Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

Recommended Photo Store
 
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
 
 
 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • A Very Good Immigration Post

    Posted by Jonathan on June 29th, 2007 (All posts by )

    Opponents of the wall genuinely think that sealing the border is impossible–at least those in the mainstream do. Furthermore, if they refuse to even entertain the notion that sealing the border is possible a) they will never be proven wrong; and b) their adversaries will never be proven right. And it doesn’t hurt that their stance will make them the favored choice at the polls for the very vocal hardcore believers who think that any attempt to close the borders is a betrayal of their ideals.
     
    The argument that X is an intractable problem so we shouldn’t even try to fix it is kind of an odd argument for the left to be making, considering their faith in social engineering. Yet it’s become their fallback position in recent years.

    Read the whole thing.

    I was wrong about immigration, at least the politics of it. I thought the political divisions would force the competing constituencies into some kind of messy but reasonable compromise that would be an improvement over the current situation. Instead, one side used dishonest arguments and raw political leverage to try to impose its preferred outcome on everyone else, which further radicalized opponents and alienated many citizens who might otherwise have been sympathetic to Bush’s approach.

    Whether a real compromise, the status quo or some kind of smaller and more incremental reform is now more likely is anyone’s guess.

     

    3 Responses to “A Very Good Immigration Post”

    1. Consul-At-Arms Says:

      I’ve quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2007/06/re-very-good-immigration-post.html

    2. Peter Jackson Says:

      I thought the political divisions would force the competing constituencies into some kind of messy but reasonable compromise that would be an improvement over the current situation.

      I wrote about this exact thing yesterday.

      A couple of problems with comparisons to the Israel defense barrier are:

      1. The Israeli defense barrier is a militarized barrier with razor-wire, machine gun nests, etc. Is this really what we want on our southern border?

      2. The Israeli defense barrier would barely would barely make it around San Diego County. A 2000-mile wall/fence traversing the Chihuahuan Desert would require an effort of a different order of magnitude. To call it an apples to oranges comparison would be an understatement.

      And in the end, there’s no reason to believe that such a monstrous project would even slow down illegal immigration from Mexico. San Diego is arguably the most fortified stretch of border, complete with a multi-fence no man’s land, yet they find tunnels under it all the time. The ways in which such a wall could be defeated are only limited by the imaginations of immigrants and coyotes, and their desire to make money.

      yours/
      peter.

    3. Kurt9 Says:

      Instead, one side used dishonest arguments and raw political leverage to try to impose its preferred outcome on everyone else, which further radicalized opponents and alienated many citizens who might otherwise have been sympathetic to Bush’s approach.

      This is precisely the way to describe what happened. I actually read through the bill about a week ago. It was imperfect. It was not even that good. However, I thought it reasonable first-step in addressing the issue of immigration (I especially liked the part where it would have eliminated the visa “lottery”). The problem was the bill supporters. Instead of reasoned public debate, the supporters arrogantly tried to bully this bill through congress with no respect, whatsoever, for anyone who had questions about it. Their attitude was that the rest of us (much of the electorate) were stupid rubes who had not the knowledge nor the wisdom to question what our arrogant betters thought was good for us.

      This is the reason why the bill went down in flames, and rightly so!

      The democrats really do need to take a hint from the republicans and get rid of their senority system in congress.

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.