Diving even deeper into the tank for mindless, globalist utopianism, putting up this load of drivel by one Allan Bourdius:
I’ve got a challenge for you.
“Try to read through the following incandescent bullshit without throwing up.”
Challenge accepted. Reluctantly.
Try to imagine: you and your family are living somewhere the rest of humanity seems to have forgotten. You have no economic prospects, your children can’t get an education, your government controls your entire existence, you either have no private property or your property is valueless, basic living costs can’t be met, and you can’t even get the most basic of items for survival, like clean drinking water. And no, you are not a resident of Flint, Michigan.
Haha. He made a funny. How cute.
Then add in – as is true in many circumstances – you live under the daily threat of death from war, terrorism, sectarian violence, criminal gangs, or subjugation by tyrants who use things like food and water as their means of coercion.
That’s it? No alien invasion? No imminent destruction by the Sweet Meteor of Death? No Hillary Clinton cackles on endless loop?
Ha. Too easy.
Unless you’ve lived it, or seen it with your own eyes, it’s an existence nearly impossible for the average American to envision. What passes for poverty in the United States is a life the impoverished in the rest of the world would see as great comfort. But please try, and then ask yourself this question:
What price or risk of consequence would I not endure to escape a hellish existence and have a better life?
Can’t say. But we can say, based on simple observation of current events, what price the “impoverished in the rest of the world” absolutely won’t endure, and that’s the price of staying at home to get rid of the causes of their misery and build a better future for themselves.
They’d much rather grab their iPhones, Nike Airs and designer sweatshirts and boogie off to Cologne for some impromptu, non-consensual, one-sided “cultural enrichment” with a nice dessert of free bennies, food, medical care and housing.
It’s a simple cost/benefit proposition. If death—or conditions ultimately leading to death—is your daily life, what wouldn’t you risk to have a chance at life?
Not much, but that’s just us. As far as the poor rapefugees are concerned, they’re not quite prepared to risk bugger all.
It’s very easy for us, as people with roofs over our heads, food to eat, water to drink, medicine to cure treatable medical conditions, our children not being impressed into combat service by tyrants, etc. to say, “I’d want to migrate elsewhere and build a better life, but I’d obey the law.”
As somebody who migrated somewhere else to build a better life and obeyed the law to the letter every single step of the way, we’d say “yes, pretty damn easy.” And your point?
Immigration and refugee policy are on the campaign battle lines. Yes, the economic and homeland security policy concerns being raised are serious and must be paid close, considered attention, but…
…you’ll proceed to not pay any attention to that at all. How sweet. A but-monkey. Haven’t seen those around much since the first few years after 9/11.
but the default is to let rhetoric and impractical, pandering solutions that merely try to placate the extreme opposites of opinion trump discussion of what practically can be done to both address the current situation and address the conditions that produce illegal immigration and mass migration.
You, of course, being the final arbiter about what “can be done” and what can’t be done.
It will come as a huge surprise to us all when “what can be done” turns out to be in perfect alignment with what you want to be done, we’re sure.
There are two things I see missing from the discourse on these topics.
The first is reason.
Sayeth the bloviating but-monkey who just opened out with the most cloying and sickening outburst of emotional balderdash we’ve read since… well… forever.
Logically there is no law, no wall, no enforcement effort, no penalty (even death) that will ever outweigh the desire and drive of the impoverished and persecuted to get to the United States or anywhere that offers them a better existence. So long as living conditions elsewhere exceed those where one is, people will come by whatever means they can grasp at, regardless of consequences.
Oh, they’ll keep on wanting to come, but the actual coming is highly dependent upon the kind of, ahem, “welcome” they learn to expect when they come a-knocking, suicide vest and koran in hand.
Want to end illegal immigration once and for all? Destroy our own existence, our own prosperity, our own safety, such that life in the United States is worse than the proverbial hell holes illegal immigrants and refugees currently live in. Do that, and the world will stay home. If you look at life in America versus elsewhere logically, I think you’ll come to the same conclusion.
No. You don’t think. That’s the whole problem.
If you truly believe that liberty is the way, how can you concede that “immigrants” and “refugees” that come here can’t be won by a message of free enterprise, self reliance, personal responsibility, and individual achievement? Unless liberty is a false premise, it is a message that applies to all, regardless of race, nationality, religion, etc.
That’s what passes for “reason” in your head?
No, Allan. Liberty is not a magical potion that just springs into existence at the merest mention of it. Liberty is something that has to come as a desire from within, coupled with the courage, determination and utter disregard for consequences necessary to establish it first and defend it second. Liberty is the end result of a struggle to achieve it, it’s not a magical concept that springs into existence because you click your heels and say the word three times, it’s not an infectious condition that takes over any organism it comes into contact with.
And if you look at the current reality in Europe logically, I think you’ll come to the same conclusion.
Why do so many circumvent our laws to enter? Because their circumstances demand that they can’t wait. Fix the legal immigration system first, and you will necessarily reduce the number of people who will try to enter illegally.
And while we’re at it, let’s legalize rape and watch rape statistics plummet. Why didn’t anybody think of this before???
Border security is important, but a line-in-the-sand of “close the border first” is exactly the position progressives want us to have. They’ll defeat it in the court of public opinion, every time. Outflank them. Change the rules of the game.
You’re not talking about changing the rules of the game. You’re talking about changing the desired outcome. To match the Prozis’ preferred outcome. That way we can’t lose!
People are going to leave places where they are subjugated for greener pastures, period. We will not stop them.
YOU obviously won’t.
The rest of us? Oh, we’ll stop them alright. If we want to. There are many, many ways of stopping somebody. A wall is just the most humane way.
The real question is what we do about them when they get here, or other prosperous places like Western Europe, because they will.
No they won’t. Unless we let them.
Efforts to stop them will never exceed the will to pursue freedom, and why would we want them to?
It would seem to us that it didn’t take too much of an effort on the part of the rulers of their home countries to “exceed the will to pursue freedom”, so what makes you think it won’t work here?
No, we don’t want them to stop “pursuing freedom”, if that is what they’re doing, and nothing in their behavior elsewhere indicates that that’s what they’re after, we just want them to pursue it where they are, rather than them coming here and taking ours away. After they’ve pulled us down into the mud with them.
And pursuing it where they are is, indeed, possible.
The Founding Fathers of a country with which you ought to be familiar did just that.
They didn’t run off to Switzerland.