# Will ending "birthright citizenship" help to control America's borders? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 4, 2005, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564 "2005-11-04T22:08:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/101 "2005-11-06T15:41:30Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > How reliable are these figures ? Last I heard, the job of hospitals and doctors wasn’t to verify immigration status, so they weren’t even counting. The term “anchor baby” sounds like classic right wing rhetoric, after all. I wouldn’t know about the USA, but in France, they abolished birthright citizenship, one of the argument presented was boatloads of pregnant mothers coming to France so that their children would be a french citizen and that themselves, having custody of a french child, couldn’t be expelled. However, at this time, this argument was strongly disputed, by people stating that this practice was actually quite uncommon. The reality was apparently that a number of illegal immigrant who came in single eventually settled down with someone, had kids and only then, incidentally, became impossible to expell. So, it wasn’t really a deterent for illegal immigration at the first place. It just allowed to expell a limited number of illegal immigrants generally present in France for quite a long time when the mother (or father, but most immigrants are male) didn’t have citizenship either. This law (french citizenship is a legal, not constitutionnal, matter) fitted well in the “stop immigration” rethoric of the (corrupt) interior minister of this time, hence it nevertheless passed easily. So, I would tend to be warry about this kind of allegations. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/102 "2005-11-06T16:18:17Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > It’s not been 15 or 20 years. It’s been more like 40. No, it has not, really: **…** … **……**** … ****…Latin** \_\_…Northern YEAR…Total…Europe…Asia…Africa…Oceania… **America** …America…Unknown **1990** \* 19,767,316 \_4,350,403 \_4,979,037 \_\_,363,819 \_\_,104,145 \_ **8,407,837** \_\_,753,917 \_\_,808,158 **1980** \* 14,079,906 \_5,149,572 \_2,539,777 \_\_,199,723 \_\_,\_77,577 \_ **4,372,487** \_\_,853,427 \_\_,887,343 **197** 0\* \_9,619,302 \_5,740,891 \_\_,824,887 \_\_,\_80,143 \_\_,\_41,258 \_ **1,803,970** \_\_,812,421 \_\_,315,732 **1960** \* \_9,738,091 \_7,256,311 \_\_,490,996 \_\_,\_35,355 \_\_,\_34,730 \_\_, **908,309** \_\_,952,500 \_\_,\_59,890 [Nativity of the Population and Place of Birth of the Native Population: 1850 to 1990](http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0029/tab01.html) Now, you could say that the phenonenon had its roots in the 1960s, but by 1970, there were still fewer than 2 million Latin American immigrants. Then it did a bit of (scary) doubling up to 1990, but then the rate actually fell in the 1990s, so that by 2000, instead of the 17 million Latin American immigrants that the doubling would have predicted, we had only 14,477,000 foreign born from Latin America. [Nativity, Place of Birth of the Native Population, and Region of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population: 2000](http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/foreign/ppl-145/tab01-1.pdf) You want them out of their neigborhoods by the second generation? The first generation of substantial size only dates to the 1980s and I certainly see evidence that they are moving out, if by nothing more than the number who now live in Ohio and Michigan. I’m afraid I still see this aspect of your argument as little more than emotional overreaction without a basis in reality. It seems to be a part with this comment: > [@](#): > > I think that the Chinese suffer from the same problem. By choosing to create and remain in Chinese enclaves, they have not woven themselves into society nearly as well as the Japanese, who came here later and in much smaller numbers. No doubt racism and fear of abuse played a large role in their desire to cordon themselves off, but the fact remains that outside of their communities they are almost invisible to much of America. Given their numbers and length of time here, I find this both astounding and sad. To pretend that the Chinese “cordon[ed] themselves off” or that they are invisible, today seems just odd. They did not cordon themselves off, they were compelled to live in ghettoes with restrictions on their ability to purchase land. And I have no idea where you hang out that you do not see ethnic Chinese Americans, but I see them all over–and Ohio is hardly their point of immigration. Aside from a couple of very old and very well-established Chinatowns (San Francisco), most of the Chinatown neighborhoods, today, seem to comprise a handful of markets and restaurants (with the owners driving in from the suburbs along with the rest of us to work each day). The Japanese and Koreans never developed the same enclaves because, by the time they were even let into the country in serious numbers, most of the punitive property laws had been removed (and, of course, we were able to disrupt the Japanese communities by the simple expedient of stealing their homes, then telling them to scatter out and find new ones where ever they might be able after 1945). ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/103 "2005-11-06T16:26:51Z")
> [@Sunspace](#): > > A bit of googling yielded this page at [religioustolerance.org](http://religioustolerance.org): [http://www.religioustolerance.org/shariaon.htm](http://www.religioustolerance.org/shariaon.htm) , which gives a better summary than I could. Thanks for the link. The argument for allowing it was stronger than I though. I found the “Comments by the Publis” particularly instructive. ---
