Out with the trash.
So, the Alt Righters believe that taking an extreme hard-line position on DACA and immigration is stupid and short-sighted; they assert that we need to be practical and understand the realities of political horse-trading to make progress to ease the demographic pressures from immigration.
I have four ripostes to that position:
1. First, whether or not that opinion position is valid or not, it would seem to be valid only for those people in political power who actually have the option to engage in such pragmatic political negotiations. Miller in the White House may well need to consider such a course of action. However, perhaps it would be best for Alt Righters talking and lulzing in their “Hate Loft” to take the most extreme positions possible, to push the discussion as far in the radical direction as possible. Leave the mainstreaming to those who have the power to actualize political deals, and manifest vanguardism to keep the mainstreamers honest.
2. The only deal worth making in exchange for DACA amnesty is one that truly eliminates all future illegal immigration and makes enormous cuts to legal immigration. A true end to the illegal influx and a mass decrease to the legalized dispossession of White Americans. Does anyone believe that’s what we will really get?
3. Why can’t we get enforcement of existing law - perhaps coupled to the decreased legal immigration that a majority of Americans want – without giving amnesty to the Nightmarers? Why must following existing law be held hostage to amnesty? Why must listening to the will of the American people be held hostage to amnesty?
4. There is a more fundamental reason why amnesty is a bad idea, even with lots of concessions in return: trading something irreversible for something reversible is always wrong, always a bad deal
Amnesty for the Nightmarers will indeed be irreversible (absent revolution and the ethnostate), and giving them eventual citizenship would just solidify that irreversibility. However, “strict enforcement” can always be reversed by a future administration, by a shift in Congress, by judges striking down laws, by cuts in funding, by passive aggressive refusal to enforce existing law (as we have today). Enforcement can be ignored, but amnesty is forever. Don’t we remember the fiasco of the Reagan amnesty? How soon we forget. What about the “wall?” Isn’t that permanent? First, that assumes it will ever get built. Second, even if it is built, its utility is limited, people can get in other ways, without strict, ongoing internal enforcement of immigration law, the grant wall is mostly symbolic rather than effective. Third, legal immigration quotas can always be increased in the future, putting those “big beautiful doors” in the almighty wall. The wall itself, even if built, doesn’t amount to much compared to the will to actually enforce the law – with that will, the wall wouldn’t be necessary to begin with. The wall, in the end, built or not, may end up being another Trumpian scam. Why doesn’t the Trump team and all his fanboys realize #4? Readers of this blog know the answer to that.
The Nightmarers should be deported. That’s actually the humane option, as one could argue that the Nightmarers should be treated like part of an invading army; the military should be sent after them. If the Nightmarers surrender, put them into POW camps until the immigration war is won, and then repatriate them to their nations of origin. If they resist, treat them as you would any resisting military enemy – destroy the opposing force. Have the army gun them down.
One could argue that. This blog, steeped in humanist pacifism and the love for all peoples, obviously would not argue that, but some people may do so.