A Right to Migrate?

TCS Daily ^ | 04.06.06 | Nathan Smith

[stands2reason]

You have a poor grasp of logic. Morality is not determined by judicial fiat.

[jordan8]

Cloud cuckoo land libertarianism that can't tell the difference between a nation and a state (or an empire, for that matter) and pretends that people are interchangeable economic units that have no effect on society other than economic.

[dr_who_2]

I don't believe in trespassing on private property. I believe it is the duty of a government to keep certain undesireables out of U.S. territory, public or private. But I think it's unrealistic to paint with a broad brush and try to keep a majority of "in-bound aliens" out, because as long as territories south of the border are less hospitable/inviting than the US, there will be lots of foreigners trying to get in one way or another. I also think that property owners who live next to a border need to realize that the final responsibility for the defense of their property falls to them even though they are bound by laws. It's normally going to be easier where U.S. territory literally stops at the water's edge. Should the U.S. demand vigilance on the part of their neighbors so that the U.S. can properly enforce its laws? Certainly, but it's nuts to demand more than our own government can deliver in order to fully comply with its own laws, if that. If changing our position forces Mexico to change its "behavior" in a generally positive way, good. But don't expect miracles. On the other hand, if you want total isolation, imagine what the situation would be like if Mexico was like Cuba.

Should "a" wall be built that ensures people intending to enter or leave the U.S. be filtered through official U.S. checkpoints? To the extent that the U.S. government could provide enough of these checkpoints, yes. Border traffic is far more than just illegals trying to get in. You can't pen people in in a free society. Border property owners will have to make allowances to the U.S. for it to work, and the U.S. will have to do a good job of maintaining and fortifying a big structure that will have to be more than a typical cement wall or fence to stop people from crossing it. The money will inevitably come from the same place highway, entitlement, pork money comes from, but there are limits to the amount you can collect before it ceases to work. A wall is like any levee, especially in this case. If the mood of the electorate or their elected officials moves back in favor of something else, then the wall will become less and less effective with time, although the property owners I speak of should be allowed to step in, as their interests are directly protected by a wall. To those who have boundless faith in some self-taxing system of border/citizenship enforcement, look at public schools, etc. Many of us here would like to extricate schools from federal, state, and local governments altogether for some reason or another. People here can turn a blind eye to waste, fraud, and abuse in a pentagon-run national defense because the 1789 model wouldn't work in this day and age. Amtrak, like the USPS, is increasingly worthless but just won't go away.

I would caution anyone against thinking that a wall wouldn't adversely affect our relations with Mexico, and that poorer relations with our neighbor Mexico is something of no consequence. If you think every criminal act along the border amounts to another battle in an on-going border war, then we're at war anyway and always will be. But don't complain if it gets worse, much less spirals out of control as a result of tit-for-tat behavior. Mexicans are not any more helpless than Americans would be in the same situation, or else we would have won the drug war by now. To the hot heads here who would say, "What's the matter with having another war with Mexico?", I'd say that a genuine ongoing war with a neighboring country is the number one national security threat, and worse the war, the worse the threat. And if you think that rogue states and stateless terrorist groups don't pose a real threat, then you have an unhealthy obsession with Mexico. There's nothing like a war close to home to keep the U.S. pinned down. If you think I'm being paranoid here, stop and reexamine your own rhetoric. It's better to influence a neighbor than to make a permanent (dare I say useful) enemy out of him.

To an extent, good fences make good neighbors, as long as both neighbors mend the fence, even an "invisible" one. So it's far more than a question of who starts laying the bricks first. I don't think the situation with Mexico or any other foreign nationals is as bad as the other side claims, but we could easily and unnecessarily make it worse. People here (including me) have written off France, but I think it's fair to say that our track record will remain better than theirs now and in the future, even though there's hope for that country as well. More than what the headlines suggest.

[Myrddin]

The ranchers who tried to protect their land, but ran afoul of the law by "pistol whipping" a couple illegals, lost their ranch entirely. link. This entire incident would never have occurred if illegals were not crossing our border, trespassing on private property and committing acts of robbery, burglary and vandalism along the way.

The illegal alien invaders are now the owners of the ranch they invaded...compliments of Morris Dees.

[dr_who_2]

People here speak ill of Fox and will probably say the same thing about his successors, but I wonder what's stopping them from communicating to him to see what happens. It's been done before with the POTUS. Why not Mexico?

[dr_who_2]

But once they're in America, guest workers tend to want to stay.

Got any statistics on that point?

[dr_who_2]

Does Mexico have more of a right to be worried about destabilizing forces on its southern borders than the US does? Think back to events of ten years ago before you answer.

[MarkL]

Why is it that nobody askes the question, "Why doesn't Mexico allow "illegal aliens" to take the jobs Mexicans won't do? Why do they have their military patrolling their own southern border for just that reason?

