Stephen Bainbridge notes that he is a “pragmatist” on the issue of immigration, noting
As long as illegals can make more money here than there, they’ll keep coming.
Indeed.
In fact, I will up the ante a bit: as long as immigrants are willing to die to get to United States (to then take fairly lousy jobs to boot), then there is no stopping the tide.
Think about about: how many people do you know who are willing to risk death so that they can get a job working nights cleaning up a McDonalds? Yet these people are,–and such determination is difficult to supress, and impossible to stop.
As such, Bainbridge rightly notes:
The California GOP can either accept the demographic reality and start thinking about how to attract Hispanic voters – many of whom started out as illegals or children of illegals but share our social conservatism – or it can be seen as a party of apartheid.
A bit strong perhaps, but basically accurate (I will confess to discomfiture over the application of the term “apartheid” in this situation).
Still, one thing is for certain: integration is possible and desirable–despite much of the “sky is falling” rhetoric of some on the Right regarding immigration.
And as far as the Minutemen are concerned: the President got it right, they are vigilantes. Further, while they may have affected border crossings in the area in which they are patrolling, I guarantee that the immigrants have simply diverted their routes into the US. The border is, after all, 2,000ish miles long.
May 2nd, 2024 at 9:17 pm
Immigration is an issue that politicos on both sides of the aisle (but mainly from the right) occasionally use “the sky is falling” rhetoric. However the proposed solutions never seem to catch the public imagination. The lack of response from the public would imply that not everybody agrees that the stratus later is crashing down.
May 2nd, 2024 at 9:43 pm
(to then take fairly lousy jobs to boot) Lousy by our standards, yes. But by the standards of raising chickens on hard dirt in a cinderblock shanty with no running water, not so much.
May 3rd, 2024 at 12:34 am
Do you think some of the more sophisticated Romans said, “Hey, what difference will a few more Germanic tribes make? Besides, we need them to do the jobs we don’t want to do.” And then those tribes sacked Rome. You claim we are like “chiken little”, afraid of the sky falling. I say we are watching history repeat itself. I’m not against Hispanics but I am against illegal immigration. If we have the will we can still save our culture but we can’t assimilate Central and South America’s millions and retain what we have. But you and Prof. Bainbridge can only say, “Not to worry! Don’t let all those negative people wake you up from your slumber until the pot is boiling and it’s too late.”
May 3rd, 2024 at 1:12 am
Basic facts:
1. Illegal immigration is, by definition, illegal. The appropriate authorities should enforce the law or expect it to be violated.
2. Vigilantism never leads to anything good; we citizens should not support it, even ironically.
3. We don’t have to accept illegal activity just because we can’t stop it.
4. America is, has been, and should continue to be, “the land of the free” – it’s time for us to continue to be a place that welcomes all hard-luck cases, even now that’s it’s not economically sensible. We talk loudly when we can absorb all the riff-raff we want (and we haven’t always wanted *all* the riff-raff), but now everyone wants to close the borders? Screw it! Let’s make America the best friggin country in the world, so good that everyone wants to come here. Maybe then those of us that are already here will stop complaining so much and realize what a great country we have.
May 3rd, 2024 at 7:19 am
Bryan:
Indeed–really your details help make the point.
May 4th, 2024 at 12:59 pm
Poliblogger on Immigration
Steven Taylor weighs in on immigration:… as long as immigrants are willing to die to get to United States (to then take fairly lousy jobs to boot), then there is no stopping the tide. Think about about: how many people
May 4th, 2024 at 9:24 pm
My basic problem is the fact that we are a nation of laws. Open Border advocates are basically saying ignore the law, just turn a blind eye and we will get all these great cheap workers to do the job nobody else wants to do. Well unfortunately when we just open our borders, or not enforce them like today you get the good and the bad. As an intelligence analyst, I see the types of people we are getting into this country on the backs of the hard working families that just want jobs. We are getting murders, drug dealers, and terrorists. We have caught hundreds of Middle Eastern males crossing illegally.
From the Congressional Record
http://hutchison.senate.gov/speec435.htm
May 5th, 2024 at 1:50 pm
What is it that the Minutemen do?
1. Observe the border, looking for suspicious persons.
2. Avoid all contact with suspicious persons.
3. Contact the Border Patrol with the description and location of suspicious persons.
4. Let the Border Patrol handle the situation.
What is it that Neighborhood Watch programs do?
1. Observe the neighborhood, looking for suspicious persons.
2. Avoid contact with any suspicious persons seen.
3. Call the police and inform them of the location, description and activities of suspicious persons.
4. Let the police handle the situation.
I await PoliBlog’s denouncing of Neighborhood Watch programs as “vigilantes” with great anticipation.
Words mean things. “Vigilante” has a distinct meaning, and the Minutemen in no way fit any meaningful definition of the term “vigilante”.
I await PoliBlog’s definition of “vigilante” as well…
May 5th, 2024 at 2:50 pm
I love when someone who won’t leave a name, e-mail address or url makes demands.
May 5th, 2024 at 3:18 pm
Nothing the Minutemen are doing remotely resembles vigilantism. They observe and report to authorities. That is what Neighborhood Watch programs do. They don’t even make citizen arrests.
By your definition, it would seem that anyone who calls the police to report a crime is a vigilante.
May 5th, 2024 at 3:33 pm
Steven Taylor wrote:
I love it when someone who won’t leave a name, e-mail address or url makes demands.
In addition to awaiting PolyBlog’s denouncing Neighborhood Watch as vigilantism, and PolyBlog’s definition of “vigilante”, I now also await PolyBlog’s definition of “demands”.
PolyBlog/Steven Taylor’s apparent inability to admit error, or even to engage in logical debate, is duly noted.
May 5th, 2024 at 4:09 pm
Ken,
The basic idea of “vigilantism� is that of taking the law into one’s own hands. While it is true that the Minutemen have not wholly done this, they have in part. They aren’t just neighbors watching their own neighborhood, as they aren’t from this particular neighborhood—they flew in for the chance to watch. If a bunch of guys showed up in my neighborhood and started patrolling, even if they didn’t directly confront the criminals, I would find this a bit unusual.
The idea of the Minutemen is that the Border Patrol isn’t adequately doing its job, so the Minutemen will help do it for them.
Further, the Minutemen are trying to affect US policy on the border by bringing specific attention to a specific location and thereby are trying to direct the US Border Patrol. As such, they go beyond a neighborhood watch.
If the people who were living in this region were calling the authorities, i.e., keeping an eye out and reporting unusual circumstances, that would be a neighborhood watch.
Vigilante may be a bit too strong a word in terms of direct denotation, but there is a certain amount of connotative vigilantism in their actions. Further, the very adoption of the term “Minutemen” to describe their actions underscores the connotation of something being just watching, as the imagery is one of revolution, righting wrongs and reaction to wrong-doing. All which is hardly connoted by a “neighborhood watch.â€?
Further, the entire enterprise is pointless: a handful of weekend warrior types pretending to be border patrolmen (yes, I know that they are not engaging the “enemy”) is like putting a rock in a river to try and hold back the water. Even if it is big rock, the water just flows around the rock.
May 5th, 2024 at 4:50 pm
Steven Taylor wrote:
The basic idea of “vigilantism� is that of taking the law into one’s own hands.
The Vigilance Committee in San Francisco in the 19th century chose to enforce laws because, in their eyes, the legal structure of that town refused to do so. They therefore chose to sieze wrongdoers, conduct kangaroo courts and in some cases perform executions. Please show where the Minutemen on the border have done any of these things.
While it is true that the Minutemen have not wholly done this, they have in part.
False. The Minutemen do not attempt to apprehend suspicious persons on the border, they observe them and call the appropriate authorities.
They aren’t just neighbors watching their own neighborhood, as they aren’t from this particular neighborhood—they flew in for the chance to watch.
The Minutemen regard this country as their ‘neighborhood’, and have chosen to watch the border in a critical sector in support of the Border Patrol. I suspect most of them drove, since few look wealthy enough to fly to Douglas International Airport…
If a bunch of guys showed up in my neighborhood and started patrolling, even if they didn’t directly confront the criminals, I would find this a bit unusual.
