Why Would It Be Wrong For Us To Choose Who We Let Into This Country?
I'm pro-immigration -- meaning that I think our country is great because we mimic what makes the strongest immune system, which is diverse backgrounds.
In an immune system, two people who have diverse defenses -- which probably means they are from different places and different genetic lines -- make for the strongest immune system in any child they might have.
As I write in my science-based advice column:
If you and a genetically similar man have kids, your combined MHC genes will only be able to recognize a very similar, limited set of trespassers. But with a genetically dissimilar man, the immune systems of any kids you have will have a much larger force of security guards, able to recognize a much broader group of icky invaders.
I grew up in Whitepeopleville -- the Detroit suburbs back in the 1970s and 80s -- and I hated the homogeneity. I love California for what a big mishmash of peoples it is. And again, I think that we are greater than any other country because of this.
However, immigration to our country has long been limited. We didn't let just anyone in.
I am for letting in people for humanitarian reasons -- but I think there's a problem in just letting people in unvetted whose background suggests they may believe in an ideology that commands them to convert or kill those who don't believe as they do. I don't have an answer to how to vet these people, either. Call it an open problem.
I also think we have a right -- and a need -- because our country is no longer wide open spaces needing people to build cabins and stake claims, to do some critical thinking about which immigrants would be valuable to us.
David Harsanyi at The Federalist speaks to the need for some standards -- in the wake of CNN's Jim Acosta reading a poem I love, the one by Emma Lazarus on the base of the Statue of Liberty:
"It says 'Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,' it doesn't say anything about speaking English or being a computer programmer," Acosta goes on, "Aren't you trying to change what it means to be an immigrant coming into this country if you're telling them they have to speak English."Yes. Acosta is going to quote "The New Colossus," a poem that was attached to the statue in 1903, which is neither a policy guide nor a reflection of the Constitution nor anything but a beautiful rhetorical nod to the millions of immigrants, like my parents, who came here under the strictures Americans set on immigration. Because we have them. We always have.
First of all, is it really un-American to expect immigrants to speak English? As Miller pointed out, some proficiency in English is already a requirement for those who want to be naturalized. Yet, Acosta asks: "Are we just going to bring in people from Great Britain and Australia?" I happen to live in an immigrant-heavy neighborhood, and most of the people around me speak English pretty well. Not one is from England or Australia.
Is it un-American, as Acosta alleges, to regulate the number of immigrants we allow in the country? Does "The New Colossus" say: "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, but keep them at around one million new green cards every year or it's un-American?"
Is it un-American to give preference to immigrants who have already shown the propensity to assimilate? Is it un-American to prioritize immigrants who have skills in jobs we need filled? Is any reform of immigration -- other than to legalize millions by executive fiat -- un-American? I may disagree with a certain immigration policy, but changing the parameters of immigration policy is not an unpatriotic act.
Um, guys, The New Colossus was never an official US immigration policy. It is, and always has been, a poem.
"I am for open immigration, but that sign we have on the front of the Statue of Liberty, “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses…” can`t we just say, “Hey, the door`s open, we`ll take whoever you got”? Do we have to specify the wretched refuse? I mean, why don`t we just say, “Give us the unhappy, the sad, the slow, the ugly, people that can`t drive, that they have trouble merging, if they can`t stay in their lane, if they don't signal, they can't parallel park, if they`re sneezing, if they're stuffed up, if they're clogged, if they have bad penmanship, don't return calls, if they have dandruff, food between their teeth, if they have bad credit, if they have no credit, missed a spot shaving, in other words any dysfunctional, defective slob that you can somehow cattle prod onto a wagon, send 'em over, we want 'em." ~ Jerry Seinfeld
Perhaps it's time we had a more coherent immigration policy than we'll take anyone who can crawl, swim, or be carried here. We're not doing any favors to a third-world melon farmer by shoehorning him into an advanced technological society in which he has neither the skills to compete for a job nor the language to assimilate.
Conan the Grammarian at August 3, 2017 7:25 AM
Among the enumerated powers of Congress is listed (Constitution, Article 1, Section 8)
Congress isn't limited to whom they can exclude or who must be admitted. It is not a human right to be granted US citizenship upon birth.
Acosta maybe confused about illegal and legal immigration. I'm thinking that purposely muddying the waters is the point: "undocumented workers" is akin to calling drug dealers "undocumented pharmacists".
http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/02/jim-acosta-throws-fit-quotes-statue-of-liberty-poem/
*facepalm*:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cnns-jim-acosta-claims-victory-in-briefing-beef-with-stephen-miller-he-couldnt-take-that-kind-of-heat/article/2630493
I R A Darth Aggie at August 3, 2017 10:02 AM
"Diversity" is probably not what you think or have been told...
