After having gone through the process of trying to help an Indian trans person find a job in my country in order to allow them to get here legally and having found the requirements being draconic, I don’t care about anyone illegally moving to a country as long as they behave respectfully, which they most usually do because conflicts where the police gets involved are more likely to get them deported. Do I want them to pay taxes? Sure, but the extent to which they’re able to pay taxes depends on the country deciding to regularize their status.
A bit tangential, but there are a lot of cases when the country doesn’t want you, especially if you listen to the opinion of the officials. They are quick to judge one to be too poor, too old, too stupid, too smart, too demanding, too questioning their decisions, etc.
The hilarity of half this list being things natives within a country often don’t do themselves, and the other half only because they literally can’t.
The US for example has Christian nationalists trying to impose their own values on everyone else, there is an entire branch of government which exists because people don’t like to pay taxes, everyone I know has done under the table work at one point or another, and I know plenty of native born shoplifters.
But somehow those idiots are more deserving to be here than an immigrant who would be denied entry, but snuck across the border 15 years ago and has been contributing more to society than many Americans?
Uh, yeah, the “native” population of a country is more deserving to be in their country regardless of circumstance than an illegal immigrant, that’s how countries work. Legal immigrants are also deserving. The citizenry of a country get to have those discussions about how they want their country to run, not other countries. The citizens not paying taxes, shoplifting, and breaking the law should be prosecuted for those crimes, the same as someone breaking immigration laws. It’s not a good thing when any government picks and chooses which laws don’t apply to which people, because it’s not usually the poor and the immigrant that benefits. Based on your apparent support for unlimited and unregulated immigration, I will assume you also claim to be anti-colonial and I’ll assume you disagree with countries meddling with or toppling other governments.
The US illegally flooded Texas with both legal and illegal immigrants, who didn’t integrate into the Mexican culture, kept isolated, and tried to impose their values on Mexico (hint: slavery was a “value”). They eventually caused a rebellion, and flipped the territory to join the US in the end. Europe sent a lot of illegal immigrants all over the world to impose their values on the countries they pulled into their empires. China flooded Tibet with immigrants to the same effect as Texas. The western world had a habit for not liking when a part of a countries citizens would try to impose socialist or communist values on everyone else in that country; I’ll assume you wouldn’t support the foreign intervention that happened to stop those movements, believing that those countries should get to make they determination themselves. I’ll even go out on a limb and assume you condem Israeli settlers illegally immigrating into the West Bank and Gaza.
All severe examples of worst case scenarios and weaponized immigration, but why does territorial sovereignty apply in these cases while not applying to the current mass immigration happening worldwide right now. The intent may be different, 99.99% of illegal immigration across the Southern US border and across the Mediterranean is more “benign” economic migration, but laws should still apply. It is hypocritical to condem border and immigration enforcement in the US and EU, while then condemning border and immigration violation by Russia, China, and Israel. Countries can’t exist without enforceable borders, and enforcement should be consistently and fairly applied based on rule of law.
For me everything is based on how they get there and how they conduct themselves.
I have been an immigrant to several countries and I still am, but
I had all of the proper paperwork,
I didn’t sneak across any borders illegally,
I didn’t overstay my visas,
I didn’t pay some guy on a boat to bring me there,
I didn’t commit any crimes that are worse than jaywalking,
I didn’t get clumped together with other people from my country and try to impose my values on the citizens of the country I was in,
I didn’t do any under the table work,
I paid all of my taxes.
These are the thing that I expect from others as well.
That’s a lot of words for “I can’t (won’t?) see past my own privilege and have no compassion for people who don’t have the same options I do.”
Then too bad, I don’t have an option to fly into space, yet you won’t see me trying to glue myself to the next rocket that SpaceX launches.
After having gone through the process of trying to help an Indian trans person find a job in my country in order to allow them to get here legally and having found the requirements being draconic, I don’t care about anyone illegally moving to a country as long as they behave respectfully, which they most usually do because conflicts where the police gets involved are more likely to get them deported. Do I want them to pay taxes? Sure, but the extent to which they’re able to pay taxes depends on the country deciding to regularize their status.
Rules are rules and if you don’t follow them, the country doesn’t want you.
It’s a different conversation when you talk about the consequences of such policies, but that’s what the country decided and those are the rules.
A bit tangential, but there are a lot of cases when the country doesn’t want you, especially if you listen to the opinion of the officials. They are quick to judge one to be too poor, too old, too stupid, too smart, too demanding, too questioning their decisions, etc.
The hilarity of half this list being things natives within a country often don’t do themselves, and the other half only because they literally can’t.
The US for example has Christian nationalists trying to impose their own values on everyone else, there is an entire branch of government which exists because people don’t like to pay taxes, everyone I know has done under the table work at one point or another, and I know plenty of native born shoplifters.
But somehow those idiots are more deserving to be here than an immigrant who would be denied entry, but snuck across the border 15 years ago and has been contributing more to society than many Americans?
Get the fuck outta here with that BS.
Uh, yeah, the “native” population of a country is more deserving to be in their country regardless of circumstance than an illegal immigrant, that’s how countries work. Legal immigrants are also deserving. The citizenry of a country get to have those discussions about how they want their country to run, not other countries. The citizens not paying taxes, shoplifting, and breaking the law should be prosecuted for those crimes, the same as someone breaking immigration laws. It’s not a good thing when any government picks and chooses which laws don’t apply to which people, because it’s not usually the poor and the immigrant that benefits. Based on your apparent support for unlimited and unregulated immigration, I will assume you also claim to be anti-colonial and I’ll assume you disagree with countries meddling with or toppling other governments.
The US illegally flooded Texas with both legal and illegal immigrants, who didn’t integrate into the Mexican culture, kept isolated, and tried to impose their values on Mexico (hint: slavery was a “value”). They eventually caused a rebellion, and flipped the territory to join the US in the end. Europe sent a lot of illegal immigrants all over the world to impose their values on the countries they pulled into their empires. China flooded Tibet with immigrants to the same effect as Texas. The western world had a habit for not liking when a part of a countries citizens would try to impose socialist or communist values on everyone else in that country; I’ll assume you wouldn’t support the foreign intervention that happened to stop those movements, believing that those countries should get to make they determination themselves. I’ll even go out on a limb and assume you condem Israeli settlers illegally immigrating into the West Bank and Gaza.
All severe examples of worst case scenarios and weaponized immigration, but why does territorial sovereignty apply in these cases while not applying to the current mass immigration happening worldwide right now. The intent may be different, 99.99% of illegal immigration across the Southern US border and across the Mediterranean is more “benign” economic migration, but laws should still apply. It is hypocritical to condem border and immigration enforcement in the US and EU, while then condemning border and immigration violation by Russia, China, and Israel. Countries can’t exist without enforceable borders, and enforcement should be consistently and fairly applied based on rule of law.