If thousands of people per month walked through the yard of Steven Taylor, killing his pets, stealing his property, damaging his house, destroying his fence, leaving all manner of trash and raw sewage on his doorstep, he might just welcome such a neighborhood watch…
And yes, that is an accurate assessment of the situation in the Naco/Douglas/Bisbee corridor.
The idea of the Minutemen is that the Border Patrol isn’t adequately doing its job, so the Minutemen will help do it for them.
That’s correct, and events so far have shown this to be an accurate notion.
Further, the Minutemen are trying to affect US policy on the border by bringing specific attention to a specific location and thereby are trying to direct the US Border Patrol. As such, they go beyond a neighborhood watch.
The political aspects of the Minuteman project may or may not be accurately rendered, but even if true this militates against them being vigilantes; vigilantes historically have not gone in for political efforts, preferring direct action via kangaroo courts, threats, intimidation and even lynching….none of these actions have been carried out by the Minutemen.
If the people who were living in this region were calling the authorities, i.e., keeping an eye out and reporting unusual circumstances, that would be a neighborhood watch.
The people who live in this region are all but unanimous in their praise for and support of the Minuteman project. Some of them are getting a full night’s sleep for the first time in months, others are able to leave their homes without fear of burglary for the first time in years. The people of this region have in fact called the Border Patrol regularly for years, there simply aren’t enough of them to put an observation post every 440 yards along the border for several miles. Perhaps Steven Taylor should take the trouble to find out just how the people who live in the Naco/Douglas/Sierra Vista region have reacted to the Minuteman project?
Vigilante may be a bit too strong a word in terms of direct denotation, but there is a certain amount of connotative vigilantism in their actions.
Attempting to weasel out of misuse of a word in this manner is amusing, but not impressive. The Minutemen cannot be compared with the Committee of Vigilance of San Francisco or any other vigilante organization, save by stretching the term “vigilante” so far out of shape as to render it without meaning. It would be easier, and more impressive, for Steven Taylor to admit error…
Further, the very adoption of the term “Minutemen� to describe their actions underscores the connotation of something being just watching, as the imagery is one of revolution, righting wrongs and reaction to wrong-doing. All which is hardly connoted by a “neighborhood watch.�
Perhaps if Steven Taylor ever bothered to examine the Minuteman website, he might not wander off on such pseudo-intellectual excursions as the one above…
Further, the entire enterprise is pointless: a handful of weekend warrior types pretending to be border patrolmen (yes, I know that they are not engaging the “enemy”) is like putting a rock in a river to try and hold back the water. Even if it is big rock, the water just flows around the rock.
If Steven Taylor truly knows that the Minutemen are not engaging anyone in combat, then his assertion that they are vigilantes isn’t an error, it is a deliberate falsehood.
The Minuteman project demonstrates that with sufficient manpower, a section of the border that previously had thousands of illegal crossings per month, many by drug smugglers, can be brought to a condition of order with very few attempts at crossing. This has profound implications for border policy, to those who can see facts and think clearly about them.
The open-borders lobby probably is quite upset by the success of the Minuteman demonstration, because it demolishes one of their pet shibboliths. Perhaps that explains the illogical and emotive response, devoid of logic…
May 5th, 2024 at 5:42 pm
Steven, the heart of vigilantism is extrajudicial punishment. Irrespective of the name they chose, it is not vigilantism unless they detain and punish illegals. Reporting crimes makes one simply a concerned, involved citizen, even if it’s not in one’s own neighborhood.
As for the “rock in the river” analogy, this strikes me as more a way to bring attention to the problem than to be an actual solution. I don’t have a problem with that.
May 5th, 2024 at 7:01 pm
On the ‘Rock in the River’ analogy, would you be willing to support actions that would be meaningful, such as concrete barriers, better monitoring of the borders, and more vigilante enforcement of the law (by the apropriate authorities of course). There’s a lot of pull factors here, but very few push factors in disuading said illegals. Wouldn’t some push factors, such as making the trip more difficult, increasing the probability of being sent back, etc. be worth it?
May 5th, 2024 at 7:47 pm
I actually consider it a practical impossibility to stop illegals from entering across the US border. It is too large and, as I noted in the post, these people are already willing to risk death–given that, what deterrent do you suggest we employ?