Nathan Moore's Thoughts
The Protests – This Isn’t About National Security
The protests in Los Angeles, among others, are not to be taken lightly. Especially so in LA, where it seems no one predicted the size of the protests (500,000 at last count). The people protesting will, for the most part, be dismissed as lawless advocates by many on my side of the political spectrum. It’s time for conservative pundits to can the xenophobic soundbites. Those on the left…who knows. The social dynamic in southern California, New Mexico and Arizona is something we should look more closely into. Let’s start with some reality.
We cannot seal the southern border. It is too long, too porous, and would require too much manpower. We would do better to use those resources to scan every cargo container that enters the country (also, almost an impossible task). Mexicans did not attack us on 9/11 – if national security is the real concern, we shouldn’t overlook our much longer and less monitored neighbor to the North. If it’s not national security concerning us, I think we need to ask some tough questions of ourselves.
Though it’s a popular thing to propose, it is physically impossible to block off the Mexican border, and the Hispanic vote in enough districts has become sufficiently powerful to scare many congressman away from any such idea altogether to where it is also nearly politically impossible. The alternative then, if we cannot stop the flow of northward bound immigration, is to monitor it. A guest worker program with some method of American indoctrination would do that. Some acts are malum in se (where the act itself is clearly bad, like murder). Immigration to America, which has infected so many millions throughout history, does not fall into that category. We’re talking about a set of immigration rules that have outlived any modicum of usefulness. The desire of the world to come here is a net positive. We have established a set of laws we cannot enforce, with dubious policy goals in light of the volume we must now handle and the national security concerns post-9/11. If the system isn’t accomplishing its stated goals, we have to change it.
Besides, illegal immigrants aren’t the real problem. A zero tolerance policy toward those who are here will result in the eventual de-Americanization of the southwest region of our country. If a Mexican national comes here, illegally or not, we need to assimilate them or risk an expansion in influence of the Mexican government in our affairs that we cannot afford. After the next generation of Mexican immigrants becomes newly minted citizens, border of Mexico will de facto expand into the southern border of United States. To avoid this, we need a program of Americanization, not the continued call for enforcement of unenforceable laws. Treating illegal immigrants as some scourge accomplishes nothing. They aren’t going anywhere, and by most estimates add much more to the economy than they may receive in government assistance. Let’s make the desire to reach America at any cost work for America. We can absorb more.
A guest worker program, or something similar, with a goal toward Americanization should be put into place. Mandatory English classes along with weekly American history classes would go a long way to this end. The goal should be to de-Mexicanize the immigrating Mexican worker, not foster an underground culture unassimilated into American society.
(note, a new category has been added, starting with this post, under “Immigration”).
UPDATE Harry Monroe has more here.
FURTHER UPDATE And of course, there are those who are angry and want more unrest, for no other reason than the complete destruction of American society.
FURTHER FURTHER UPDATE My point made here. As Harry Monroe said in the comments, we can’t be accused of being knee-jerk. This, however, is just that.
UPDATE AD INFINITUM Virginia Postrel notes
Anti-immigration forces have made great strides politically by cynically conflating terrorists and criminals with dishwashers and construction workers. Any real plan to “secure the borders” should make it easier, not harder, to separate the two. Workers, especially those who want to settle and become citizens (or have their children become citizens), are not threats. They’re contributors to American society.
Bingo.

















March 26th, 2006 at 3:21 pm
You crazy little liberal you…I do agree with most of your assumptions, although I think there can be something done to somewhat strengthen our border. I think a reasonable alternative would be to allow pretty much anyone in so long as they can pass a thorough criminal background check, and give them a temporary 5 year (possibly less) work visa. If when their five years are up they can show at least 3 years employment they will be given the opportunity to obtain permanent citizenship. Obviously if at any time in those 5 years they are convicted for a felony, they would forfeit their temporary citizenship.
I have to say though, the use of 9/11 to scare people into supporting draconian measures against immigrants is a tactic learned from President Bush in his pursuits to elevate the status of the Executive Branch and launch the Iraq War. So any complaints on his part over the overusage of 9/11 will undoubtedly fall on deaf ears in the public.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
Well, I am a liberal in the classical sense of the term.
I agree that we should speed individuals along the path of citizenship. If they want to come here for opportunity, let’s help put their roots so deeply into American soil that they simply cannot leave.
Oh, and for the record, I do think you’re overreaching with that last paragraph. Too much effect, with too little causation.
N
March 26th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
I think the causation is that the proponents of anti-immigration policies know that the best way to get a majority of Americans on their side is to emotionalize the issue and Bush has shown that one poll tested formula for getting people’s nationalist emotion levels up is to bring up 9/11 as a reason for a certain policy.
The battle over immigration will be largely in the Republican party and it will be largely between the pro-business front (which I’m assuming you’re in) and the populist nationalist front (Lou Dobbs, Pat Buchanan, Allen, Tancredo, etc…). In order for the populist nationalists to win the argument they must portray the buisness side of the Republican party with putting profits over national security. The same as Bush accused Democrats (an accusation I’m sure you agree with) of putting politics (and sometimes Labor interests) over national security.
March 26th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
Who would have thought it? Nathan Moore and I are the leading Nashville liberal bloggers on immigration!
At least they won’t say we’re knee-jerk.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:18 pm
No surprise to me, HJ. I aready had him pegged.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:09 pm
Yes – but I’m not knee jerk…people get hurt that way.
January 18th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
young russian teen
gimmemoney 225610 Top news about young russian teen.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:47 pm
girl howard stern sybian
Info about girl howard stern sybian.
June 27th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
[...] Moore never has been as Sean Braisted clearly points out. He, and his wife, have been stridently pro-immigration on their blog. They are securely to the left of the Party’s grassroots on this [...]