CBF's immigration policy

[whottt]

Can the people who say this would be equivalent to slavery explain to me in what ways the former immigrants would be worse off than they are now, and how their current status is different from what I have described in any functional way?

Because then instead of being illegal aliens being discriminated against, they'd be US Citizens being discriminated against. That's a slippery slope.


That is exactly how slavery begain in the US CBF...it didn't start out as they were property, it started out as them working their way to land ownership and paying off the expense it took them to get here. And then it rapidly turned into something else.

You really can't base a citizens worth on their economic status...you can't just legally define it.


To flip this around...I'd say right now they aren't being discriminated against all, since they are illegally, or under a work agreement. So they are basicacally non citizens getting certain benefits, instead of citizens being denied them.

It may not seem like that much of a difference, but it really is more about what it does to us then what it does to them...



Slavery was a moral failure, not an economic one....and this would be starting down that same path. The status quo is better than different classes of citizens....


You are justifying lesser legal status based on economics...believe me, that's not something we have to be encouraged to attempt...it's something we have go guard against. Greed and using our fellowmen for our own net gain is not an alien idea to us...it's like about our second or third instinct. The system now is not really based on economics...but the rule of law.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

They already have that lesser status in the context of the businesses and households they work in today. And we do have individuals with higher legal status based on economics...it just isn't formalized in writing. Normal people without armies of lawyers are functionally lower level citizens compared to others with those powers.

And the immigrants would not be citizens.

It still wouldn't be slavery unless you just stick with the slippery slope thing, because we're not forcing them to come over here, and it would be put down in law that any children born here still get normal citizenship. It wouldn't be a self perpetuating slave class, every civilian would be 1st generation only.

[Wild Cobra]

I have a solution fo everyone who wants a legal means for the current illegal immigrants to work here.

Become a sponsor. Take that plunge and be responsible for them.

[whottt]

They already have that lesser status in the context of the businesses and households they work in today.

True...but no one is encouraging them to come here, they do so out of inherent economic inequality, the only way to change that situation is to make our economy suck as badly as theirs does. It's(the lure) not something we can eliminate...

And we do have individuals with higher legal status based on economics...it just isn't formalized in writing. Normal people without armies of lawyers are functionally lower level citizens compared to others with those powers.

Bingo...all sorts of stuff happens that isn't formalized in writing, that doesn't mean we should formalize it in writing.

I mean people discriminate based on race and gender as well...that doesn't mean we should formalize it in writing. It took us a long time to stop doing that....

The letter of the law needs to be blind even if the people aren't. The promise of equality for all citizens is the defining point of our cons ution. It took years to get the government to live up to the Cons utions promise of being blind...we need to keep moving forward on that, not stepping backwards.

And the immigrants would not be citizens.

They'd be some kind of probationary citizen.

It still wouldn't be slavery unless you just stick with the slippery slope thing, because we're not forcing them to come over here, and it would be put down in law that any children born here still get normal citizenship. It wouldn't be a self perpetuating slave class, every civilian would be 1st generation only.

A lot can happen to first generations...not only that but your plan would actually encourage more immigration, that would be second class citizens and the long term impact of that plan would be a huge second class citizen population...bitter ove their inequal treatment...the classic recipe for an eventual barbarian storming of the gate.


It's human nature to want more and to be dissatisfied with less.

[Anti.Hero]

I'd rather just wait until enough people get tired of standing in line behind them (illegals) in our hospitals, schools, etc and kick them the out.

Or getting murdered by them, but that's mainly in San Fransicko so that's okay for now.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

A lot can happen to first generations...not only that but your plan would actually encourage more immigration, that would be second class citizens and the long term impact of that plan would be a huge second class citizen population...bitter ove their inequal treatment...the classic recipe for an eventual barbarian storming of the gate.


It's human nature to want more and to be dissatisfied with less.

Niice. I'm glad you went there. So, are we to believe that "barbarians storming the gate" is something that is capable of being avoided, or can we view it as inevitable, and somehow twist it into a means to an end?

The early western Roman Empire "declined" because of barbarians storming the gate, but eventually, hundreds of years later, the barbarians pushed in as far as they could, and there was an equilibrium that was reached. Might that be the vision of a North American Union?

