Illegal immigrants release ‘Bill of Rights’ - Demand citizenship, birth certificates, medical care
Posted by ShrugInArgentina 9 years, 1 month ago to News
"An immigrant-rights group proposed a “Bill of Rights” for illegal immigrants Thursday, demanding that Americans recognize there are millions already in the country who deserve health care, in-state tuition rates for college and a guarantee of citizenship in the long term."
I want it for free, and I want to stay
Keep your dumb English, your rules and your law
While I skim off the benefits, stuff them into my maw
Gimme, gimme, gimme, I want it for free
Its good as long as you foot the whole bill for me.
We'll drain your economy (like blood sucking fleas)
for Ishmael, and Jorge, and little Feliz.
Gimme, gimme, gimme, I won't let you say no
then straight to gthe gub'mint, that's where we will go
We'll sell them our vote, under the table we'll serve
'cuz we gots no scruples, no morals, just nerve.
Gimme, Gomme, Gimme, we're having a ball
We'll vote in the libs and stop your damned wall
and when we succeed, and you've no more to give
we'll pack up our bags and find another place to live.
+10
Time to strike.
You do not have to presume anything about the moral character of the immigrants. If they are immigrants who are not expected to assimilate, they will bring their values with them, as this article clearly attests. Moreover, they will expect that you will at least tolerate, and more likely assimilate to, their values.
And did you not say, "Objectivists have mistakenly presumed that all immigrants are of noble character"? Again, what does this have to do with the existence of open borders?
Regarding the "noble character" argument, the general Objectivist presumption is that no one is allowed to restrict an immigrant from pursuing his/her self-interest. What if the immigrant's objectives are to destroy the host country's (and its citizens) rights? In the American Southwest, many illegal immigrants have openly stated their aims to make that part of Mexico. A number of Muslims have openly stated their desires to take over certain enclaves (Dearborn, MI; an area near Minneapolis, Toronto, London, much of France, etc.) in an effort to eventually convert those areas (and eventually more) into Sharia-compliant areas. If people with such objectives are not restricted from entry, then their values have indeed been condoned. Any country, by accepting entry of people who openly state goals that are contradictory to those of Objectivism, is participating in its own self-destruction and will not live for long. Nations, like individuals, must execute enough self-generated actions to sustain their own lives; however, unlike individuals, nations do not have nearly so many rights. They should only have the rights that individuals delegate to them.
If anything, the article that started this discussion should forever end the argument that illegal immigrants are "in the shadows". Those who are "in the shadows" do not make demands.
I enjoy customs from everywhere, but immigrants bring their non-Objectivist values with them. This includes immigration from the Northeast to Florida, for example. A relatively recent transplant from the Northeast got elected to county commissioner here in Florida ostensibly as a Republican (in name only) and immediately proposed a 6 cent per gallon gas tax to pay for road improvements. While that is a legitimate function of county government, it exemplifies how an open borders policy will only serve to ensure that there will be nowhere that is free from looters and moochers.
This is something, after all this discussion, everyone would honestly acknowledge.
The problem with today's immigrants is that the vast majority are illegal or asylum seekers. To jbrenner's point, they don't care one whit about becoming Americans!
Jan
To follow the conservative's marching band to the border, aimed at the immigrant rather than the real culprit behind their concerns, socialist progressive Democrats, is to follow the magician's stock in trade of 'watch my right hand while my left hand does the manipulation', or the pickpockets 'bump on your shoulder while their hands in your pocket'. This is why Rand said that Conservatives would destroy this country, and why the country has gone too far away from individual rights to ever get them back, without a major reset of some type.
We've reached the point of no use, in attempting to educate or illustrate the values of individual rights and liberty. It's time to just turn away and walk on.
You are quite right in that it is time to turn away and walk on. The cancer is beyond treatment.
If you really don't want the evil of illegal immigrants or wet backs or whatever else you think of them as, coming here and taking advantage of the socialism--get rid of the evil of progressive socialism and socialists. Don't fall for the conservative answer of eliminating just a little bit of individual liberty, just till they can figure out how to eliminate the socialism they secretly support. Tomorrow they'll need just a little more of everyone's liberty for just a little bit longer.
Nonetheless, your response regarding liberty is a correct one, as is your conclusion. Consequently, both of us have chosen to turn away and walk on. There is no point in further trying to change the system.
As an individual, I am unable to get rid of the evil of progressive socialism nor of any other ill in society, and if I were able to do so, Objectivism would correctly tell me that I should not intervene because it is none of my business.
The conservative approach is incorrect. While the Objectivist stance on this issue is correct, any liberty we have will only because we are surviving in isolation, rather than thriving. Very sad. In preserving our own liberty, we are getting a hollow victory indeed.
As to not intervening, you refuse to ever give the sanction of the victim and freely choose to associate with those that share your values. .
A policy of asylum or of a country granting rights to refugees is, by definition, altruism at the expense of its citizenry.
Irrational? Yes.
Wait - does that mean it is OK to assume a US "citizen" can be presumed to be of noble character and Objectivists values - or I am getting the wrong premise from that statement?
If your leg is caught in a bear trap, you don't wrap a bandage around all of it, hoping it will keep out infection. Your first action should be to remove the bear trap.
A moocher immigrant "problem" is a head fake followed by "fixes" that punch our liberty. More looters are hired to manage and implement an "immigration solution" that does not address the cause...and we still have our leg in the looter's bear trap, dying of infection.
None of your criticisms are the result of Objectivist-based policy.
As to the greater threat being moocher immigrants or looters in office, the two are highly intertwined and are symbiotic to each other while both being parasitic to us. The looter problem is fundamentally easier to eliminate through the voting process, but only if moochers do not have an opportunity to elect their looter benefactors.
The solution to the bear trap is ... to shrug and leave. This is why I spent time considering a physical Atlantis. However, given the predilection toward open borders amongst Gulchers, a physical Atlantis would soon devolve into yet another moocher/looter paradise.
The reason why a largely open borders policy worked in America up through WW2 is that it cost so much to come to America that the travel cost and distance formed a sufficient barrier to entry to moochers. With the advent of inexpensive transportation, this barrier is greatly lowered, only making the entitlement pie that much more enticing.
Even if the entitlement pie were eliminated entirely, an open borders policy will result in immigration without assimilation into a culture of value for value exchange. Galt's oath was the key assimilation requirement.
I understand some of your frustration. However, we've had looters in office draining the life from our freedom and rights much longer than any immigrant issues or demands. That's our clue.
In a company I worked for 15 years ago, I unsuccessfully argued against the cost of HR policies that duplicated everything in Spanish - documentation, signage, meetings, etc. I think it will take rational business leaders to help crack the 'politically correct' coddling that discourages the 'melting pot' we once had.
By committing perjury to obtain entry to the land she proclaimed as the only moral country in history, she lost credibility on the immigration issue and made a mockery of not just American immigration law, but all American laws and values. She did something that was counter to everything else that she claimed both she and America stood for.
http://www.vdare.com/posts/ed-meese-s...
Thanks Dog!
provided by someone else. It used not to be so
much the immigrants who did this (but then, I mean
when they were legal). But that whole notion goes
back as far as FDR, and further. So things just
get worse, and worse.
Don't blame the Nazi's it wasn't their decision to turn USA into USSA and start a Directorate of Internal State Security. That was a choice of the Government Party.
Now go vote for them again. Either one of their candidates for President will do the Rino version or the Dino version.
It's all left wing fascist socialism
Now we are in the right spot. Lakoff country!
Not sure why a comment aimed at the top keep threading under Mcnabs post..... supposed to be under Evito
Really?