My name is Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, a.k.a. PEG, I'm a Paris-based entrepreneur and the curator of the Paris [Startup Digest].
Posted on 08/24/2015 4:18:22 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Conservatives usually believe in American exceptionalism, and in upholding the Constitution. Which is why it's strange to see so much conservative ebullience over Donald Trump's proposal to end birthright citizenship.
It's not news that there are a significant number of Americans who are anxious about immigration — illegal and otherwise — and that they exert considerable political clout (though ultimately less than is sometimes breathlessly suggested). And many of those people fret about so-called "anchor babies." The problem with "anchor babies" is that they're a myth. (Trust me. As a Frenchman with a fertile wife who often wanted to emigrate to the U.S., I did the research.)
This fight therefore nicely serves to highlight the fact that most (though not all) fears related to immigration belong more to the realm of fantasy than reality.
But it also illustrates something else: how the restrictionist position is all too often born of a lack of confidence in the American project.
After all, the two are inseparable. Birthright citizenship says, quite explicitly, "The American project is so strong, our culture is so strong, our values are so strong, that any baby born on our soil, no matter where his parents come from, will ultimately grow up to be a well-adjusted American, so that we don't need to wait for him to prove himself to extend citizenship."
Which, again, goes to highlight the tension between extreme restrictionism in immigration and conservative values. Conservatives typically display above average, not below average, confidence in the American project and in the capacity of judicious applications of American patriotism to solve problems.
There's another funny intersection between birthright citizenship and the conservative worldview, and I have an unusual window into it. As I said, I'm a Frenchman. France and the United States are unusual in both being nations explicitly founded (or refounded) on Enlightenment values. And one trait they share is that they both instituted birthright citizenship.
One reason was the Enlightenment-driven belief, over and against the feudalism that prevailed in most places in Europe, that citizenship depended on a social contract, not a bloodline, and that your parentage should not therefore change your citizenship status.
But there was another reason (and here lies an entire critique of the Enlightenment, which is a whole 'nother can of worms), a reason we're not too comfortable with today: empire. The institution of birthright citizenship in France was enacted by France's revolutionary government and ratified by Napoleon's civil code, partly so citizens could be pressed into duty in the army. As France expanded, so did its citizenship rolls, as did its citizen army, as did its military might, all in a virtuous cycle (virtuous, at least, from Napoleon's perspective).
The U.S. enacted birthright citizenship for different reasons, to ensure the citizenship of freed slaves after the Civil War. But the point is that birthright citizenship is historically associated with confidence in the national project, perhaps even supreme confidence.
Oh, and how did it do in France? Well, we got scared of immigrants, so we got rid of birthright citizenship piecemeal over the past few decades.
So here's the other odd thing about the birthright citizenship debate: American conservatives saying they want to be more like France. Kudos!
America needs birthright citizenship like I need hemmorhoids
We are killing off our babies at the hands of the butchers at PP, and advocating for anchor babies. What’s wrong with this picture?
America does NOT need birthright citizenship of children of illegal immigrants.
Just muddying the water. We don’t want to get rid of birth-right citizenship, we want to give it to the children of people here legally.
Saying that the parents have to be here legally is really a pretty low bar. There are lots of ways to be here legally. But if you sneaked across the fence, that isn’t one of them.
Pascal-Emmanuel was a senior research analyst for Business Insider Intelligence.He's a freakin' Frenchman!He is also a business and economics columnist at Atlantico, a lecturer at HEC Paris business school and a mentor at startup accelerator programs SeedCamp and Le Camping.
Prior to BI Intelligence he was a reporter at SAI, Business Insider's internet page. His writing has appeared in The Atlantic, Forbes, The Daily, Le Figaro, Rue89, techPresident, The American Scene and even Fashionista.
In a previous life, he co-founded a venture-backed consumer web startup. He has an MSc in management from HEC Paris. He lives in Paris with his beloved wife and daughter.
Does France have "birthright citizenship?"
Maybe it does. It also has "no go zones" in cities and suburbs all over the country.
Some say that if they want Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry’s opinion, they’ll beat it out of him with a nail-studded baseball bat.
If anchor babies are a myth, then why were we talking about “separating families” a couple years ago? Are Mexican adults stealing American children and raising them? Are they adopting American children? If anchor babies are a myth, then deportation will not separate any families.
I think that we should discriminate between “anchor babies”, which are presumably from parents who entered the country without following legal procedures and those babies born to legal immigrants.
I realize that the current regime bends rules to the extent that this would not be enough of a distinction. However, this is probably the most reasonable cut.
If Birth right citizenship is so great why is it that none of the other countries have it? Hmmmmm?
As I said, I'm a Frenchman.That says it all. Say no more.
>>So here’s the other odd thing about the birthright citizenship debate: American conservatives saying they want to be more like France. Kudos!
Not everything about France is bad. We just don’t like the Cheese-eating Surrender Monkey part, which is the part that our Progressives want us to emulate. The Conservatives want to emulate France’s proud nationalism.
Can I go to Mexico and get welfare, healthcare, and food stamps, etc.
You made that up, Pascal. No one else ever thought that.
Bullshit story.We have not had a hold on immigration since the early 30s(IIRC).It was in place so as to assimilate the last batch into becoming Americans but no more.We are losing our country more and more everyday.This needs to stop now.Send them all back.Every last one of them.
The Week another DC left wing rag not suitable as toilet paper at a biker bar .
He’s also about 26 years old.
IIRC, the number of anchor babies is around 400,000 per year. That does become a major problem when ‘chain migration’ is also an extention of it. Then you get both grannies and gramps and uncles and aunts and cousins coming in.
That seems to average out at about 12 to 20 additional. Many of those get free healthcare, welfare, social services and education.
Yeah, it becomes a problem real quickly — because the rest of us are paying for it/them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.