**Author:** ![rayh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@rayh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rayh)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/104 "2005-11-06T17:06:48Z")
[Here](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2001/destination_uk/default.stm) is what the BBC has to say about immigration into the UK. Of particular interest is the [British Immigration Map](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4218740.stm). Including the [155,000](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/born_abroad/countries/html/overview.stm) people from the USA that came to live here (0.27% of the population). There is also an article discussing the [integration](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4218442.stm) of immigrants. Or how about [Super-diversity](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4266102.stm) or [Multiculturalism](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4223322.stm). I believe that immigration has made our country a better, more varied place… ---
**Author:** ![rayh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@rayh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rayh)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/105 "2005-11-06T17:08:21Z")
Bugger, screwed up the links, can someone fix this for me? ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/106 "2005-11-07T01:20:39Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > 41 years, 3 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 19 hours and 27 seconds. C’mon you know damn well there is no definitive way to answer that. And yes, as I indicated, vestiges of the neighborhoods are still there. The personal knowledge I have of both Italian and Jewish families who arrived in the first decade of the 1900s is that they were out of the old neighborhood in one generation. Meaning that the children of those who arrived by boat had moved out of the old neighborhood and into fully mixed neighborhoods. A few that I know of took two generations. I am not personally aware of any that took longer. Granted, I’m sure they exist and I am working from a very small sample size… I guess you’ve never been to Bensonhurst! > [@magellan01](#): > > …Are you saying that I do not see what I claim to see? I hope not… No I’m saying you don’t see the whole picture! > [@magellan01](#): > > …That brings us to sentence #3: Are you claiming that I DO have data? Sentence #4: Are you saying I AM aware of data proving my theory wrong?.. No.No.Maybe? > [@magellan01](#): > > …So, my personal observations (of which you have perfect knowledge) DO NOT lead me to believe that I am correct? Interesting… Your personal observations (of which I have imperfect knowledge) may lead you to an incorrect conclusion. Interesting? > [@magellan01](#): > > …That leaves Sentence 6: And that must mean that a trip to any big city is absolutely incapable of convincing you that my theory is correct… Yes. It’s only convincing if I ignore all the cultural islands that you ignore. > [@magellan01](#): > > …Do you mean that you will not change your mind regardless of any evidence that might be presented?.. Will you change your mind if I show you all the non-Spanish speaking cultural islands that you don’t seem to be bothered by? > [@magellan01](#): > > …And I will just add, just because a claim that there are cultural island where Spanish is the language spoken does not mean that I’ve claimed that there are no other cultural island within which they speak a language other than Spanish… But the only ones that you seem concerned with are the Spanish speaking ones, WHY? > [@magellan01](#): > > …Well, I hardly claim to have been everywhere and seen everything. Do you suggest that I should deny the reality my personal experience offers me?.. Yes, since your personal experience is limited. ---
**Author:** ![Foaming\_Cleanser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f05b48/32.png) [@Foaming\_Cleanser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Foaming_Cleanser)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/107 "2005-11-07T04:58:41Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by **magellan01** > Additionally, excessive accommodation of one culture leads to an argument for all cultures. Right now, Canada is having to make accommodations for Sharia law, as Muslim’s insist that their legal traditions be recognized along with those of other laws. > [@](#): > > Governments need to understand the ramifications of every accommodtaion they make. I use the Canada example to because I think that any sane western country will agree that Sharia law is vile, barbaric and inhumane. Canada is not dealing with Sharia law, and never has, so if this is your measure of insanity, rest easy. The idea was never more than a proposal by a single member of an opposition party in one province, Ontario, and the premier officially rejected even consideration of the notion nearly two months ago. Ontario does not represent all of Canada, and a proposal by a member of the second-ranking opposition party in a provincial legislature does not oblige the country to accommodate anyone or anything. From a Sept. 11, [CBC](http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/09/09/sharia-protests-20050909.html) story: > [@](#): > > Premier Dalton McGuinty said today Ontario will reject the use of Shariah law and will move to prohibit all religious-based tribunals to settle family disputes such as divorce. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/108 "2005-11-07T10:26:24Z")
> [@Foaming Cleanser](#): > > Canada is not dealing with Sharia law, and never has… You make this statement, and then provide a link to an article in which a Canadian province had to deal with Sharia law. I’m not sure what your point is? Have you read the thread? Did you see how this came up? Did you read the other articles which links had been provided? ---
