Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-27-2005, 09:16 AM   #1 (permalink)
zen_tom
Guest
 
Immigration as Nature's Leveller?

Reading this story from the BBC:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC News
Hundreds of immigrants have tried to break through the border fences around the Spanish enclave of Melilla in North Africa, police sources say.

At least 18 people - both police and immigrants - were injured.

About 100 people managed to break through into Spanish territory, where they are being questioned.

Melilla and nearby Ceuta are seen as stepping stones to Europe by African immigrants. Spain is doubling the height of the fences around Melilla.

Three immigrants have died since August trying to enter Melilla...snip
So people are risking life and limb to get into Europe (or out of Africa) and I suppose they may also be doing the same thing over the Mexican border into the US, and over countless other borders between rich nations and poor ones.

Water flows from high ground to low ground, and people, it seems, flow from areas of less development into areas of more development. Is it possible to stop, or is it a powerful natural phenomenon like Niagara Falls, or New Orleans?

If it is possible to stop then how? And would it be economically feasible?

And if it's not possible/feasible, then how can we best secure ourselves against future problems?

Well, assuming the analogy of water flowing from higher, to lower ground, we can either make ourselves poorer, thus making our countries less attractive to outsiders, or we can help to develop and enrichen those other countries, in order to raise the standards of living to a point where people are no longer willing to risk their lives in hopping the border.

So my summary points are: Aren't massed illegal immigration attempts like this symptomatic of the depth of inequality between the countries of the world, and is it not in the West's interests to ease the disparity? Failure to do so will mean building higher walls, and employing more heavily armed guards along our borders in order to keep the desperate foreigners off our lands.

Is that how we want to live?

Last edited by zen_tom; 09-27-2005 at 09:59 AM..
 
Old 09-27-2005, 10:35 AM   #2 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
I think, unfortunately, that the answer for many is to just build higher walls and have better armed guards.

I think the real lasting answer is a combination of better development abroad and tighter security and better immigration laws at home.

A couple things to think about:

1) if we should share in the development of underdeveloped nations, what form should this take? (i.e. cash will likely just find its way into corrupt pockets)
2) there are already many multinationals on the ground in underdeveloped nations. These nations provide cheap labour to support our high rate of consumption.
3) what would it take to make us poorer? ( by this what I really mean is what would it take for us to consume less?)
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 09-27-2005, 11:36 AM   #3 (permalink)
whosoever
 
martinguerre's Avatar
 
Location: New England
zen, i think you have a point. immigration is kind of the equivalent of the ultimate free trade zone. in the end, it's much to our benifit to promote economic development in other areas. worldwide development means more opportunity to trade...and that labor wouldn't have as much incentive to cross political boundaries.
__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.

-John 3:16
martinguerre is offline  
Old 09-27-2005, 01:50 PM   #4 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Bigger fences and more guards...sounds about right.

If people want to enter another country permenantly, there are laws for immigrating. It isn't our job to develop other nations. If people envy the US, or EU nations, they should work in their countries to implement gov'ts that mirror the US or EU, and put in policies that will naturally allow for growth.
alansmithee is offline  
Old 09-27-2005, 01:50 PM   #5 (permalink)
Junkie
 
hannukah harry's Avatar
 
i really see only two ways to stop illegal immigration (in a way that oddly parellels terrorism). first, you can give armed border gaurds the authority to 'shoot to kill' people illegally entering the country, which would be a more short term method and long term you would need to help build up the economy and development of their home countries so they'd no longer want to illegally enter our country.
__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer
hannukah harry is offline  
Old 09-27-2005, 01:59 PM   #6 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by hannukah harry
i really see only two ways to stop illegal immigration (in a way that oddly parellels terrorism). first, you can give armed border gaurds the authority to 'shoot to kill' people illegally entering the country, which would be a more short term method and long term you would need to help build up the economy and development of their home countries so they'd no longer want to illegally enter our country.
Wow I agree with hannukah for once... shoot to kill is a bit extreme... prison or some form of true punishment would be more humane.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 09-27-2005, 02:16 PM   #7 (permalink)
zen_tom
Guest
 
Quote:
It isn't our job to develop other nations. If people envy the US, or EU nations, they should work in their countries to implement gov'ts that mirror the US or EU, and put in policies that will naturally allow for growth.
No, it's certainly not our job, but I'm saying that it might be in our best interests.

And martinguerre makes a great point, allowing free immigration is an extension of pure capitalism and the ideals of free trade. Everyone out for themselves right? If we believe in the capitalist system, shouldn't we allow everyone, all round the world to believe in it too?

In some ways, employing government sponsored guards and immigration controls is an acceptance of the authority of, and a call for, big government, as well as an admission that capitalism, the free market, and opportunity for all is not the answer.

