Immigration from Europe to thr U.S. was highly restricted starting in 1924.
Immigration from Latin America to the U.S. was mostly free until 1929.
Also see:
You can count me as being in favor of open borders.
Personally, I think that freedom of movement is as important a right as freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. Like any freedom, it can’t be absolute, but limitations should be, well, limited. People should be allowed to live and work where they want.
There would be cultural and economic impacts, but I don’t think they would be disastrous. I think there would even be positives, though not evenly distributed.
Something I wonder about is, for people who are in favor of borders, why not more? Why would it be a bad thing for a government to require its citizens to get permission to move to a different city? A lot of the same arguments that get applied to national migration apply there too.
It comes down to the old David Frum saw, If Liberals Won’t Enforce Borders, Fascists Will
Frum’s rule only applies at the nation-state level.
For qualifications concerning specific border policies of Trump and Biden see:
Biden Didn’t Cause the Border Crisis
As explained in my link, Biden did enforce borders, and we got what some here call fascism, and I call a hybrid regime, anyway.
EDIT: If you think of an example like Greenland, they shouldn’t allow unlimited immigration from the U.S. for good political reasons that do not apply internally within Greenland.
I mean, the line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise we could even dissect it even further and require permission to move within different neighborhoods of the city.
FWIW, the Chinese hukou system does do something akin to what you mentioned, that a person cannot just move about as freely in China for residency as people can in the USA.
Don’t forget that immigrants commit much LESS crime than citizens: They don’t want to risk deportation. They are a boon for the economy; it is really a shame how fomenting hatred has become the main theme of a major political party.
I am not a radical leftist, but I still like this song:
The problem with that argument is that if liberals act like fascists, then they are fascists.
I mean, there’s a difference between “deport all brown-skinned people” and “deport some people.” Otherwise, by this logic, nearly every nation in the world is fascist.
“Deport all brown people” is what “enforcing the borders” means. If the liberals aren’t deporting every non-white person they can, then they aren’t “enforcing the borders”.
Ethnic cleansing is the entire point.
What MAGA calls “open borders” is any immigration laws that allow colored people to enter.
This. To be meaningful, any conversation involving them has to admit both that MAGA are a bunch of white nationalists, and that they lie. Otherwise, you aren’t actually talking about MAGA at all.
By the arguments put forth in this thread, it seems like Japan is simultaneously open-borders and fascist. Open-borders because it still allows a few “colored people” to immigrate. Fascist because it allows a lot fewer such colored folks to come in than the USA.
I know you’re being ironic, but of course Japan isn’t “open borders.” Which is not to say that there are not people staying there without permission. In the early 1990s, there were actually a lot of Iranian people there working in construction who, people told me, were there illegally.
I think the “fascism” part has more to do with kicking people out after they come in, instead of not letting them in in the first place. Joking aside, what Trump is doing now is disgusting precisely because he is brutally and incompetently increasing enforcement of a system that was “accidentally on purpose” (i.e., Big Business needed and still needs the labor) leaky as hell.
Trying to appease fascists is not a good reason to do something, and it’s even worse as a justification that that thing is good or right.
And I think most people would describe that as oppressive and authoritarian. Heck, I’ve seen conspiracy theories that claim that “15-minute cities” are an attempt to do that, with the implication that that would be a dystopian government.
I would argue that our system of allowing freedom of movement within a country but not between countries is still oppressive, just to a lesser degree.
There’s a lot going on with this hypothetical.
So, in a world with truly no borders, Greenland and the US wouldn’t exist as separate polities in the first place. Worrying about the US invading Greenland would be like worrying about New York invading Maine. Admittedly, this is a utopian vision that will never actually happen.
More realistically, well, I’m not really sure what the situation is. Violence and threatening violence would still be illegal, so an invading would still be forbidden. I guess you’re referring to some kind of stealth invasion where the soldiers pretend to be normal immigrants who then… buy all the real estate and influence local elections? I don’t know, it seems like an esoteric threat and Greenland’s government could just say “Yeah, you’re not fooling us” and either pass a law saying that you need to be a resident for at least 10 years to vote or just make a special exception kicking out the army.
Again, I don’t think freedom of movement can be literally unlimited. But those limitations shouldn’t be based on your skin color or who your parents were or where you were born.
Okay, good point, but not Asia.
Name a significant nation that does.
Bill of Rights.
All true.
The French are fascists now? The British? Many nations have issues with immigrants. Doesnt make them fascists- but it doesnt make them right either. I guess its fascists all the way down now, and if everyone is a fascist, the term loses meaning. (On this SDMD, the term has lost all meaning now)
Nationalist and liars- certainly. Right Wing Populists are their leaders.
So does the USA, see the H1b visa.
The fascists have grown greatly in power there yes, and the odds are good that they will go fully fascist at some point.
Tell ya what- go ahead and name some major nation that says “hey, all the poor people of the world- you can come here in unlimited numbers and once you get here you get a work permit and even citizenship after a short interval”.
But there are none, which I
guess that then means every nation is fascist eh?
Nations simply do not have open borders.
That seems to be the case, since even in the US, they deport some (small) number of white people.
Yes it is mostly brown people, but oddly - most undocumented aliens are POC. Mind you, I certainly agree that the current administration and it’s ICE policies are bigoted, no doubt. But even Obama deported quite a few “brown people”. What’s bigoted is the scale of the current practices and how brutally they are being practiced.
The world in general is headed towards fascism, yes. And not just because of the borders. More and more the populace of the world looks upon everyone outside their borders as subhumans who should be killed.
There isn’t any more. But there was once, and it grew fantastically wealthy and powerful as a result.
Yeah. The nations of the world acting evil and self-destructive doesn’t make being evil and self destructive a good idea. It just means they are being evil and self destructive.
When 100% of the nations have borders and some form of enforcement, perhaps that is actually the will of the people and the idea of a borderless world just isn’t ready for prime time. Why should a majority of nations be dictated to by the sensibilities of a fringe minority?