What are your thoughts on this Channel 5 coverage? Having a border like this feels very inhumane, I think. Does that mean we shouldn't have a border at all? I don't know--but, I can't help feel that the current situation is inhumane.

This could have been prevented with a wall and a strict no illegal entry policy

It is certainly inhumane

This post was edited by El1te on Jan 21 2024 07:45pm

I am so glad you said this, because I think that is a very intellectually honest thing to agree to. Does that mean we care more about the potential loss of our current standard of living than we do the suffering inherent in its inhumanity?

This post was edited by Handcuffs on Jan 21 2024 07:46pm

I dont think it means that, having a strict border is in the interests of both the migrants & US citizens. A porous border is exploited by human traffickers who seize the opportunity for profit at the expense of the migrants. A porous border creates an incentive for migrants to make a long and dangerous journey through the desert, which often results in death and disease for their family, with the false hope of a better life. Migrants now are living in far worse conditions on the streets of NYC, Chicago, and other cities, many of them want to go home since they didn't get what they hoped for. If one cares about their suffering, the rational solution is to close the border and stop putting out the message that it's open season and that they will be properly cared for: we can see quite clearly that they are not properly cared for.

The proper moral policy, frankly the self evident solution, is to have a closed border with proper and fair immigration policy based on merit.

High walls with large gates. Not high walls with no gates.

The best thing for them is to stay put in their homes and work to make their community a better place to live. These people are not under persecution by the government, they are economic migrants

This post was edited by El1te on Jan 21 2024 07:54pm

One more point to add, the US Federal government simply does not have the capacity or wealth to take on the entire 7 billion population of the world as dependents. It's a simple quantitative issue.

NYC and Chicago are demonstrating this

Okay, dude, I love you right now because I think the line you said here (bolded above as well): "we can see quite clearly that they are not properly cared for" is exactly what I am so curious about. So you're telling me that we are not adequately prepared to meet the demands at this time, for reasons out of our individual control, yes? If yes: What is your take on what to do about that then? My thought would be that we should try and make sure that we can meet the demand as much as we possibly can. The fact that we aren't approaching it that way I think is not to the evolutionary benefit of our species. Intracommunity violence is a significant anchor in humanity's advancement. The quicker we can achieve world peace, the more exponential our evolutionary speed, no?

I think more people are catching on that the care of the migrants is atrocious. The news coming out of NYC and Chicago is terrible, you have migrants forced to live outside in the cold and fed what amount to wartime rations.

Yes, I think we certainly don't have the capacity to meet the demands of their care at this time, since we can't pour from a cup that's empty. Cities have already been incredibly strained such that public services are cut, school hours are cut for temporary housing, etc., and that's with giving them what amounts to a concentration camp level of care. "Three square meters per prisoner" or less. And this is definitely outside of anyone's control.

I feel like we already have met the demand as much as economically possible. Bankrupting the country is in no one's interest - but that's already happening at the current level. If a precedent continues that illegal migrants will be accepted, the problem accelerates and has no end point.

It comes back to the fact that one cannot pour from an empty cup. My view is that the solution to the problem is as follows in order:

1) Secure the border - build a complete and fortified wall across the Southern border complete with modern security technology, much like Egypt's border wall with Gaza.

2) Initiate a mass deportation effort - I know this sounds ugly, but it only has to be ugly if the migrants violently resist which is in no one's interest. Migrants can be bussed back to their countries of origin (given they're in the America's, otherwise by boat).

3) Reform legal immigration and asylum policy. Only offer asylum to those who can offer documented evidence of persecution, this can include correspondence with narcos, etc. This has to be provide before entry.

4) Invest in a strong, powerful, prosperous and wealthy America (this is aligned with the MAGA movement). Invest in proper and humane short term care facilities for asylum seekers, no wire cage chicken coups. With a proper vetting system for legitimate asylum, this is economically feasible.

With these reforms we can as a civilization put our selves back on track for honest humane care, without patronizing those who deceive and scam (illegitimate asylum claimees).

That is an interesting strategy for world peace. Is the idea that humanity within a certain border that is peaceful will continue to exist and evolve only in so far as the violence stays outside of its borders, or at least not to a level of violence that jeapordizes the social order?

I do think it's the proper strategy for the goal of world peace.

World peace, or regional peace, is predicated on rival nations, who each vie for the greatest outcomes for their nation and peoples, to respectfully co-exist, of which a massive factor of that is recognizing and respecting rival nation's borders. This is predicated on each party agreeing to a legitimate border (the Ukraine Russia war is a perfect example of a border dispute).

Opening the floodgates has historical precedent for not being a solution for peace. The fall of the Roman Empire was largely caused by open borders with unfettered barbarian immigration, peoples who had no respect for the rule of law, leading to the dark ages.

The main idea in my view is that civilizations and/or nations must develop on their own accord. A nation or country is the macroensemble of its people, nothing less. The violence that exists outside our borders is not typically ours to solve, however as I myself an am imperialist, I think we should expand our Empire and rule of law outside our borders, while respecting their cultures to a certain degree.

This post was edited by El1te on Jan 21 2024 08:57pm

It's not like anyone invited the tens of thousands of illegals.
I hate to sound cold, but it's like... "playing in traffic". Ya gotta expect to get run over, when you do that.

I mean, how many of you would open your doors for some starving vets (aka citizens), if they came and sat on your door step?

This post was edited by Ghot on Jan 21 2024 09:04pm