I don’t subscribe to the “arc of history” or any of that. Nothing is pre-ordained. (I’d point Democrats have consistently been on the “wrong” side historically as well, for that matter). With regard to the subject under discussion, people are entitled to their opinion about illegal migration. They are not bad or evil because of those concerns.
Is it your contention that the only possible reason anyone could object to millions pouring across the border is due to ethnic racism? This is the “one size fits all” type of slander that is so offensive.
Cesar Chavez, the California labor leader was vehemently against illegal migration. Was he racist as well? What he objected to was wage suppression for the union members he represented. There are many, many legitimate reasons to object to illegal migration, trying to simply dismiss them all as “racism” is silly, that’s all.
The progressive position should be that everybody is entitled to a fair wage. If illegal immigrants are getting shafted because of their legal status, by the way, one way to ameliorate that would be to make migration legal. (I assume this also increases the number of votes.)
There are other potential reasons why someone might theoretically object to mass immigration. But that’s purely theoretical, since those reasons aren’t the reasons why the vast majority of immigration opponents oppose it.
Labor is subject to supply and demand, as any other “good”. There is plenty of blame to go around with both Democrats and Republicans. Uniparty is what a lot of people look at it as. There is simply no need for millions and millions of unskilled laborers. This is especially acute due to the rise of automation and increasingly, AI. There are not enough jobs to go around for native Americans, and wages have been stagnant since 1974. Offshoring of whole swaths of industries have not been kind to American manufacturing. The net balance of payments went negative around 1975 as well. The national government is now 40 Trillion dollars in the hole. We could go on all day, and talk about the real issues facing our nation, but people want to lay it all on “hating brown people”. It’s just nonsense on steroids.
I really can’t understand collapsing “immigration” into a “for” or “against” issue, and doing that will put large majorities of us on the “against” side.
I am for a pathway to legalization. I am for increasing the numbers allowed legally, both for ethical reasons and because I believe such is in the long term best interest of this country. I am for humane treatment and assessment of those claiming asylum.
I am against the Trump hijack of ICE into an unchecked unaccountable tool for oppression and attack of all he considers “other” and of dissent.
I am for the job ICE had been doing under previous administrations. Including ERO functions. I am against eliminating those functions or considering them as evil.
I am for adequate funding and staffing of controlled legal immigration pathways and against
Immigrants to the US, legal or not, statistically are less likely to engage in violent crime than citizens, work harder and longer, are more likely to start businesses, less likely to receive government assistance, and much more. Overall, immigrants both legal and not are of great statistical benefit to the US economy, as well as offering immense non-quantifiable benefits (culture, cuisine, ideas, etc.).
Anyone who opposes immigration in general, or favors violently cracking down on peaceful immigrants (Iegal or not), is either driven by hate or driven by ignorance. There’s no other explanation I can think of. If you have one, feel free to share it.
I believe the jobs ICE is designed to perform, had been performing adequately well (but far from perfectly) before Trump kneecapped some of its functions and hijacked its others are important functions, and that ICE sans the Trump distortions of it is the right vehicle for those functions. I endorse immigration control and enforcement.
From the POV of some here that seems to mean wanting a police state run by Gestapo stormtroopers.
This is all true. Immigrants are a net positive. Not to mention undocumented are helping shore up Social Security, by paying in, while not taking out.
Why should it or they be “illegal”? I mean sure, keep out criminals and terrorists, but if people want to come here and work, give them a work permit. We would have cheaper food.
This is not the same as “open borders” which is a fake slogan.
The problem is that ICE has hired thousands of wannabe Gestapo stormtroopers who have destroyed whatever was salvageable about ICE. Pre-9/11, there was immigration and customs enforcement, handled by whatever the agency was called back then, with professionally trained folks who did the job competently and openly.
ICE today is not fixable. Get rid of it and assign the role of internal immigration and customs checking to some other organization.
But characterizing in a broad brushstroke way concern about illegal immigration as racism is, if not “silly” counterproductive. Mind you I think some of the not racist reasons for concern are misguided and simply wrong, but they are not all racist reasons.
So, your contention then is the “vast majority” of opposition to illegal migration is solely due to racial prejudice. That’s an opinion, which you are entitled to. But it is poisonous.
That seems to be the core statement of faith. But the bulk of the harms were Biden era guidance being undone by Trump memos and which could be restored just as easily.
The other big issue are the new hires, many of them thugs, all of them not subject to proper vetting.
Reduction in workforce, reorg, newer hires are still in probation periods and get gone first as surplus positions.
Fixing the damage is not that hard. Eliminating an agency and creating a new one is OTOH a huge task.