Undocumented means illegal. It really rustles my jimmies when people complain about sneaking in when my family had to struggle so much to immigrate legally.
It’s nice that your family had the money for lawyers and such, and had the background to be accepted.
Plenty of others don’t have those advantages, but they still want to improve their lives, or escape from terrible political or criminal oppression. They are human, too, with families that they love as much as anyone else loves theirs, and they want to improve the lives of their families, and their descendants.
Who cares how they get here? They came seeking a better life. I would rather have more people like that, than elitist pigs who feel entitled to America, and we should all get their permission to live our lives.
You have absolutely no idea how legal immigration to the US works. My family immigrated from Iraq nearly a decade and a half ago. We had NOTHING. We had no property, no savings, no investments, and no money for anything like lawyers or the like. Yet despite our struggles, we kept being patient and did everything necessary to enter the country legally.
If you unironically think that the only way to immigrate to this country is by being extraordinarily rich or by sneaking illegally, then you’re too ignorant for this conversation. This applies doubly so if you can’t even comprehend why illegal immigration is wrong on both a legal and moral level. Not only is it a breach of national security when you have this many people enter the country without documentation or vetting, but it’s also a slap in the face for all the people like my family who went through a lot to get in the country the right way AND to all the people and families out there who are still waiting their turn to get in. Why should they be shafted in favor of people who choose to cut the line, intentionally circumnavigate immigration laws, and still feel entitled to receive the same treatment as legal immigrants?
Immigration is a privilege, always has been and always will be. It is not right and never was. Nobody is entitled to be here or any other country they are not citizens of. My family had the privilege of moving here and so did yours. If people want to move to another country, great, but they have to do it through the legal channels. If they reject you then you have to respect it, and if their system takes a long time then you just have to wait. You can’t just skip immigration laws just because you don’t feel like it. By doing so, you automatically forfeit any sympathy for your immigration case (the only exceptions being genuine asylum cases from either Mexico or Canada). Why should sympathy go to you instead of someone who is going through similar circumstances by immigrated legally or is waiting their turn legally? The answer is it shouldn’t
Uh, yes I do. I helped a very close friend of mine immigrate to America. She came here from Venezuela illegally, then immediately started the process.
Don’t tell me that it isn’t expensive, and doesn’t take lawyers, because I lent her several thousand dollars to cover the costs. Even though she was working hard to resolve her situation, she was still technically illegal while the process played out.
That was about 10 years ago, and she just became a legal citizen in December.
Your family was from Iraq, a country that we deliberately broke. So while your family didn’t have much, it’s likely that your family had special treatment because of America’s special relationship with Iraq at the time. I doubt your situation was the same as the person who just slips in from some random country.
What are you even on about lmao? Ever since the Persian Gulf war back in the 1990s, Iraq was heavily sanctioned by the US and immigration was very difficult, and this was doubly so after 9/11 and the 2003 invasion. The US ever since then has had ADDITIONAL layers of mandatory screening, background checks, paperwork, and interviews compared to other countries. The heightened scrutiny that Iraqis had to go through when applying to immigration to the US is iconic. That’s the “special treatment” my family went through. Not to mention that we were Iraqi citizens living in Syria at the time when we did our immigration process so even if there was any of that elusive special treatment, it didn’t cover us. But that’s the thing, you literally know nothing about me, my family, or the immigration process to get here. You’re just making up assumptions to rationalize your ignorance.
Also, If we assume that your story about Venezuelan friend is true, it directly contradicts the very point you made in your previous comment. The OC specifically pointed out how he gets annoyed when illegal immigrants get more entitled than his family, who has struggled greatly to get into this country legally. You immediately accused him and his family of being privileged, wealthy, and having the right background even though you know nothing about OC, his family, what they went through, or what’s required to immigrate here legally. Right after saying this, you go ahead and provide this anecdote where you talk about how your friend ILLEGALLY immigrated here, PAID her way through the system by hiring American lawyers using thousands of dollars of her own money as well as money you lent her, and then had the right background to get accepted in the end. That’s literally the privilege you were accusing the OC’s family of having.
If you have no idea of legal immigration actually works, why are you talking so confidently about it to people who have actually gone through it? It seems your only experience with immigration is a single indirect case of illegal immigration, and your knowledge doesn’t extend past that. Where do you get off telling us what our experiences were like when you don’t even know what you’re talking about? That’s just arrogance.