[whottt]

Niice. I'm glad you went there. So, are we to believe that "barbarians storming the gate" is something that is capable of being avoided, or can we view it as inevitable, and somehow twist it into a means to an end?

That economic end you'd be twisting it too would be null and void within a vew generations of granted citizenship.

IMHO, there's more than one way to storm a Democratic gate...you can do it with voting power too.

The biggest problem I have with the majority of Mexican(and Canadian) immigrants is that they are lefties.

I'd rather make Mexico more like the US politically than vice versa.


The problem with Mexico is it's government.


It's got a typical corrupt Spanish colonial government...aristrocracy never died.

The early western Roman Empire "declined" because of barbarians storming the gate, but eventually, hundreds of years later, the barbarians pushed in as far as they could, and there was an equilibrium that was reached. Might that be the vision of a North American Union?

I don't have any problem with barbarians per se, just depends on why they are storming the gate...they should at least try to storm Mexico's gate before doing it to the US.


No reason for Mexico to a be a poor country with such massive emmigration problems...absolutely no reason. It's their political system...

[Cant_Be_Faded]

That economic end you'd be twisting it too would be null and void within a vew generations of granted citizenship.

IMHO, there's more than one way to storm a Democratic gate...you can do it with voting power too.

The biggest problem I have with the majority of Mexican(and Canadian) immigrants is that they are lefties.

I'd rather make Mexico more like the US politically than vice versa.


The problem with Mexico is it's government.


It's got a typical corrupt Spanish colonial government...aristrocracy never died.




I don't have any problem with barbarians per se, just depends on why they are storming the gate...they should at least try to storm Mexico's gate before doing it to the US.


No reason for Mexico to a be a poor country with such massive emmigration problems...absolutely no reason. It's their political system...

I completely agree with the basis of what you're saying. If we could, I would naturally want to see Mexico reform, their standard of living rise, and watch the stream of immigrants subside.

But

It is difficult to believe, after all of American's actions, after american elites sticking their into other country's metaphorical asses and calling it freedom, after several CIA sponsored coups (both short and long lived) throughout the world, how and why would the US elite let Mexico go this far with such a backward, racist, corrupt government?

The writing for the immigration problem was on the wall before any of us were ever born. And nothing has been done. Nothing. Mexico is arguably the most racist country in the world, every single leader in its history has been Castillian, and the only rich Mestizos have been drug dealers.
How do we let this happen in our own backyard?

I am beginning to think its intentional, part of a bigger plan.

[whottt]

Mexico is arguably the most racist country in the world, every single leader in its history has been Castillian, and the only rich Mestizos have been drug dealers.

Bing ing go. It's Spain West... , Spain is actually less corrupt now.

How do we let this happen in our own backyard?

The same way we let it happen in most of the corrupt countries we are allies with. Because they are that way to begin with. Because these guys are so corrupt it's easy to get them to do what you want them to do so there's really no need to overthrow them. We act in our own best interest first just like every other country in the world...and when you have these corrupt countries lead by people only worried about their personal wealth, it's easy to get them to act in our best interest.

Mexico never screws with us so it's tough to justify doing anything over there. And I don't really think it's by design they are economically ed...it's typical of most Latin American countries, in fact their proximity to America has actually left them in a better position than most Latin American countries.


The thing is CBF...American Capitalism and what the rest of the world define as Capitalism are two very different things. The American form is much humane. It sounds silly but it really is.

Most of these countries embracing the evil of Socialism are doing so as a reaction to the evil of Capitalism. And I don't really blame them based on the form of Capitalism they have been exposed too...but that doesn't make Socialism a good alternative.

There is European "Capitalism", there is also European "Democracy", and it is not like American.

Big difference...this is the A#1 reason I rail on Europeans and Latin Americans coming onto this site thinking they are experts on us using their own experiences in their own countries. It's also why I rail on Americans that do it to sound intelligent, just because it's what European intellectuals do.

Big huge difference....and what's in Mexico is typical of most former Spanish colonies...in fact it's actually a lot better and more stable than what's in most of their former colonies, probably because of America. We alleviate a great deal of their citizens in poverty problem...we take care of more of it than they do.



Here's the problem though with immigration...

