Why should it be illegal for any person to come to the United States, assuming his intentions are peaceful and he is not likely to become a public charge or health risk?
Obviously the question makes some large assumptions, but I think it is a very good, sensible starting point on immigration from both a practical and philosophical perspective. It would force people to reveal their true beliefs, and, hopefully, force them to acknowledge their significantly biased, if not false, premises.
This is pure conjecture, but, as I have alluded to a few times in earlier posts, I think national borders are an obsolete concept that probably do more harm than good.
Mary Anastasia O'Grady of the The Wall Street Journal does something I have heard no one in the mainstream press do when talking about immigration; talk about the drug trade. And not only does she talk about it, but she does it very well. A snippet:
It’s tempting to couch the organized crime problem as an issue of sovereignty (i.e., Mexicans are invading!) but that ignores the role of the demand for drugs. The solution has to start with acknowledging that drug trafficking through Arizona—a key concern of citizens of that state—is the product of a complex set of federal policy failures.
You simply cannot talk about immigration and not mention The War on Drugs. Yet to mention drug prohibition today seems to be taboo, or those whom you speak with seem to cast you as a nut or a joke. I find this to be very unfortunate and a hinderance towards progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment