We're Re-legalizing Slavery ( STTNG - "The Measure Of A Man" Euphemism Alert)

Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 06/07/2006 | Mary Beth White

[goldstategop]

One might say, and some have, that George W. Bush, with his compassion for the plight of illegal immigrants, can be compared to Abraham Lincoln of 1863, who bravely declared the emancipation of slaves of his time. If that were truly the case, then one must assume today's illegal immigrants are the modern version of the 19th century African slaves. In fact, each group is the exact antithesis of the other, and if one considers seriously, one recognizes that Abraham Lincoln and today's president are opposites as well. Contrary to Lincoln's actions, George W. Bush is flirting with returning this country to legal slavery.

In the early 1800s, America's South was made up mostly of small landowners who were able to provide for their families through family labor. Most did not own slaves. However, the very large plantations were the face of the South, and these plantations required intensive labor. They produced a multitude of crops that not only provided for those residing, but also offered goods to sell and trade. It was these farms that kept the slave trade system thriving.

When one reads about the slaves of the early 19th century, one is struck by the community that flourished among the displaced Africans and their descendents. These people had been viciously routed from their homes and brought overseas to be sold, legally, via contract or to the highest bidder. Their "wages" consisted of a roof over their heads, food to eat and clothes to keep them from being naked. Some were treated better then others, but their sole purpose was to provide cheap labor for the large plantation "businesses." Buying a slave proved expensive, and so on-farm "breeding" provided new, young hands to fill ever-increasing work for these businesses. The slaves were kept dependent upon their providers, as lack of education, skills and respect kept them "in their place."

(Column continues below)

On Jan. 1, 1863, Abraham Lincoln mounted his podium and announced that these oppressed people were to be endowed with freedom and respect, rights that are taken away from those who break the law. Although it would be decades before the society recognized what Lincoln knew to be true, a grave wrong was righted by a righteous man with a vision. Can we possibly say that about our president today?

Today, we have millions of people who were not whisked from their homes in the dark of night, shackled and brought to the country legally, but rather who chose to break the laws of this land to enter without so much as a wave to the legal immigration process. These people are still tied to their homeland, wherever that might be. They work for minimum wage or less and live and work under conditions of which America must be ashamed. In large part they are the poorest in this country. Enter George W. Bush with his "Emancipation Proclamation: Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill." What will change for these people? Let's see:

* They will work for minimum wage or a bit higher and will live and work under conditions of which America must be ashamed.

* They will be poor and uneducated, making them dependent upon the system that needs them for cheap labor.

* They will provide more cheap labor by bringing family from their respective countries and by raising families.

* They will remain tied to their homeland, continuing to embrace that culture because they will not have the education, the skills or society's respect due an immigrant who has followed the web of rules to achieve legality. They will "know their place."

* Their sole purpose for being in the U.S. will be to provide cheap labor for business – the Epsilons of our Brave New World.

The only thing that will change will be that these people will be legal. They will be legal slave labor. The saddest part is, once they become legal slaves, the businesses will hire more illegal labor to cut labor costs below even what legal slaves require. The laws in place now are not being enforced, so why would anyone assume they will be enforced after this so-called emancipation?

We keep hearing the charge that those opposed to the immigration bill in Congress have no solutions to offer. Well, here are some solution suggestions:

* Enforce the immigration laws, as they stand, on the illegal immigrants. Deportation of 12 million or so illegals might sound impossible, but law enforcement can start with one or two or 40. Remember how one eats an elephant? One bite at a time.

* Enforce the immigration laws as they stand, on the business owners. Create a database of all visas/green cards information and make that available online to all business owners for verification during the hiring process. But if an illegal is caught working in a business while holding false U.S. citizenship documentation, hold the illegal responsible and not the business.

* Build the fence that has already been approved and funded by Congress.

* Increase the numbers of visas available as employment needs arise. These increases would not be permanent but would be subject to scrutiny periodically.

* Make the pathway to citizenship for legal immigrants less difficult.

* Make English the official language, necessary for a smooth transition into society.

The president made an astounding statement on May 31. He said, "… you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all …" as if the comprehensive immigration bill will be the miraculous pill that cures the leprosy of illegal immigration. Far from it, this bill, though it shies from the word "amnesty" and centers around the virtue of "compassion," is nothing short of legalizing a system of slavery. It is as bad a practice of business today as it was in 1863. But above all else, it is wrong.

[goldstategop]

We fought at a terrible price to eradicate slavery. And now our bipartisan political class wants to reinstitute it with the euphemism its about amnesty. No - its about making the world safe for property. As Captain Picard realizes in his conversation with Guinan in the STTNG episode - "The Measure Of A Man" - even that is a euphemism. The truth is harsh - we'd be creating a race of disposable human beings in our country with no rights whatsoever. Its bad law and its wrong. Its wrong now as it was in 1863.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Darkwolf377]

So we're all against this bill because it's bad for the Mexicans?

Come on.

[South40]

One might say, and some have, that George W. Bush, with his compassion for the plight of illegal immigrants, can be compared to Abraham Lincoln of 1863, who bravely declared the emancipation of slaves of his time.

One might say that. But he'd have to be pretty stupid to believe it.

[goldstategop]

We're against this bill because its as assault upon human freedom - no man made be sold for the benefit of another. Today it could be Mexicans - tomorrow it could easily be you and me. That's why we need to throw down the gaunlet to Jorge W. and his fat cat friends. Cheap labor is just a form of slavery.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Darkwolf377]

Uh huh.

You can keep selling, but I ain't buyin'.

[Darkwolf377]

Oh, and you lose some of your credibility as someone who is so horrified by the treatment of these Mexican folks when you use the term “Jorge” as an insult.

[giotto]

The real slaves are the taxpayers who would be forced to pay for the cost of bringing in millions and millions of immigrants.

[sourcery]

So we're all against this bill because it's bad for the Mexicans?

We're against it because it's bad for us. Because we would have to pay the cost, as taxpayers, a net $21,000 per immigrant (government services less taxes collected.)

And we're against it in spite of the fact that cheap immigrant labor lowers the employment costs of many businesses, and so lowers the costs of the products produced by those businesses. Illegal immigration also lowers our own wages. Who needs that?

We're against it because we don't want to create a new peasant underclass in this country, nor import one from any other country. We've already seen what happens eventually when there's an underclass whose sole raison d'etre is cheap labor. That must never be allowed to happen again in this country.

We're against it because today's illegal immigrants are not just failing to integrate into our society, into our culture, and into our language--they're militantly opposed to doing so.

And finally, we're against it because illegal immigrants from south of the border often believe that this country, or large parts of it, rightfully belong to them, and are brazenly coming here to reclaim what they believe belongs to them (a notion that is not only false, and not only disputed by Americans of European descent, but also disupted by the native Amerindians, such as the Navajo, Sioux and Cherokee.)

[Darkwolf377]

Very well said.

Sorry, but I couldn't give a damn about these people who are sneaking into the country illegally, who don't care enough about their own people who are coming in legally to respect the process, and who are costing us in so many ways.

BTW, did anyone else catch the hilarious spin on some illegal immigration data that came out that showed "$40 billion" in income added to the economy by illegals, with $60 billion supposedly in costs? Now, I ain't no mathematician, but even in this liberal spin, that looks like a $20 billion LOSS to our economy.

So how does the Globe headline this?

"Economic Gains, Losses from Immigrants"

[alexander_busek]

>>So we’re all against this bill because it’s bad for the Mexicans?<<

Actually, for SOME people, slavery would be an improvement.

For those unable to responsibly care for themselves, to manage their lives, the imposition of a “master” (i.e. “caretaker”) might be a good idea.

[devolve]

[Soul Seeker]

I’ve been making this argument for a couple of years. And people can track back through my posts if they don’t believe this has been a consideration for some of us for quite awhile.

It’s not the only consideration, because this is one of the few bills that can be opposed on just about any ground. Security, economics, political...you name it. That’s why so many people across party lines that don’t agree on much are united against this. There’s something that stinks about this for everyone.

As for the proposition itself, Call it slavery, call them indentured servants, in the end it’s the same. Wrong. And it’s as repugnant to me on a moral level as my posts will attest to, as it is on any other ground.

[Eastbound]

"The real slaves are the taxpayers who would be forced to pay for the cost of bringing in millions and millions of immigrants."

a 'tufer.' Except it would be creating two classes of slaves for the price of nothing. The higher class slave paying for the health and welfare of the lower class slave.

Yesteryear's plantation owners would be green with envy, especially with them having to pay for their own enforcers and not having the gummint to control both classes and having the military to keep them all in the cotton fields and off the battlefields.

[Eastbound]

and having = or having

[MNJohnnie]

This is a totally absurd argument.

To compare people who come here willingly to work with Africans kidnapped, treated with abdominal cruelty and forced to labor their whole lives under terrible conditions is just nonsense.

I am going to point something out here that none of you are going to want to hear. The simply fact is we have had these arguments before.

If you are really interested in an honest historical comparison instead of one that merely fits your political opinions, read about the Know Nothings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know-Nothing_movement

Some of the arguments being thrown around here today are almost word for word repeats of the same arguments the Know Nothings made against the Irish and the German immigrants in the 1840s.

These are the arguments where you lose me. I can agree with the arguments that base themselves on the idea that this is an overly bureaucratic, unworkable bill. That adding another layer of bureaucracy is a mistake. However. some of the other arguments being put forward are pure emotion based rantings with utterly NO basis in any factual reality. The argument that the immigrants will some how “destroy the Republic” or “Demographics are fate” are pure nativist rantings.

There is utterly no evidence that Hispanic Immigrants will do any such thing. Anymore then the Germans, the Jews, the Irish, the Blacks, the Chinese, the Japanese et al did. So if you want to argue this issue, I suggest you all stick to the economic or small Govt argument and leave the rest out of it. But when you start arguing that the Hispanics are the “Wrong sort of Immigrants”, you lose.

Every immigrant group has it share of problem children. But we have gangs and thugs that are native born Americans too. Most of the Hispanics I meet, or served with in the US Military, are descent hard working respectable people.

So if you all want to win this argument, I suggest you leave the more emotional, over blown rhetoric behind and concentrate on making a calm rational factual argument. Too many of the people who you need to convince own ancestors faced the same sort of Nativist opposition when then came to this country to be convinced by these sorts of Nativist arguments.

So if you want to argue this issue and win, argue it on the merits NOT on some hysteric nonsense about “the Mexicans are coming, the Mexicans are coming”.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Just say NO to Amnesty!! Before it’s too late!!

U.S. Senate switchboard: (202) 224-3121

U.S. House switchboard: (202) 225-3121

White House comments: (202) 456-1111

Find your House Rep.: http://www.house.gov/writerep

Find your US Senators: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

[Paisan]

Actually, for SOME people, slavery would be an improvement

This is a subject that is rarely touched upon. As despicable as American slavery was, slaves enjoyed a commodity that very few of us can realize - security. Slave holders were obligated, by virtue of their financial outlays, to provide their slaves with food, clothing, shelter, medical care and employment. Suddenly freed, they lost the SECURITY of this arrangement. And it seems that many of them and their descendants would like the government to continue this arrangement - and the government DOES.
The first time the government provides free medical care to an illegal, the word is passed south, the floodgates open wide and we get the bill. Anyone here concerned about the high cost of medical care in this country? And that’s just the start...

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

Your attempt to breezily dismiss concerns about assimilation by making comparisons to Irish, German, etc. are invalid.

There is no historical comparison of the United States taking such a huge bloc of immigrants from a contiguous country, and who are most thickly settled in the region bordering that country.

There are serious concerns in the current circumstances because of the enormous number of people coming in, of assimilation and potential balkanization such that we have never faced in the history of our republic.

And of course, with the Irish, Germans, etc. we did not have our current welfare state in place.

[calex59]

* Enforce the immigration laws as they stand, on the business owners. Create a database of all visas/green cards information and make that available online to all business owners for verification during the hiring process. But if an illegal is caught working in a business while holding false U.S. citizenship documentation, hold the illegal responsible and not the business.

This is BS here. The methods to check out fake IDs are already in place and are supposed to be used by employers to vet and employee. If they don't do it they are as complicit as the illegal using fake ID. Put the POS in jail and give them the maximum fine and people will stop hiring illegals, with or without fake ID. The illegals will then start to deport themselves especially if we couple this with taking away welfare, ER services etc. from the illegals and mounting a vigorous deportation campaign.

It isn't about feeling bad for the illegals(they chose to break the law after all)but about saving this country from becoming a third world sh** hole.

[RipSawyer]

For those unable to responsibly care for themselves, to manage their lives, the imposition of a “master” (i.e. “caretaker”) might be a good idea.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sad, sad, sad, but true for some, without a doubt.