The Mestizos and Idigenous people of the Americas naturally embrace certain forms of wealth re-distribution..it's part of their culture, it has been since before they encountered the Europeans. And the way they practiced it made a lot of sense...And the European style leaders capitalize on that inclination...and instead of giving the Indigenous populations what their cultural memory tells them they are about get...they give them true Socialism European style...which is actually extreme Capitalism and class separation. The greatest on Earth.




But the bottom line is America has to accept people wanting to assimilate, that GET IT, not those that don't. ...


Immigrants are not the problem. Our immigrants are what has driven this countries success, in military, in athletics...they've come in waves from every country, they've made huge contributions, every wave.

The Mexican immigrants that truly want to be here are no different...but letting people come here without embracing the ideals of the Cons ution is the A#1 way to up this country....and make it's government like Mexicos. Because they'll elect those same types of idiots that are telling them what they want to hear over here, just like they do over there.



Mexico is very much a European construct....not an American...we have retooled most European ideals to where they are no longer attractive to Europeans...that's why we don't get along with them.

[Tully365]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican-American_War

The Mexican–American War was an armed military conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848 in the wake of the 1845 U.S. annexation of Texas. Mexico did not recognize the secession and subsequent military victory by Texas in 1836, and considered Texas a rebel province.
In the United States, the conflict is traditionally referred to simply as the Mexican War. In Mexico, terms for it include intervención norteamericana en México (North American intervention in Mexico), invasión estadounidense de México (U.S. invasion of Mexico), and guerra del 47 (war of '47).
In the United States, the war was a partisan issue. Most Whigs opposed it. Southern Democrats, animated by a popular belief in the Manifest Destiny, supported it. The regular U.S. army saw a 13% desertion rate (versus a 15% average annual rate in peacetime at the time[3]), the highest in U.S. history for a foreign war.[4] Anywhere up to 4,000 U.S. military members defected to the Mexican side.[4]
The most important consequence of the war for the United States was the Mexican Cession, in which the Mexican territories of Alta California and Santa Fé de Nuevo México were ceded to the United States under the terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. In Mexico, the enormous loss of territory following the war encouraged its government to enact policies to colonize its northern territories as a hedge against further losses.

While recently reading about this topic, I've come across opinions written at the time by Lincoln (before he was president) and Ulysess Grant (before his Civil war fame) in which they both state their opposition to the Mexican-American war, and if I remember correctly, Grant said something along the lines of being ashamed at having to be a part of it. It was essentially a land-grab at the time. The US had made an offer to buy land which was needed to complete the transcontinental railroad, and when Mexico said no, the US took the land by force. I'm not saying this to bash the US or hold Mexico up as a faultless country, but I do think that the history of that war is much more ingrained in the minds of Mexicans than it is in the minds of citizens of the USA.

It's remarkably similar to the S. Ossetia/Georgia/Russia situation right now, where Ossetia plays the part of Texas and wants to separate from Georgia, which like Mexico doesn't approve, and then the stronger country to the north, the US, sends in troops, just like Russia... funny how history repeats.

[whottt]

If you doubt Mexico is still very much a product of Colonial Spain...just take a look at the sanitation problems in Mexico.


The Aztecs, Incas and Olmecs were among the cleanest civilizations in the history of man...while the Spaniards were among the filthiest....that's why they got wiped out from disease.


The sanitation problems, in particular around Mexico city, making it arguably the filthiest city on Earth...came from Spain, that is not a remnant from the Aztecs.

Mexico is a European construct(and so is Canada)...I'd say American influence has been a positive on it, as it's not near as ed up as most of the other Latin American countries. But it is still a contsruct of Colonial Spain...as are it's people politically, as will be the majority of it's emmigrants, coming here. I'm not ready to let them make this country like Mexico...I want the ones that want to leave Mexico because they like the American way better...it is better. No free pass...the people becoming citizens here need to buy into the ideals...

[Nbadan]

What about the filthy parts of South and Central America which have had little European influence?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

The same way we let it happen in most of the corrupt countries we are allies with. Because they are that way to begin with. Because these guys are so corrupt it's easy to get them to do what you want them to do so there's really no need to overthrow them. We act in our own best interest first just like every other country in the world...and when you have these corrupt countries lead by people only worried about their personal wealth, it's easy to get them to act in our best interest.

