Illegal Immigration - ITT: We discuss Wall-Might

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Yet that concept is from 1600s and there were numerous land grabs since.

In fact, it's pretty rare to find a country that has had 100 years of unbroken sovereignity. There are a couple, but not that many. Besides breaks in sovereignity, territory has changed hands numerous times.

Besides, in some sense, that sovereignity is more illusory than reality. When the US needed their panama canal, they had no problem inventing a new country, panama, to get it. When US/EU wanted to expand it's sphere of influence, they had no problem helping a coup in Ukraine and as a response, Russia had no problem annexing Crimea to retain access to the black sea.

The EU and the US would have more than enough tools to seriously curb immigration if they wanted to. The point is that they don't want it. In the US neither neocons or democrats want to curb cheap labor/guaranteed voters. In the EU they need it to have voters that will offer less resistance against the forming of the EU state with army and all.

Sure. But then world war 1 happened. And the solution to that fiasco was to take the westphalian system and make it even more inflexible. Then world war 2 happened. At its core, World War 2 was a rebellion by revanchist powers that did not want to be constrained by a westphalian international order. They were defeated and the international order created at the end of World War 1 prevailed and is now the guiding authority to this day.

The fear both the EU and the US has is that to deal with the issue of illegal immigration from central america and the middle east would require undermining the very foundations of the international order we spent the entire bloody history of the 20th century to enforce. It's not a question of capability. The issue is the current ruling class is not far enough removed from world war 1 and world war 2 to make the break. Senior leaders are old enough to remember the wars and their deputies were trained by people of that same generation. They in turn are hiring new civil servants they feel best show the ability to enforce the world order they fought for.

History is...fluid...across the generations. Keep in mind the US department of Veterans Affairs was paying stipends to civil war widows until the early 2000s thanks to randy old goats marrying teenage girls in the early 20th century.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
The liberal elites lionize illegal immigration because they need a slave class. Illegal immigrants will inevitably form the backbone of that class.
Not only that but they are making the countries the illegals come from even worse by draining them of their most resourceful citizens. I also suspect they have a financial interest in smuggling them here-getting to the US isn't cheap so they have to work, no matter how awful the conditions may be, to make the loan and interest payments.
 
Mexicans should have the right to apply for asylum as refugees and be rejected when it comes out that they are economic migrants. The Central Americans from shitholes like Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, etc, should not even get to apply for asylum because they have already crossed at least 1 international border by the time they reach Mexico, and real refugees don't get to keep hopping international borders until they find a host country that gives them the best economic opportunity. International convention only obligates the first safe country to provide asylum for refugees, and everyone else down the line is off the hook when it comes to humanitarian responsibilities.

Even in the mega-cucked EU, they technically bar rapefugees from leaving Greece or Italy to get to the Northwestern European countries with better welfare systems.
 
If you want to have a robust social safety net, you have to choose who to exclude or else it's simply going to be overrun. It's one thing to want a welfare system for your own countrymen, but it's another thing entirely to believe we can support anyone who just walked in yesterday. You can have a welfare system or open borders, but not both. I'm highly skeptical of studies that claim migrants contribute more to the system than they take; I find it very hard to believe that someone who only recently arrived could possibly pay into the system enough to balance their drain on welfare, medical care, schools, etc. I suspect the think tanks that publish such studies carefully cherry pick data in order to push the lie that endless waves of migration are necessary to support the Western standard of living, when in fact the real motives are a desire to replace native populations, grow the consumer base, and import a willing serf class.
 
If you want to have a robust social safety net, you have to choose who to exclude or else it's simply going to be overrun. It's one thing to want a welfare system for your own countrymen, but it's another thing entirely to believe we can support anyone who just walked in yesterday. You can have a welfare system or open borders, but not both. I'm highly skeptical of studies that claim migrants contribute more to the system than they take; I find it very hard to believe that someone who only recently arrived could possibly pay into the system enough to balance their drain on welfare, medical care, schools, etc. I suspect the think tanks that publish such studies carefully cherry pick data in order to push the lie that endless waves of migration are necessary to support the Western standard of living, when in fact the real motives are a desire to replace native populations, grow the consumer base, and import a willing serf class.
I remember a good quote that walls are really built to protect the things you love inside. And walls in this case can mean both physical and judicial walls.

No love = no desire for walls.
 
So I am more neutral on the whole Illegal immigration thing then most center right people [and I am sick of it as a political/cultural problem]

The Wall at best slows the problem down.

# 1 Latin America is sending us our trash/using us as a pressure release valve (Europeans replace Latin America with Africa and the Middle East)

Beyond the fundamental cultural change/war aspects of that this means something much more serious

>The Status remains unchanged and by accepting the flood of illegal immigrants (and even encouraging it) we become complicit in the corruption and violence in those system that lead to civil unrest
> It leads to perpetuation of the status quo and corruption in our own labor markets

# 2 It stifles improvement in those countries and innovations [which american businesses are optimized to take advantage of] thus reducing potential economic growth
# 3 it created a (not entirely false) perception that the global economic and political system is rigged on both ends of the pipeline.
# 4 It allows countries to avoid quality of life investments (see point 1)
#5 Far to many people make money on the problem on both sides of the pipeline.

At best the Wall is a negotiation piece in a broader political conversation (Domestically and Internationally). So my question is how do we start the political conversation on the next steps after the wall (and the political challenges involved)
The only way to stop or reverse mass migration into white countries is make living conditions there so shitty that they rather flee back to place of origin.
 
If I'm going through the effort for a real Visa I think I deserve the right to unabashedly hate illegals. As soon as you realize why it's so hard to get a Visa then you realize how much illegals hurt the country.
Deport them as soon as they are known and get rid of birthright citizenship, please for the love of god. They need a good reason to not shoot right back across the border too.
 
Hundreds of people literally run across the border every day ... a physical barrier makes it much harder to 'make the dash' .

If you are neutral on the impact of unchecked immigration - move to Sweden, the per-capita rape and murder capitol of the European Union.
To be completely fair, Sweden is getting invaded by muslims. Mexicans are much more benign by comparison. Illegal immigrants are still bad news though.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole