish"). Today's immigrants often come from today's trouble spots and tend to be more "brownish."

Contrary to the hysterics of the current batch of nativists (who are often descendants of these very Polish, Irish, Italian and Jewish immigrants - both legal and ILLEGAL - of the past), what has NOT changed is the great adaptive and assimilative capacity that this country has. The immigrants of the past were not the "Great Constitutionalists" who somehow stood in stark contrast to these unwashed Mexican masses of today who somehow disparage the Bill of Rights. No, they were very similar - in that they were simply fleeing difficult lives in search of a better one with but the vaguest notion of what their new home offered. In the lengthy process of trying to find a better life, their children and grandchildren, with little memories of their ancestors or their home countries, became assimilated, educated and prosperous and ACQUIRED through TIME the very appreciation for our system and way of life.

Or perhaps not so appreciative - since our general respect and appreciation for the Constituition have been declining historically LONG before the great unwashed BROWN massses showed up on our shores. Perhaps these white immigrants weren't such great champions of our Constitution and quickly became like the rest of the great majority of Americans - prosperous, happy and only too willing to give up liberties for security. Perhaps our view of them is more romantic because they were our goofy, lovable and sometimes embarassing grandparents and uncles while the great masses of the brown immigrants of today are, well, so "alien" and so "obviously different" from our quaint ancestors.

Skorzeny

[Solitar]

ahenry, for a quick refresher of where we (and I've) been on this subject read this thread Your position on illegal immigration

Several of us have called for closing the borders. Take note of our comments in the following threads.
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...hreadid=117595

Take special note of my posted photo of "Mexican Pride" walking on the American flag while wearing a Mexican flag.
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...hreadid=117722

and this
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...hreadid=117443

Good fences make better neighbors . With a border that is so porous as to be nearly nonexistent in many places and, even worse, aid stations and welcoming arms (or employers, etc.) for illegals, we are making the Mexican impression or wish come true. PUT UP A GOOD FENCE! Then put the US military along the border and give it clear orders about its mission. Stop the illegal immigration/infiltration - by whatever force necessary.

But even I realize that (though it is worth trying) may not be feasible
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...hreadid=114904

Is it a militarized no mans land? That won't work either. It really is elimination of welfare, bilingual gov't schooling, etc. etc. and the requirement that these characters become full-fledged Americans (in the old definition).

I contributed my suggestion also to this very long thread:
Next time someone says something bad about immigrants...
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...hreadid=115164

We and they need some time - say about twenty years. Then we could open the taps again. I'm not saying to shut off immigration entirely. I am saying to slow it down to about a tenth of what we have going now -- until we and the immigrants catch up.

Then I go on for even more suggestions.
No matter how many ways some of us state our positions, some still have not heard or read what we've said. There is just too much written on TFL on this subject for all of us to read everything.

Even I, as a Prussian-American "nativist", have to admit that
Skorzeny nails it!

[ahenry]

Several of us have called for closing the borders. Take note of our comments in the following threads. (followed by various links)

Well ain’t that just nifty. You wanna “close the border” How the hell are you going to do that?! That is what I am asking for. Calling for “closed borders” is no different then some politician calling for “corporate responsibility” or for a “more fit America”. Its just words until you can put forth some reasonable suggestion of how to accomplish this. Seems like a lot of people want to use the military to close the border. I find that ironic given the outcry (especially on this board) generated by the current administrations “review” of the Posse Comitatus act. I should have been a tad more clear in my request. If you want to use the military to “close the border” then explain how to do so. Simple suggestions to “use the military” sound like Clinton’s suggestions about how to “save the children” in those “poor third-world country’s”. I’m sorry, but I really need a bit more than simplistic, knee-jerk, feel good measure that has no grounding in practicality (this leads back to my comment that Dennis had something of a plan. I don’t know how much I agreed with, but he had some practical suggestions and some thought about counter acting some of the down sides to the militarizing of America).

No matter how many ways some of us state our positions, some still have not heard or read what we've said. There is just too much written on TFL on this subject for all of us to read everything.

Very true, and I apologize to you, and in advance to others, because I am sure there are other people that have suggested a thing or two and I have missed it. My overall point remains however, far too many people are complaining about this, without even the most elementary of ideas about how to solve it. Add those that want to do the infeasible or ridiculous and you wind up with a bunch or complaining without any effort expended to improve things.

[glock glockler]

Ok, Aaron

You obviously know that I thing we should get rid of all public doles here, which I doubt many on this board would argue with. You also know that I don't think one should be able to vote simply because you were born here and you're 18, I think that native born Americans should have to go through the same citizenship test that aliens do.