But the writing was on the wall for the immigration problem since day 1, and allowing it to happen is against our interest. We have never had anything to fear from Mexico. We could have violently overthrown their leadership, told them to ing deal with it, and nothing would have happened.

The thing is CBF...American Capitalism and what the rest of the world define as Capitalism are two very different things. The American form is much humane. It sounds silly but it really is.

The Mestizos and Idigenous people of the Americas naturally embrace certain forms of wealth re-distribution..it's part of their culture, it has been since before they encountered the Europeans. And the way they practiced it made a lot of sense...And the European style leaders capitalize on that inclination...and instead of giving the Indigenous populations what their cultural memory tells them they are about get...they give them true Socialism European style...which is actually extreme Capitalism and class separation. The greatest on Earth.

I'm a little confused about what you mean here.

Mexico is very much a European construct...

Seems like it, but I can't help but be incredulous when we're the first truly global superpower in the history of mankind and we can't even find a way to calmly evoke true change in our own back yard.
Then, after playing deaf blind and dumb to the problem, we talk about merging with this country....there is a big piece to the puzzle the public is missing IMO.

Perhaps a neo-slavery is in the mind of the american elite.

[whottt]

What about the filthy parts of South and Central America which have had little European influence?

There aren't any.....unless you are talking about some of the primitive tribes of which there are few....and they still weren't as filthy as the Spaniards were.

[whottt]

But the writing was on the wall for the immigration problem since day 1, and allowing it to happen is against our interest. We have never had anything to fear from Mexico. We could have violently overthrown their leadership, told them to ing deal with it, and nothing would have happened.

They'd fight us if we did that... it was a enough to help Texas. Those people love their country.

At some point they're responsible for their own policies....since they aren't hostile to us, or anyone else, we don't have much ground for ing with them.

And like I said...their leaders are so corrupt, it's easily to capitalize on it...

You can't expect a country to look out for the best interests of another country just out sheer altruism, when even their own leaders don't do it.

I'm a little confused about what you mean here.

You ever notice the majority of people saying them they're savages on this forum are socialist leaning liberals? It's like that with Europe...Capitalism or Socialism...it's not like that to the same degree with American Capitalism. American Capitalism historically attempts not to where it eats, they don't pull the roots out and leave something to grow back. European Capitalism doesn't give a , it rapes...because after all, they are dumb savages....see every country in every region of the world that they have colonized for proof of this.


European Socialism is worse than European Colonial Capitalism...more power concentrated in the hands of fewer people.

Seems like it, but I can't help but be incredulous when we're the first truly global superpower in the history of mankind and we can't even find a way to calmly evoke true change in our own back yard.
Then, after playing deaf blind and dumb to the problem, we talk about merging with this country....there is a big piece to the puzzle the public is missing IMO.

Perhaps a neo-slavery is in the mind of the american elite.

Dude....we'd have liked nothing better than to have taken over Mexico at times...and Mexico would probably be better off for it, at the same time, I don't think it's as easy as it sounds.
The Mexicans will defend their country and land....just on principle.

As for formenting dissent from within...dude we try that everwhere and it never works...Europeans are good at selling their line of help the poor bull ....but it is extreme elitism.

[whottt]

I know it sounds like I have anti-European bias and to an extent I do, towards the colonial powers...but that's mainly because many Americans look to them as the example we should be following...when the reality is, we are hated largely for the deeds of Colonial Europe.


They mass exported racial and gender inequality during the colonial era...they exported it to the Americas, they exported it to Africa...and they did it so well that it is largely viewed to be product of the Idignenous American and African People....


It's not...it was legitimate export of Colonial Europe along with their farming and industry.


The idea of racism, judging intelligence by skin color(the darker you are, the dumber you are) was a European contruct...and especially gender inequality. European tradesmen used economic pressure to to get these people to marginalize their women...something made easy by the agriculture techniques they were giving them along with that mindset, that made it easy for the men to be the sole providers of food(the preferred trading agreement of Colonial Europe).


And the countries that were the colonial powers, have not changed virtually at all...no matter how good they talk the talk.


We do not need to be listening to them....I'm sorry but we don't, and the sooner people realize that their elitism isn't something that should make you want to emulate them, the better.



PS: Eurpeans view us as being savages just as they did the Native Americans and Africans...realize it people.