The Falkland Islands

Spot on. I doubt most Americans even know what the Falkland Islands are, let alone that there is an ongoing dispute between Argentina and Britain over them. As someone who is generally aware of the issue (through no fault of the American media, which could care less about reporting on an issue like this unless it's a really slow news day), I really don't care. Like Levite, I think the Falkland Islands should be under the jurisdiction of whoever the residents of the Falkland Islands believe they should be under. Whether that's Britain, Argentina, some other country, or complete independence makes no difference to me if it's what the residents want. Since it seems they want to remain British, that's where I stand if I have to pick a side.

 

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, if the people south of the US border held a vote and decided that they wanted to now be Americans with all the rights and privileges, how would you stand on that?

It's interesting that everyone claims to support self determination but that it clearly has limits.

 

If we could send our military, FBI, and intel agencies down there to clean up the violence and crime, it would be a great place to live. I went down there last year, and people were free to do things that you can't do here, they were more laid back, and the weather is great this time of year. Prices were also good.

Now that I think about it, our government would just mess it up.

 

Daniel_: That's not an appropriate comparison. If the people living on the Falkland Islands want to be British, and the British government wants them to be British, it's a mutual agreement. If the people of Mexico want to be American but the American government does not want Mexico, it is not mutual. Theoretically speaking, if there was a benefit to having Mexico (or, more realistically, part of it) that led the American government to be interested in it, and if the people of Mexico decided to join the US, then I would have no problem with it. That's not the case, though, and it's not what you asked. Self-determination does not mean that you get to impose yourself on another government. It means that societies should be free to enter into mutual agreements regarding governance.

 

I don't think it's quite the same thing. If, perhaps, there was a section of Mexico that was territory claimed both by Mexico and the US, were all else equal, I might advocate that the people actually living there have the final say over which country it would actually be part of. But if Mexico claims the territory, and the US does not, then as much as I might sympathize with the people living there and their desire to have a better life, I think they can't just unilaterally decide to be Americans.

 

Mexico claiming Texas and the residents wishing to be Mexican possibly. This does point to the style of occupations the Chinese have in Tibet. Import loads of Han Chinese into the country and then later when under diplomatic pressure claim to hold democratic elections !