I think this would be a great start, but I think we need to go much farther to ensure our way of life and a secure future, we need to launch a world-wide campaign of freedom. This would not be the imperialist-type stuff our govt is doing where we want to have our military occupy the entire world, but rather a campaign where we help other countries become prosperous and peaceful. The more successful people becomes, the less likely they will be to want to risk everything on some stupid war that some politicians think is a great idea. They more free a people is and their greater access factual news, the less likely they will be to believe the lies put forth by govts that result in their own destruction.

I think we should do exactly what the Soviets did: target a bunch of countries that would be the easiest to convert to a free-market economy with political freedom and go to town. The CIA would infiltrate it's schools, news media, religous organizations, political parties, etc. Anywhere that seeds of political thought could be effectively planted would be a target. We would have top enconomists, propagandists, sociologists, political scientists, etc all working on developing the most effective means of turning the country around. Even if it's using the Ayatollah's trick of making audio casettes because the people are illiterate, we would tap into the minds of people explaining why they are being oppressed and why they have the right to free, and the right to a limited govt.

Tihs would be done "under the table" while the govt would extend full diplomatic and economic relations to the country. The more we are working together, the less likely that those countries will be a threat to us and the more likely that they will indirectly look out for our interest, as they don't want their allies being harmed. Once their conversion is complete, they would assist us in targeting other countries, and the process would continue, like a tree branch extending to many smaller branches outward.

We would create a worldwide alliance of political and economic freedom, cooperating and trading with one another in an effort to achieve peace and prosperity. We cannot think that the "bring em all here" approach will result in long term security, we have to export freedom rather than just importing people. This is not to say that I'm opposed to taking the world's best and brightest, I'm not, but the most viable long term approach is to make the world safe for America, not to make America safe from the world.

How's that?

[ronin308]

ahenry-

Have you been reading my suggestions?! That is exactly what I have said from day one (except for the national defense part).

But how can you pay for a standing army with no taxes? Privatized army?

[ronin308]

The more successful people becomes, the less likely they will be to want to risk everything on some stupid war that some politicians think is a great idea. They more free a people is and their greater access factual news, the less likely they will be to believe the lies put forth by govts that result in their own destruction.

Why don't we have that in America first? This would be a good place to start

I think we should do exactly what the Soviets did: target a bunch of countries that would be the easiest to convert to a free-market economy with political freedom and go to town.

The United States of America doesn't even have a free market economy.

Tihs would be done "under the table" while the govt would extend full diplomatic and economic relations to the country. The more we are working together, the less likely that those countries will be a threat to us and the more likely that they will indirectly look out for our interest, as they don't want their allies being harmed. Once their conversion is complete, they would assist us in targeting other countries, and the process would continue, like a tree branch extending to many smaller branches outward.

What you are suggesting here is that when countries have good economic relationships, they are less likely to be threats to each other. That would be essentially the same result that is given by every country worldwide having a free market. But there is one flaw in your reasoning. It is not possible to have a free market economy with any form of government. The government will always intrude on the free market given an amount of time. Free market + government = controlled market.

[ahenry]

Perhaps I should have also said I disagreed with the statement of absolutely “no taxes” as well. However, since we just went through a HUGE debate on that one, I didn’t want to open the door again. Suffice it to say that I think there is both constitutional and practical as well as moral justification for minute amounts of taxation. It should be administered through direct taxation, in conjunction with a census, and then gathered by the states, which then gives the appropriate amount to the fed gov’t. While implementing this system would create some massive economic tremors in the short run, the long run affects of this would greatly strengthen our entire economy.

[ronin308]

ahenry- I see. I will not comment on taxes for the sake of this thread and for the sake of other TFLer's sanity We'll just leave the taxes door closed right now.

[glock glockler]

Ronin, I am aware of the fact that we don't fit the description of what we would like other countries to become and that we would need to unFoxtrot ourselves before we help others do the same.

Also, when we say things like "free-market" or "free-trade", these terms are relative in nature. An absolute is not possible, but if we could get things far closer on the scale towards free as opposed to complete statist, we'd be in good shape.

[ahenry]

Laudable goals, but I’d rather get our own house in order first.

[edited because I don’t really care about the state of other people’s hoses]

[Beowulf_93]

I say we adopt the techniques of the Soviets in divided Berlin. We could build a wall all across the southern border & call it the " Mexican-American Friendship Wall". That would make it easier for the border patrols to do their job.