"We are an immensely wealthy nation that could help all of these South American migrants multiplied by thousands and it would not change our GDP one percent."
Nothing is without cost. I disagree with this statement.
"We have a moral duty as people lucky to be born free in a rich country to help others less fortunate"
What is being proposed is essentially having no border with Mexico. This would be fine, if we had control of and owned Mexico. But Mexico has its own president and rules, etc.
"The only difference between turning away the boatloads of Jews fleeing Hitler and sending them back to their deaths, and the migrants now is the name of the dictator and the ethnicity of the refugees"
Which dictator? Most of these refugees are fleeing poverty and economic hardships, not because of a risk of being murdered by a dictator.
Let me guess: you are American, and you are trying to defend the indefensible?
We are locked in an existential battle for the soul of our nation, founded as it was in the ideals expressed in this essay.
I do believe you are trying to justify the unjustifiable.
Shall we begin your remedial history lessons with the Monroe Doctrine, or perhaps start with United Fruit in Guatemala, or perhaps discuss Kissingers role in overthrowing the democratically elected Salvador Allende and assisting a certain General Pinochets rise?
Our crimes in Latin America are numerous and our neighbors were not plopped next door to us yesterday.
We are actively involved in their continued instability and impoverishment (See Guatemala, see Honduras, oh and LOOKEE HERE Venezuela and 30+ years of sanctions, or shall we mention the drug war and it's biggest client?)
What is missing from any discussion of our bad attitude ("Keep out" says a nation of immigrants!) is HUMANITY.
Where is your humanity? Do you have no sense of right and wrong?
Is a Mexican not your brother?
What is being proposed here is not what you suggest is being proposed, although I will remind you that all nations and all borders are fictatious entities.
What is being proposed here is the radical idea that border-crossing human movements need not result in the deaths of human beings, seeing as how our entire species has always migrated.
Are you 100% Native American? No? Then you are a descendant of migrants!
"OH but they did it LEGALLY" yeah and slavery was legal and so are American cops shooting black people with impunity.
Your point?
The nation state system will not likely survive the 21st century. Mark my words.
So, I can't think of other nations where border crossing result in deaths, legal or otherwise.
I can't think of a single other nation in which such a double-standard of borders exists:
Americans can go party in Mexico for the weekend, so it's not like we are at war with Mexico, but then this border is militarized like Gaza or the Korean DMZ... hmmmm kinda odd buddy.
3 comments
[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 19.7 ms ] threadNothing is without cost. I disagree with this statement.
"We have a moral duty as people lucky to be born free in a rich country to help others less fortunate"
What is being proposed is essentially having no border with Mexico. This would be fine, if we had control of and owned Mexico. But Mexico has its own president and rules, etc.
"The only difference between turning away the boatloads of Jews fleeing Hitler and sending them back to their deaths, and the migrants now is the name of the dictator and the ethnicity of the refugees"
Which dictator? Most of these refugees are fleeing poverty and economic hardships, not because of a risk of being murdered by a dictator.
Let me guess: you are American, and you are trying to defend the indefensible?
We are locked in an existential battle for the soul of our nation, founded as it was in the ideals expressed in this essay.
I do believe you are trying to justify the unjustifiable.
Shall we begin your remedial history lessons with the Monroe Doctrine, or perhaps start with United Fruit in Guatemala, or perhaps discuss Kissingers role in overthrowing the democratically elected Salvador Allende and assisting a certain General Pinochets rise? Our crimes in Latin America are numerous and our neighbors were not plopped next door to us yesterday. We are actively involved in their continued instability and impoverishment (See Guatemala, see Honduras, oh and LOOKEE HERE Venezuela and 30+ years of sanctions, or shall we mention the drug war and it's biggest client?)
What is missing from any discussion of our bad attitude ("Keep out" says a nation of immigrants!) is HUMANITY.
Where is your humanity? Do you have no sense of right and wrong? Is a Mexican not your brother?
What is being proposed here is not what you suggest is being proposed, although I will remind you that all nations and all borders are fictatious entities.
What is being proposed here is the radical idea that border-crossing human movements need not result in the deaths of human beings, seeing as how our entire species has always migrated.
Are you 100% Native American? No? Then you are a descendant of migrants!
"OH but they did it LEGALLY" yeah and slavery was legal and so are American cops shooting black people with impunity.
Your point?
The nation state system will not likely survive the 21st century. Mark my words.
So, I can't think of other nations where border crossing result in deaths, legal or otherwise. I can't think of a single other nation in which such a double-standard of borders exists:
Americans can go party in Mexico for the weekend, so it's not like we are at war with Mexico, but then this border is militarized like Gaza or the Korean DMZ... hmmmm kinda odd buddy.
It's almost as if you wish to shout out "I have no humanity and celebrate wanton cruelty"
Please DO address the ship full of Jewish refugees turned away at our doorstep.