Mark

[dr_who_2]

Sounds like a classic case of stupidity piled on stupidity. Do ranchers further north get into this sort of problem? If not, then perhaps it's better to move up north and worry more about your livestock than getting your pound of (human) flesh.

[dr_who_2]

Enlighten us.

[John 6.66=Mark of the Beast?]

I would say that any nation has the right to protect its borders under the equal right of souvernty.

[TigersEye]

and pretends that people are interchangeable economic units that have no effect on society other than economic.

From the White House website...

Investing in Our People

Work through the Partnership for Prosperity and the Canada-Mexico Partnership to strengthen our cooperation in the development of human capital in North America, including by expanding partnerships in higher education, science, and technology.

I thought our federal gov. was supposed to protect the people so we could invest in ourselves?!

[dr_who_2]

What is that supposed to mean? What is it supposed to mean if one nation infringes on another nation's "rights" to begin with? The victimized nation has the right to retaliate against them in some way? Is there some sort of higher power that's supposed to arbitrate and hold both nations to its judgement?

[John 6.66=Mark of the Beast?]

What that means is that each nation on this earth has the right to defend themselves from any infringement on their souvernty. Meaning the US has the right to defend its borders from any invasion of people in the name of national security.

Just as Mexico, Israel, or BFE has the same right to protect their borders from any and all unwanted peoples. If Mexico or Israel feel that it is best to blow their butts away as they cross their borders we should be able to use the same force to protect our borders too.

That is the one problem I have with US policy we can go into another nation in the name of national security and take out their leader IE S.H. yet Israel could not go into P.T. and take out their leader. We tell them no no don’t do that if we were being shot at and had homicide bombers coming in from Mexico or Canada daily hitting our border cities I can guarantee you we would not hesitate to go in and wipe them out and set up another leader that would see eye to eye with us.

[Ban Draoi Marbh Draoi]

Better yet, let's all migrate to this idiot's neighborhood.

[TheLion]

Hey, lets just let all the worlds 8 billion in and then sort it out. How many is enough....100 million, 200 million? When will it be a problem to you?

[Myrddin]

Sounds like a classic case of stupidity piled on stupidity. Do ranchers further north get into this sort of problem? If not, then perhaps it's better to move up north and worry more about your livestock than getting your pound of (human) flesh.

Somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 illegals cross the border each night. The ranchers next to the border are caught in a continuous stream of illegal aliens. The federal government is responsible for controlling the border, but they do a damn poor job of it.

I moved from San Diego to Pocatello, Idaho. I'm very familiar with the transition that occurred as I lived in San Diego from 1961 to 2001. I had intended to retire in the house that I owned in Mira Mesa from 1983 to 2001. I changed my mind as the lightly used Mira Mesa Blvd turned to gridlock from 6 AM to 9 AM and again from 4 PM to 7:30 PM Monday through Friday. Graffitti appeared. Drive by shootings started. A Mexican woman rented the house next door to mine and turned it into a daycare center from 5:30 AM to 6:30 PM M-F. It was decorated like a hovel in the outskirts of Tijuana. My evening walks had to be stopped as a group of gang bangers set up shop on my regular path.

My new location is about 5% hispanic. Mostly farm workers. There are a few gang bangers, but most of them try to hide out on the local Shoshone/Bannock reservation where the "wannabe" gang bangers idolize a genuine transplant from the Los Angeles gangs. The Mexican drug runners are well established in Ogden, Utah (about 150 miles south). They are the principal suppliers to the local drug dealers...most of whom are hispanic. Relocation only changed the percentage of the population, but not their behavior. Our local police department arrests lots of drug dealers. Most of them are illegal aliens from Mexico.

Moving 905 miles north just put me in a house 3x the size and escaped the endless drone of anti-gun bills. My cost of living is lower. I still have to wait for a seat at a decent restaurant if I go at 6 PM. We need more restaurants. The main road through town, Yellowstone Avenue, looks much like Mira Mesa Blvd from 5 to 7 PM. We've outgrown our street capacity. At least it isn't over my back fence.

[CowboyJay]

"Got any statistics on that point?"

About 20 million of them... and counting.

[CowboyJay]

"Sounds like a classic case of stupidity piled on stupidity. Do ranchers further north get into this sort of problem? If not, then perhaps it's better to move up north and worry more about your livestock than getting your pound of (human) flesh."

Purely yours, piled on top of a big fat heap of '60's liberalism and wrapped in a Libertarian tortilla.

Do you understand the concept of private property? The constitutional principle of providing for a common defense? Rule of law? Sovereignty?

[backhoe]

I have been psuedo-blogging, for years, a couple of the elements in WWIV ( III being the Cold War ), in which we find ourselves engaged.

The first element?

-Islam, a Religion of Peace®? Some links...--

The other, somewhat interlocking element is this one:

-Thunder on the Border-- (Minuteman Project)--

---

Not yet, but within an hour, I will update these collections of links with further links connecting these two seemingly disparate groups. Stay tuned.