I suspect that the obsession with free immigration is tied to the Civil Rights era insistence that all cultures are really the same, and that it is therefore bigoted and immoral to exclude people.
In Canada Quebec has always been demanding special rights. When our Constitution was written other provinces were against special rights for one province. Citing large Indian or Ukrainian populations, BC and the prairies. Pierre Trudeau and the idiot Premiers at the time enshrined multi cultures in Canada with the idea they are all equal to ours. A sop to allow special status to Quebec. In Canada this was a major contributor.
I believe the conversation with the American living in Germany really happened because I have seen numerous similar comments on FB posts. It also reminds me of a comment I saw a few years ago on an anti-gun post. One commenter said "So many people have guns, its getting to where I think I need a gun too, to protect myself!"
Absolutely an honest definition of how legal boundaries should be in sane societies. However if you are involved with a political party that can’t achieve success legally then all bets are off. In those circumstances an additional 15 million new voters will assure victory. Morality be damned.
A human right to movement, if you concede that, you enable the argument against borders. That is unavoidable, which means then you set the stage for squelching a human right.
The better argument is there is no universal human right to free movement.
I disagree. You have a right to leave America, but as I clearly stated, other countries have a corresponding right to deny you entry. Should you choose to apply for immigration, you are completely free to do so and if accepted, you may live in the country you choose - you are also free to renounce your citizenship in the process.
If I need permission to enter, then I don't have a right to go there, do I? It's the exact same principle as owning a piece of property - that is fundamentally exclusive and cannot logically conflict with some other right.
Citizenship is an exclusive thing, therefore no one has a right to it.
I disagree. My teen son is free to leave this house if he no longer wants to live by the rules of the house. But he has no right to go into anyone's home and demand they allow him to stay there.
Your son doesn't own your house. You're as free to kick him out as he is to leave on his own. None of that has to do with some universal human right to freedom of movement.
I suspect that the obsession with free immigration is tied to the Civil Rights era insistence that all cultures are really the same, and that it is therefore bigoted and immoral to exclude people.
In Canada Quebec has always been demanding special rights. When our Constitution was written other provinces were against special rights for one province. Citing large Indian or Ukrainian populations, BC and the prairies. Pierre Trudeau and the idiot Premiers at the time enshrined multi cultures in Canada with the idea they are all equal to ours. A sop to allow special status to Quebec. In Canada this was a major contributor.
I believe the conversation with the American living in Germany really happened because I have seen numerous similar comments on FB posts. It also reminds me of a comment I saw a few years ago on an anti-gun post. One commenter said "So many people have guns, its getting to where I think I need a gun too, to protect myself!"
Absolutely an honest definition of how legal boundaries should be in sane societies. However if you are involved with a political party that can’t achieve success legally then all bets are off. In those circumstances an additional 15 million new voters will assure victory. Morality be damned.
A human right to movement, if you concede that, you enable the argument against borders. That is unavoidable, which means then you set the stage for squelching a human right.
The better argument is there is no universal human right to free movement.
I disagree. You have a right to leave America, but as I clearly stated, other countries have a corresponding right to deny you entry. Should you choose to apply for immigration, you are completely free to do so and if accepted, you may live in the country you choose - you are also free to renounce your citizenship in the process.
If I need permission to enter, then I don't have a right to go there, do I? It's the exact same principle as owning a piece of property - that is fundamentally exclusive and cannot logically conflict with some other right.
Citizenship is an exclusive thing, therefore no one has a right to it.
I disagree. My teen son is free to leave this house if he no longer wants to live by the rules of the house. But he has no right to go into anyone's home and demand they allow him to stay there.
Your son doesn't own your house. You're as free to kick him out as he is to leave on his own. None of that has to do with some universal human right to freedom of movement.