Yes, people from other countries might be better off if they adopted more western systems of government, but how can we expect them to do so, if we refuse to stick to the ideals we pretend to hold so dearly?

Capitalism is a very Darwinistic way of running a country, and as such is an efficient one because it mirrors the natural world in which we live. All I'm doing is pointing out one of the inconsistencies that governments in the west, who purport to believe in the capitalist ideal are failing to recognise. i.e. If you choose to believe in every man for himself, then you must also expect people from different countries to hold those ideals true themselves, and do their utmost to put themselves in a position where they can benefit from those idealistic, and individualistic ideals themselves.

So, yes, we can choose to build higher walls, and adopt "shoot to kill policies", but in doing so, aren't we admitting the failure of our ideals?
 
Old 09-27-2005, 02:21 PM   #8 (permalink)
zen_tom
Guest
 
As an aside, I might be wrong, but I think Hannukah Harry was simply putting my original post into different words - I agree with him whole heartedly, in his analysis in terms of dispassionate short-term vs long-term solutions.

Which is likely to be more effective I wonder?
 
Old 09-27-2005, 03:56 PM   #9 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by zen_tom
Capitalism is a very Darwinistic way of running a country, and as such is an efficient one because it mirrors the natural world in which we live. All I'm doing is pointing out one of the inconsistencies that governments in the west, who purport to believe in the capitalist ideal are failing to recognise. i.e. If you choose to believe in every man for himself, then you must also expect people from different countries to hold those ideals true themselves, and do their utmost to put themselves in a position where they can benefit from those idealistic, and individualistic ideals themselves.
The problem as I see it is that the E.U. and the U.S. are not true capitalistic countries. Both offer a variety of social programs to their citizens (Europe more than the U.S. of course).

I think allowing more immigration would be a good thing if we limited the amount of social benefits available to new residents. Say something like a 10 year waiting period before eligibility.

The U.S. is a nation of immigrants and most of our families have only been here for a few generations. However when most of our families came here there was no social safety net.

I have no idea how to encourage the less developed countries to adopt more robust economies, but I will say that the engineers and craftsmen that I have worked with in Mexico over the years have been very intelligent and hard working people.
flstf is offline  
Old 09-27-2005, 04:57 PM   #10 (permalink)
Junkie
 
hannukah harry's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zen_tom
As an aside, I might be wrong, but I think Hannukah Harry was simply putting my original post into different words - I agree with him whole heartedly, in his analysis in terms of dispassionate short-term vs long-term solutions.

Which is likely to be more effective I wonder?
i don't think i was intending to put your OP in different words, but that may be how it turned out. i just think that if we don't want it to be happening, in the short term we have to take drastic measures (kill on site, i think something like saying we're going to imprison them might not be believed, or be believed by many to be a better deal than living in their home countries, and then we still still have to pay for incarcerating them) and work on long term solutions that make their homes as attractive to them as ours are. so i guess we're probably just in agreement then.

btw, i don't think that we should be doing this, it's just the only real solutions i see to the problem.
__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer
hannukah harry is offline  
Old 09-28-2005, 08:22 PM   #11 (permalink)
2+2=5? Not again!
 
MichaelFarker's Avatar
 
Location: Dallas, Texas
Governments, like that of the US, are inefficient in providing long-term aid.

The other killer problem is the complexity of the situations in the poor countries. Many African nations and people groups will continue to suffer horrible poverty as long as members of different tribes keep murdering each other. Also, anywhere there are disease epidemics like AIDS people are going to have serious difficulty trying to change their lives. Jumping onto the industrialization bandwagon is harder and more expensive the later you do it, so it may not be possible to industrialize a lot more nations without significant improvements in pure science. (Pure science leading to radical paradigm shifts, I mean.) As a final example, how do you prevent the humiliation and loss of dignity inherent in being helped (or ignored) by a much more prosperous nation?

I don't think immigration itself is the problem. Dieing to try for a small chance at a better life is much better than watching your family starve because your people group's enemies are hording all the food. Trying to stop immigration is futile and unhealthy. You could briefly stop it by positioning real military units on your own boarders, but the problems with that range from moral (murdering helpless people as they try to cross) to practical (over time the soldiers would become ineffective, disatisfied, maybe compromised).

The US economy benefits from immigration so we would be hurting ourselves anyway. Probably the best way for the US government to help potential immigrants is to allow a lot more into the country. Short of a series of natural disasters, that would help our economy by increasing the number of consumers, improving our pool of ideas, and giving us a steady stream of cheap, hardworking labor.

You suggest fixing the problems in poor countries. Private organizations do it better than governments. If every US citizen gave a small fraction of their money to an effective relief and construction organization things would actually get better.
MichaelFarker is offline  
 

Tags
immigration, leveller, nature

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:38 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360