Saturday, April 24, 2010

Arizona's anti-[illegal] immigrant law and the Washington Post


The Washington Post printed an editorial denouncing Arizona's just-signed illegal immigrant law, titled “Arizona's shameful 'immigration' bill.”

The writer, A.J. Dionne, is one of the Post's mainstay left-of-center columnists and a practising Catholic. The Post published hundreds and hundreds of comments, including many foaming-at-the-mouth denunciations of Arizona's government, and many others by Tea Party types--but it censored out my comment.

However, you can read it here, and see what the Post believes violates its editorial standards (and maybe let me in on the secret, since I can't figure out what led them to delete this):

The closest thing to a valid objection to this law is that it’s discriminatory, because it employs profiling.

That’s fine with me. It just applies statistical probability to real-life practical situations. But it is a good thing for our society to be—and to be seen--as color-blind.

So here’s how to achieve it: deploy a universal biometric ID database. This is doable today, & other rich countries are starting to implement one. It doesn’t even require a card you’d have to keep on you.

For example, Fujitsu has been selling palm readers for years. We all have a unique pattern of veins in our palms. This reads it. You can’t fake it, you can’t alter it, & you can’t erase it (short of cutting off your hand).

So—we implement universal biometric ID. Then, whenever you interact with a government agency—cops, hospital, school, whatever—or an employer—you just hold your hand over a reader for a second. If you’re in this country legitimately, cool. If you aren’t but need emergency medical help, we’ll help—then deport you. If you have legal American children, you can choose to take them with you or send them into the foster care system. Your choice.

After someone’s deported, make illegal re-entry a felony.
The readers are small & easy to link to the database using wifi, so every cop car can have one.

Of course all this presumes that you believe in countries & borders & stuff—and that this still-majority- white country has a right to exist, & has a right to decide who gets to come here. And that it’s worth offending pro-illegal-immigration-Latinos to do so.

1. Countries & borders: Every single rich country has many, many millions of people from poor countries trying to move there.

Shallow people look at the situation & say “Oh those poor deserving nonwhite people! Let us take them in.”

It never seems to occur to them to figure out why they want to come here. Honestly it’s a form of chauvinism—assuming that we’re so wonderful everyone’s dying to be us—that our “job magnet” trumps their entire culture.

But most people like their own people & culture. They only want to come here because they’re starving. And why are they starving? Because there are too many of them.

The world’s population has QUADRUPLED since 1900. Today the human race is growing at the rate of 140 more people every single minute. It’s even faster in the poor countries, because rich country natives mainly have small families (except for Catholics & some other religious groups).

Take Mexico. Please. Mexico had just 20 million people in 1940. That number QUINTUPLED in just 60 years. Mexico can’t remotely employ that many people. Or feed them, for that matter.

And here’s the kicker: we didn’t do that to them. They did it to themselves, under the domination of a primitive religion (which, by sheer coincidence, A.J. Dionne shares)—a religion that forbids any form of contraception, & which insists that even a 10 year old child raped by her stepdad carry the fetus to term (this is a current case in the state of Quintana Roo in Mexico; you can find many other such cases in Latin America).

Another case: Haiti. Its population zoomed from 3 million in 1950 to 12 million (including Haitian expats) in 2010—quadrupling in 60 years.

So—in what bizarre world are we morally obligated to take in such countries’ overpopulation that we had no part in producing?

Only if you don’t believe in countries. We’re just one big world. Of course the people of every single other country believe they’re countries. And if you’re in another country & wind up in a jail there, are you gonna call the UN? Or your church? Not likely. You’ll call the American consulate. And if that’s true for you, then you do believe in countries in general & ours in particular, & anything you say to the contrary is what’s known in philosophical circles as hypocrisy.

2. Does America in particular have a right to exist? First, let’s clear up the myth of Mexicans being the original inhabitants of the Southwest. Um, it was the Hopi, Navaho & other Amerindian tribes. I’d love to see a Mexican make this “it’s ours really” argument in front of a bunch of Amerinds.

Plus most Mexicans are mestizos—part Spaniard, part Indio. So part of most Mexicans has to go back to Spain. I don’t know whether it’s technically feasible to put someone in a blender & separate out one set of DNA from the other.

And I’m 3/32 Cherokee—so some of me gets to stay. Yay.

But face it: every country on Earth is squatting on top of someone else’s earlier territory, except for the highlands of Kenya where humanity originated (thus every American is actually an African American BTW).

3. And who has a “right” to come here? No one. Who should come? Folks with skills we need with clean criminal & medical records. But given the unemployment rate of American unskilled laborers—peasants need not apply.

BTW Latinos comprised 0.5% of America in 1940. Now they’re 14%. Who voted for that?

6 comments:

dwm said...

the line drawn in this battle is nothing short of dumbfounding and when cowardly congress finally takes it up for discussion -assuming that some day they will have to, right?- it is going to be an event to watch: as in 'war-of-the-worlds' taking place in both the congress and the streets.

i saw a picture in politico this morning of people in the street carrying a poster that read: "ABOLISH BORDERS"; leaving me with only one (equally loud) thought: "WHAT?".

you do know that the wpost published about half of your comment? maybe it was just too long and thought-out, and what they like are one-liners like: "ARIZONA = RACIST" yelled over and over. (an actual post)

the nytimes might well have rejected it all together; they have certainly rejected some of my own.

keep posting, some day this war will end.

Ehkzu said...

I re-posted the first half. Guess it flew.

I see such contentless flames on both sides getting past the moderators...

Johnson said...

Repost focusing on job skills, law enforcement, and the concept of a nation state. Leave out comments on race and peasants.

You can make the same argument but avoid using key words that will likely lead to a ban.

Ehkzu said...

No doubt you're right as far as getting past the moderators is concerned.

But I continue to believe that the Earth circles the Sun, not vice-versa, and that America doesn't need any more peasants of any race or nationality. We have enough of our own, and way too many of them out of work.

Ehkzu said...

...and have you seen the stuff that does get through, with abundant cussing and obscenities barely encrypted with asterisks and whatnot, along with racist allusions and worse?

I'm all for moderation. I moderate this blog. but apart from kowtowing to political correctness, I fail to see how the WaPo's moderation is elevating the tone of the discussion.

Then again, I'm not seeing the stuff that gets cut out (except for mine).

Sean said...

I've seen these headlines lambasting Arizona for being racist with small wonder. Isn't this the predicted response? The opinion pieces that media outlets such as the Washington Post and NYT display are a product of a cultivated way of thinking. The same can be said about user comments that contain the ever-so-subtle "ARIZONA = RACIST" message. Negative associations on racism have stuck extraordinarily well. The problem is that many people lack the will/ability/desire to discriminate between morally wrong racism and cases where a culture (such as Arizona) is desperately trying to keep from being overrun by mass immigration.

However, most of these types of posts are in the "Opinion" Section. Most front-page articles lay the blame on the US government for failing to pass substantial legislature. Of course, these front-page articles still find that it's easier to blame ourselves than to blame the bunny-rabbit-reproduction rates that Mexico has seen.