My friend also arrived with nothing, got a job and worked her ass off, using nearly every penny to pay for the process. Like many, she started illegal, but became a citizen. That’s the point.
Good for her, but your friend still came here illegally. She jumped ahead of a lot of people who are waiting to come here legally. The point is that not liking the system, even if it’s not great, is not an excuse to come illegally anyway. If you choose to do so regardless, you should do so with the understanding that you’re not going to be afforded the same opportunities or sympathy as people who want to immigrate here legally. The opinion that OC expressed is that people who came here illegally, like your friend, who also complain and whine get under his nerves because they literally cut the line and chose to circumnavigate the laws in front of people like his very own family who had to struggle to get here and still have the audacity to act entitled. It’s an understandable sense of frustration.
Nobody " jumped the line," there is no “line.” It’s dumb concepts like that that keep this nonsense going. There isn’t one line, there are immigration offices all over the country, and she went through the process locally, in an area with a much higher rate of immigration than most places, with the facilities to handle it. Nobody had to wait longer, or was refused because of how my friend came here. Stop using that ignorant reason to excuse your bigotry.
She was from Venezuela, which is occupied by an authoritarian government. It wouldn’t have been possible for her to navigate the situation from Venezuela. In the absence of the ability to emigrate legally out of Venezuela, the people cobbled together a system to come to America in a technically illegal manner, but immediately get into the legal asylum system. My friend was introduced to this “system” through her church, which had helped other people do the same thing.
Many, many people came here like she did, and when she arrived, she stayed in an apartment with three other Venezuelans, all of whom were going through the same asylum process, and my friend used their lawyer.
The US government even had a special program for Venezuelans and other oppressed nations. Trump cancelled that program, and instantly declared all those that were here under the protection of that law, over 200,000 people, to be criminals. Luckily my friend became a US citizen last December, just before Trump took office. The only thing that was standing between being a law-abiding American citizen, and being a vicious Venezuelan gang member, was a few short weeks of time.
Ok. I’m not from the US and thought this was obvious. Is anyone in favor of undocumented or illegal immigrants? I thought the actual problem was deportations with no trials. It seems obvious no one should support illegal immigration. I think instead you should support allowing more people to inmigrate
The problem is that system changes arbitrarily from one administration to the next, and people who thought they were protected suddenly find themselves unprotected, and then some clown comes along, and just starts throwing out people who thought they were safe for YEARS.
Even Ronald Reagan was able to come up with a fairly reasonable program to deal with the issue at the time, but the current MAGA Nazis literally take pleasure in oppressing people, and undocumented people are easy, low hanging fruit.
While you’re right, there’s still a big difference from legal immigrants who were granted temporary residence and illegal immigrants. The former were allowed into the country for a limited duration of time, but the latter weren’t allowed in the first place.
There’s people that qualified for a process, then that process was suspended/ eligibility is changed etc etc etc.
“Illegal immigrants” basically all start as legal migrants working through the paperwork.
I agree with you that the country’s migration system needs an overhaul, however being impatient or dissatisfied with the current system is not an excuse to cross into the country illegally.
But you can’t tell if you will be here illegally, because the rules are obtuse or change.
The process gets longer or shorter depending on the administration, but the general immigration rules have been more less the same. The only thing that I can think of that can apply to what you’re saying is the temporary protection program, but that’s a whole different subject.
No. Immigration programs change.
https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-postwar-immigration-policy
Look at all the times things have changed. What do you think happens to the people that are established that no longer qualify and are part way through the process?
It ia more nuanced than that. What makes immigration “illegal” is incredibly arbitrary and inconsistent as a matter of both practice AND law in the USA. Moreover, there are many who believe, as I do, that people have a right to try making a home wherever they are. Where immigration is a problem, it isn’t an immigration problem but rather a collapse of existing broken aspects of the society–the immigration pressure just brings these failings to light.
Complete nonsense. Countries have borders and if you cross into another country without the proper legal channels then you’re an illegal immigrant. It’s simple as that. Trying to circumnavigate immigration laws is very much a problem.
What constitutes a legal channel is not “simple” and you’re either being disingenuous or are wildly ignorant of the practical reality of immigration. Regardless, it also is totally reasonable to believe that “circumnavigating immigration laws” is very much a non-issue and by and large it is totally unimportant whether an immigrant is documented or not, as far as the state is concerned–if anything, the state, such that it is a unitary entity with its own interests, benefits from undocumented immigrants as they pay into the system and minimally draw out of it (this is also a bad thing, imo, but I suspect we disagree on why).
It doesn’t matter whether the immigration system is simple or convulsed. It is still the immigration system of the country, and you have to respect it. Feeling dissatisfied or impatient with it is not a valid excuse to actually smuggle yourself into the country illegally. With the sole exception of genuine asylum seekers, nobody has a moral argument, let alone, a legal one to be in any country illegally. Nobody is entitled to being an immigrant to any country. Immigration is a privilege, always has been and always will be, and you have to respect the customs of the country you want to immigrate to. If they’re reviewing your case then you have to be patient, and if they rejected you then you have to accept that decision.
Also, it’s completely asinine to try passing off illegal immigration as some sort of non issue. That’s just an out of touch take. It is an absolutely MASSIVE issue. Here’s just a few ways where it’s a problem:
-
Security: You have random people inside the country that are not known, tracked, and vetted. That’s a major national security threat as it leaves your society vulnerable to smugglers, foreign adversaries’ agents, human traffickers, terrorists, and a whole host of other criminals that could wander in and out of the country with no supervision, approval or consequence.
-
Legal: Countries have laws for a reason, they’re there to reflect the public interest and will. Having people blatantly violate them is a serious challenge to the country’s institutions. If these institutions, like immigration, border, and customs agencies can’t enforce the laws they’re tasked to enforce, then their authority and legitimacy have been undermined. If you read any history book, you would know that a country with weak institutions that cannot carry out their basic duties, like enforcing the laws they were created to enforce, is a country that’s headed to towards instability and collapse because it is no longer able to govern properly. The consequences of illegal immigrants breaking immigration laws are very serious.
-
Economic: While illegal immigrants technically do contribute more in taxes than they take out, I would argue that it’s a bad thing because their undocumented status makes them vulnerable to exploitation by employers who pay low wages and offer poor conditions, thus creating a shadow labor market that undercuts American workers and erodes labor standards. This two tiered system isn’t just unjust, it incentivizes lawbreaking and devalues citizenship. Prosecuting employers alone won’t fix it, and simply granting undocumented immigrants full rights sidesteps the core issue which is that we’re normalizing illegal entry and undermining the rule of law.
-
Moral: Let’s zoom out of the technical aspects and think about morals. Our immigration system, while flawed, is still functional. There are millions of people all around the world from all backgrounds, who are waiting their turn to get into the country legally. Why should these people get shafted in favor of people who chose to cut in line? How is that fair? By illegally migrating, not only have they disrespected this country, but they also insulted all these people who are trying into the country legally as well as all legal immigrants in the country who sacrificed so much to be here. There’s no good argument for illegal immigration, the most common excuse that I hear is that these people come from a place of hardship and they just want a better life, but that’s not good enough. If empathy is the standard, it should be extended first to those who respect the process, not those who disregard it.
All these points are just common sense. It’s absolutely crazy that I even have to argue why basic immigration laws are necessary. I understand Lemmy is off the rails politically, but even then, has the state of our education system degraded so much that people genuinely cannot comprehend the importance of immigration laws? Seeing people unironically defend open borders without understand why that wouldn’t work makes me feel like I’m taking crazy pills.
The only point you’ve made that has any real practical weight is the issue of labor exploitation of undocumented immigrants, which I agree is terrible, but even then you seem to not care as much about the inequity of it as much as that it “devalues citizenship,” whatever the fuck that is. None of your other points are more than baseless handwringing. Your argument about the legal ramifications is circular and based on nothing more than post hoc mental gymnastics to reach the unsupported conclusion you started with. Your economic argument is hollow and literally concludes that it isn’t important because your circular legal argument is what is important. The moral argument assumes a zero sum game and, again, is not based on anything factual. Finally, your security threat argument is evidenced by effectively nothing–the things you raise are threats regardless of immigration and are most actively guarded against at other points throughout their respective threat trajectory.
I think before you flap about complaining about education quality, you should reflect on your own reasoning as presented. You have applied zero logical process and effectively thrown a heap of conclusory axioms in the air and sputtered with indignation. You have effectively argued nothing and only shown your own severe lack of self-reflection.
The only point you’ve made that has any real practical weight is the issue of labor exploitation of undocumented immigrants
All of my points are both true and perfectly valid. You not liking them doesn’t invalidate them nor does it make them any less significant.
even then you seem to not care as much about the inequity of it as much as that it “devalues citizenship,”
I’m against the exploitation because it’s exploitation, but the solution people like you come up with is not even remotely practical. Your solution to make illegal immigrants have the same benefits of citizens without them actually being citizens. f anybody, anywhere can come into this country without approval or documentation, and start working and getting benefits from the state… then it doesn’t take genius to see how this opens up other types of exploitation.