**Author:** ![Foaming\_Cleanser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f05b48/32.png) [@Foaming\_Cleanser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Foaming_Cleanser)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/109 "2005-11-07T16:25:00Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > You make this statement, and then provide a link to an article in which a Canadian province had to deal with Sharia law. Ontario didn’t deal with Sharia law. Ontario dealt with the proposal put forward by an opposition member of the legislature pushing its adoption, which received a lot of coverage because of its nature. To say that Canada — never mind the province — is making accommodation for Sharia law merely because of a proposal put forward by some obscure out-of-power party member is akin to saying the U.S. federal government and all state governments must accommodate the same proposal — or any other — put forward by some obscure Democrat in a Republican-dominated state legislature. The possibility of it becoming law was even less likely because the proposal was made by a third-party-ranking opposition member. In the extremely unlikely event it had become a bill, it would have had to face a vote against it by the Official Opposition members as well as the government members. Any proposal made by any opposition member isn’t a bill, nor is it a law, nor is it likely to be. In the case of adopting anything like Sharia law, the reverse of any accommodation everywhere else — in either country — would be the reality. Any member of a law-making body at any level, can propose anything. Equating the likelihood of some shoot-from-the-mouth proposal becoming a bill then a law because of the amount of the ink it generates only sells more newspapers. Aside from that, there is the possibility that the premier of Ontario engineered this tempest-in-a-teapot controversy, or at the least took advantage of the opportunity, to get rid of all such religious courts. Sharia law was dealt with only as far as using it as a catalyst. If so, the plan worked admirably. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2005, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/110 "2005-11-07T17:11:15Z")
> [@Foaming Cleanser](#): > > Aside from that, there is the possibility that the premier of Ontario engineered this tempest-in-a-teapot controversy, or at the least took advantage of the opportunity, to get rid of all such religious courts. Sharia law was dealt with only as far as using it as a catalyst. If so, the plan worked admirably. This is an interesting insight. Thanks. Regarding my posts on the subject, I was simply saying that Canada, Ontario if you like, was put in a position to have to figure out what to do. I did not mean to say, and don’t think I did, that Sharia Law was put on the books. We are in agreement on the facts. I think this issue is noteworthy, though. Given what has happened in Holland, and France (current riots aside even), I think the instances of western countries having to deal with the issue of Sharia law (determining of they will accommodate it and to what extent) will be increasing. ---
**Author:** ![BwanaBob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bwanabob/32/2985_2.png) [@BwanaBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BwanaBob)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2005, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/111 "2005-11-08T15:29:57Z")
Ireland got it right. And the world still spun on its axis. If it was okay for Ireland to take control of their immigration, the United States deserves the same right. End of story. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2005, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/112 "2005-11-08T16:36:14Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > And it also might ensure that American culture would dominate throughout N. America (which I see as desirable). > . Why exactly do you see this as desirable? ---
**Author:** ![shelbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@shelbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shelbo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2005, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/113 "2005-11-08T18:19:33Z")
> [@MilTan](#): > > Under what circumstances would someone be either born or naturalized in the US and _not_ be subject to its jurisdiction? Diplomats that receive diplomatic immunity are not “subject to the jurisdition” of the United States. Currently, childred born in the United States to foreign diplomats are not granted citizenship. > [@MilTan](#): > > Would you argue that illegal aliens are not subject to US jurisdiction? Illegal aliens are clearly subject to US jurisdiction, and are routinely arrested, jailed, deported, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2005, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/114 "2005-11-08T20:01:33Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I think the counter-intuitive solution is for the US to annex Mexico. > > “But they’d all come here, then,” you say. > > Ah, but then all of Mexico would be subject to the Minimum Wage, and developers would buy underperforming Mexican assets for tiny fractions of what they would cost in the current territory of the United States. > > The result would be that the American economic ethic would spread throughout Mexico and transform that region. > > It would be a mess, to be sure, but the situation would probably stabalize within 30 years instead of 100. I too have kicked around this idea in a term paper half a lifetime ago, but the idea touches on the real issue that the Mexican government is not doing enough for its own people to keep them employed. Outsourcing has helped some, but the ogliopoly market keeps unemployment high, and Presidente Fox is all too happy to let his people flee the country to seek employment elsewhere and count on the billions of dollars in remittances sent back to his country…why would he stop a cash cow like that? Why not let other countries deal with his working poor and so he can sit on his ass and do token little or nothing? If we were to stop the illegal immigration, then Fox (and his successors) would actually HAVE to address their own problem or face a revolution in the not to distant future. To make the illegal immigration issue an issue of race is just plain ignorant…the issue is making a country being responsible for its own people, not dump them off on a doorstep of every other country. Fox and his corrupted government is not doing enough for the people of Mexico. There’s even a double standard going on in Mexico when it comes to immigration law…the Mexican government upholds their laws, especially (and brutally) with illegal immigrants coming from Guatamala, Honduras, El Salvador, etc. [Excuse me, but can someone tell me who are the real racists?](http://www.cis.org/articles/2002/back702.html) ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2005, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/115 "2005-11-08T20:37:42Z")
