,
15 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Many intractable political debates come down to a core question that shapes all other arguments. For abortion, the question is obvious: Is the baby human? For immigration, the question is rarely asked openly: Do Americans have the right to control who enters their country?
That IS the question underlying all other aspects of the immigration debate. If Americans do not have the moral right to control their borders, then immigration laws are oppressive and should be ignored and undermined.
There are many influential political actors seriously arguing right now that the poem written on the Statue of Liberty nullifies the laws duly passed by the constitutionally elected representatives of the American people.
We've had judicial rulings conjuring a "right to immigrate" that nullifies lawful immigration restrictions. The insipid "America is a nation of immigrants" canard is an explicit assertion that we have no moral right to control our borders.
We are told that effectively enforcing immigration laws is immoral, on par with the horrors of a fascist state. This is effectively an argument that the laws themselves are immoral - or, to get to the heart of the matter, that Americans had no moral standing to write them.
Savaging the people who are working hard to protect the border and cope with a tidal wave of migrants inverts the morality of citizenship: they were "right" to rush the border, we were "wrong" to stop them, and we are liable for ALL of the humanitarian consequences.
The Democrat Party wants to take this argument even further, insisting we are obliged to provide extensive benefits for literally the entire world. We are told there is no valid moral argument for refusing to provide these benefits to everyone who makes it across the border.
And yet, the people are never honestly, clearly asked the core question at the heart of this argument: Do you believe American citizens have the right to control who enters the United States?
If that question were asked honestly, the answer from the people would be a resounding "yes," far into supermajority territory. Many would laugh at the absurdity of the question. (Do not underestimate the size of the minority that would say "no," however.)
The political and media elite proceeds as if the answer is self-evidently, "No, the American people have no moral standing to control their own border." They consider themselves vastly superior for holding this belief.
In fact, for the elite, the American people so clearly lack the moral standing to control their own border that lying to them about immigration and undermining the laws they pass is fully justified. Lies and subterfuge are little sins forgiven in the name of the greater crusade.
Illegal immigrants and their advocates are fully relieved of moral responsibility for their actions. They are credited with no agency whatsoever. Even when they commit other crimes, the fundamental immorality of the immigration laws they had to violate excuses them from guilt.
This leaves us with the bizarre spectacle of open-borders advocates fuming with righteous outrage at the notion of applying reasonable standards for prospective immigrants, from screening for welfare dependency to even checking their health and criminal backgrounds.
Bad faith is assumed for every effort to set logical standards for immigration and enforce the law against violators. Legal citizens acting lawfully are treated as if THEY were the criminals, presumed guilty unless they meet impossible standards to prove they aren't evil.
And it all goes back to that basic question, the one we will never be asked honestly because some very powerful, very selfish political and business interests know what our answer would be. /end