Not only that, but since there are no controls to regulate the flow of people, then what’s there from stopping the billions of people out there who have live in places with worse economic conditions from just packing up and moving here? The answer is nothing, and with any massive influx of people, you start heavily over burdening the nation’s already stressed systems and start losing social cohesiveness. In other words this is a textbook recipe that leads to collapse.
This type of thinking sounds just and moral on the surface level, but it’s in reality surface level is all it is. The idea falls apart the moment you start looking into the consequences, there’s a reason why unchecked borders haven’t worked well throughout history. The one and only real, practical solution is to overhaul the immigration system to make it more consistent, efficient, quick, and have it work to the benefit of the nation. Once you have that in place, then you make sure that it’s strictly enforced. The only people who are allowed to come here are the people we want to be here. This is common sense.
Your argument about the legal ramifications is circular and based on nothing more than post hoc mental gymnastics to reach the unsupported conclusion you started with.
Your economic argument is hollow and literally concludes that it isn’t important because your circular legal argument is what is important.
The moral argument assumes a zero sum game and, again, is not based on anything factual.
Finally, your security threat argument is evidenced by effectively nothing–the things you raise are threats regardless of immigration and are most actively guarded against at other points throughout their respective threat trajectory.
These are all meaningless buzzword salads. It’s fine if you disagree, but you actually have to put in the effort to explain both your disagreement and your position, otherwise your words hold no weight. Simply saying things like “hollow” and “mental gymnastics” means nothing, and the same goes for insisting that my points are ciruclar and not factual. You saying they are doesn’t make them so, if you aren’t capable of explaining yourself or aren’t able to critique my points on their own merits, then perhaps this conversation isn’t for you.
The only semi-argument you made here is that you think there’s no need to do anything about immigration, because the security threats that I brought up also happen outside of immigration and these issues are being countered elsewhere, but the problem with this argument is that it ignores the fact that the way our immigration is handled a big part of why these issues are much bigger threats than they should be. These threats need to be countered within and outside of immigration.
I think before you flap about complaining about education quality, you should reflect on your own reasoning as presented. You have applied zero logical process and effectively thrown a heap of conclusory axioms in the air and sputtered with indignation. You have effectively argued nothing and only shown your own severe lack of self-reflection.
This honestly proves my point more than anything.
Look, you’re demanding I present counter arguments to statements that literally aren’t argued. Your entire position is effectively “this is bad because I say it is” so of course I’m not going to spend time and energy to counter that. Explain the actual mechanism of harm without resorting to “it’s clear from history” or “it’s a textbook recipe that leads to collapse.” I mean, if you are making your statements disingenuously as I suspect, that’s fine, but I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that you’re in fact sincerely not understanding how you are in no way making logical arguments but just rattling off conclusions.
So, here are some actual facts. Immigration of all stripes has been pretty thoroughly shown to only improve economies in terms of productivity and diversity. Immigrants, no matter what, pay substantially into the system, and thus enable scaling of the resources only some of them end up benefiting from. Immigrants, again of all varieties, are significantly less likely to engage in crime than their native-born counterparts. These are all well established in the literature, so I will take them as axiom.
Given the above, your hypothesized concerns simply don’t track as population flows scale. Crime rates don’t increase (actually go down), economies don’t implode (actually improve), and social systems don’t collapse because they inherently scale in resource allocation proportionally to population (in a competently structured system–i.e., where this fails, it is not due to immigration but to extant deficiencies already in play).
Now, let’s address another deficiency in the “reasoning” you presented. People don’t just magically immigrate between countries, regardless of Immigration laws. Even if we had no borders and lived in a space age utopia, most people would nevertheless stay where they are unless that place was inhospitable to their survival–this isn’t to say there aren’t many economic migrants, but they are still inevitably a fraction of the population of their country of origin and so the naive assumption that “billions” would flow across an open border is just absurd and completely unreasonable.
Ultimately, understand that I am not expecting erasure of borders to happen anytime soon. However, yes, it is patently clear that the current “crackdown” on immigration is a solution looking for a problem so that it can justify totalitarian authoritarianism and immigration is not and has never really been a significant threat to the US, documented or no.
-