This is my first impression of the question, without even reading the OP. No. People don’t immigrate to a country just because their children can be citizens. They emigrate from their countries looking for opportunity. So any direct effect on immigration would be close to nil. However, there would, without birthright citizenship, be as many children born to immigrants as there are now. They would no longer be counted as Americans, but as foreigners, making the numbers look bigger. And they would presumably be denied basic civil rights by the racist/nativists that manage to gain power (always a risk with local democratic institutions). This would cause a lot of problems. So the net effect on immigrants, their children, & the society as a whole would, I think, be worse. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2005, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/116 "2005-11-08T21:44:54Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > The only solution to the immigration problem that isn’t totalitarian and ugly is to equalize economies. > > Erek How? ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2005, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/117 "2005-11-08T23:16:22Z")
So orphans can be deported as foreigners? 😕😕😕 ---
**Author:** ![CBEscapee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b19c9b/32.png) [@CBEscapee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CBEscapee)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2005, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/118 "2005-11-09T01:02:32Z")
> [@Yeticus Rex](#): > > I too have kicked around this idea in a term paper half a lifetime ago, but the idea touches on the real issue that the Mexican government is not doing enough for its own people to keep them employed. Outsourcing has helped some, but the ogliopoly market keeps unemployment high, and Presidente Fox is all too happy to let his people flee the country to seek employment elsewhere and count on the billions of dollars in remittances sent back to his country…why would he stop a cash cow like that? Why not let other countries deal with his working poor and so he can sit on his ass and do token little or nothing? If we were to stop the illegal immigration, then Fox (and his successors) would actually HAVE to address their own problem or face a revolution in the not to distant future. > > To make the illegal immigration issue an issue of race is just plain ignorant…the issue is making a country being responsible for its own people, not dump them off on a doorstep of every other country. Fox and his corrupted government is not doing enough for the people of Mexico. There’s even a double standard going on in Mexico when it comes to immigration law…the Mexican government upholds their laws, especially (and brutally) with illegal immigrants coming from Guatamala, Honduras, El Salvador, etc. [Excuse me, but can someone tell me who are the real racists?](http://www.cis.org/articles/2002/back702.html) US immigration policy towards Mexico has always been guided by racism. > [@Aeschines](#): > > I think the counter-intuitive solution is for the US to annex Mexico. “But they’d all come here, then,” you say. Ah, but then all of Mexico would be subject to the Minimum Wage, and developers would buy underperforming Mexican assets for tiny fractions of what they would cost in the current territory of the United States. The result would be that the American economic ethic would spread throughout Mexico and transform that region. It would be a mess, to be sure, but the situation would probably stabalize within 30 years instead of 100. You two are carrying your share of the white man’s burden, Kipling would be proud. And many Americans get upset when Latin Americans call them " imperialista yanqui,". ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2005, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/119 "2005-11-09T04:45:33Z")
> [@CBEscapee](#): > > US immigration policy towards Mexico has always been guided by racism. > > You two are carrying your share of the white man’s burden, Kipling would be proud. And many Americans get upset when Latin Americans call them " imperialista yanqui,". That’s it? Any substantiation? Or just commentary and snipes from the sideline? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![CBEscapee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b19c9b/32.png) [@CBEscapee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CBEscapee)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2005, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564/120 "2005-11-09T05:30:39Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That’s it? Any substantiation? Or just commentary and snipes from the sideline? :rolleyes: What kind of substantiation do you need? Do you believe the USA’s history of racist immigration policy is some obscure fact hidden away in it’s history? It may be an ignored fact or a fact many Americans, especially white Americans might not like to admit but a fact nonetheless. A simple Google search with the keywords \ will give plenty of links to peruse at your leisure. As far as my “snipes” go, I’m assuming you are talking about my comment on the posts of YR and Aeschines. The dictionary defines imperialism as such: - “the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence”\* If you can show me how talk of annexation of another country doesn’t fit into that defintion then I’ll withdraw my “snipe”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-ending-birthright-citizenship-help-to-control-americas-borders/329564.md?page=7)