The surest way to destroy your new nation is to bring the problems you once had with you. In some cases, that means your entire way of life.
Radwaste at August 3, 2017 10:59 AM
We used to refer to the ones that plied their trade a few streets over from my first post-college house as "independent pharmaceutical representatives."
This moniker was dreamed by the same guy who told people he "worked for the government" when was on unemployment - because he did what the government told him to do (apply for 3 jobs) in exchange for a check.
Conan the Grammarian at August 3, 2017 11:01 AM
Why Would It Be Wrong For Us To Choose Who We Let Into This Country?
At this point it seems we're not even able to choose who we absolutely don't want to be in this country, e.g. criminals and terrorists, let alone people whose deeply ingrained culture and religion put them in potentially violent conflict with every aspect of Western culture, except our money.
The so-called "Muslim ban" attempted to temporarily restrict immigration from a certain few countries where they couldn't do any kind of background check on prospective immigrants, making them a high risk for terrorists. And then we have "sanctuary cities" harboring illegal immigrants who are known criminals, as if their undocumented immigrant status somehow outweighs and negates every other evil thing they've ever done.
There too many "adults" with political and economic power who seem to want it that way. And not enough with unsophisticated common sense, and the nerve to speak it plainly, if untactfully, in the face of public ridicule and fake news.
Ken R at August 3, 2017 11:34 AM
Acosta: "It says 'Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,' it doesn't say anything about speaking English or being a computer programmer"
It also doesn't say anything about providing them with free food, shelter, clothing, transportation, medical care, education and monthly checks at the compulsory expense of Americans and legal immigrants already here; nor tolerating criminal, fraudulent, anti-social, rude and obnoxious behavior and demands.
Ken R at August 3, 2017 11:51 AM
Instapundit:
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/271762/
I R A Darth Aggie at August 3, 2017 12:22 PM
Having seen some of Jim Acosta's other work, a well-reasoned summary of same is: Jim Acosta is a self-important media prick, a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect at work, and his opinions on any topic can be safely dismissed out of hand. The Left, in its eagerness to import a vast swath of unassimilated dependents in order to establish a permanent client-class majority, fails to realize that by constantly conflating legal and illegal immigration (and, by extension, labeling anyone who opposes illegal immigration as "racist"), they don't shame people into favoring open borders; they do the exact opposite. And by doing so, they make it impossible to have a reasonable discussion of immigration policy. Given the obvious disinformation and bad intent of the Left's position, closed-borders advocacy looks reasonable by comparison.
Cousin Dave at August 3, 2017 2:19 PM
Immigration is not just about letting people into the country. It's about assimilating them into the society. If you let so many people in that you cannot assimilate them, you end up creating ghettos where crime is rampant and economic opportunity is non-existent.
Conan the Grammarian at August 3, 2017 3:22 PM
It's worth thinking about population levels, too. The USA has twice as many people living in it as it did the year I was born. Do we want it to double again?
Natural-born birth/deaths would keep the population stable - our population growth comes from immigration.
Do we want a USA with 500 million people? 750? A billion? Sooner or later we have to look this "unlimited growth" idea in the eye and call it for what it is: a damn mess, in terms of the environment and wage growth.
Pirate Jo at August 3, 2017 3:54 PM
You may have something on wage growth Pirate Jo. But the environment has only gotten better over that time period.
Ben at August 3, 2017 4:13 PM
Weed makes you peaceful.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at August 3, 2017 5:10 PM
Sorry, wrong thread.
But maybe we could de-citizenfy those guys and swap them for someone who wants to be here.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at August 3, 2017 5:12 PM
The poem, The New Colossus, also says:
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp"
I take that to mean - keep your old stuff we don't need it.
Oh, and what Trump is suggesting is that our immigration policy be more like Canada and Australia. Aren't liberals always telling us to be more like Canada?
charles at August 3, 2017 5:46 PM
"Immigration is not just about letting people into the country. It's about assimilating them into the society. "
This. It's why immigration has never worked in Europe -- they have cultural barriers against assimilation. E.g., if you are not born in France, you will never be considered truly French, no matter how long you live there or how hard you work to integrate yourself into their culture. That's one problem we don't have in the U.S., and it's why, historically, assimilation works here.
Cousin Dave at August 4, 2017 7:13 AM
Leave a comment