(Illegal) Immigrant day, and a new Anthem

[Makalakumu]

lol...I am a bit familiar with Ojibwa tribes, and I am pretty sure their not singing the national anthem in their native language. They have other songs that they do sing in their native language which sound pretty damn cool.

Yup, they are. I'll see if I can get a recording and upload it.

 

[Marginal]

1.) I think maybe you should re-read the posts here, we are speaking specifically of illegal "immigrants" so you trying to combine legal and illegal is just incorrect. The legalization or deportation of illegal immigrants will have some effect but not the type you spoke about. I also said nothing about anyone (legal or illegal) not being important, you should be wary of placing words in others mouths, its dishonest.

Dishonest is the thread's title. Illegal immigrants weren't the sole marchers, nor were they the sole protestors involved in immigrant day. Despite this, look at the title, and look at how the term immigrant is commonly used in this thread. It's always presumed to be referencing an illegal. Fudging the terms is intentional. It's designed to breed hysteria and make this into a wedge issue resulting in a new version of the yellow scare etc rather than initiating a dialogue on solutions to a solveable social problem.

4.) Um...your contradicting yourself. Being a criminal is breaking the law no?

Laws are never revised? Amended? Retired?

I think the solution is one that will take much time and effort, but I have no problem with alowing those in the country to become legal citizens (within a reasonable period of time or legally here with a visa etc.) or being deported. Look up Mexico's laws and regulation on immigration, or any country for that matter. I just can't understand why people think illegal "immigrants" who take what they want free of any involvement or payment of taxes, should be allowed to continue while we as citizens foot the bill.

Still makes me wonder why guest worker programs are opposed when the end result is they're paying for their part of the bill once they're paying taxes and registration fees etc.

 

[Cruentus]

Yup, they are. I'll see if I can get a recording and upload it.

Cool. I pay attention a bit to the tribes in my area, but I have never heard of anything like that. Probably best to be put in a new thread.

btw... I should note for the record that I am not against people singing the anthem in different languages; although I think that musically there are probably better songs to go through the trouble of translating, it's actually kind of honorable and neat that someone would find our Anthem worth singing in their native language, whether it would be Spanish, Arabic, Ojibwa, or what have you.

I have a problem with the notion that people would DEMAND that our anthem be offered in a different language, which is the message that many of those who protested in the streets are sending.

 

[Hand Sword]

They're also trying to push radio stations, across the country to play it.

 

[Don Roley]

Again, you are neglecting to look at the difference in power between the two parties. If one party can control the choices and set the standards, then there really is no freedom.

You are repeating the same mantra of greed and envy that I have heard time and time again. You talk as if the employer has a gun to the person head. In a lassiz faire system, both sides can say yes or no and it takes both to make an agreement.

These people were not dying in droves of starvation before these factiries and jobs in America spang up. But my grandfather thought that working from sun up to sun down on his farm was just the accepted reality. That is still the case in many places in Mexico.

So what you call harsh working conditions, they think of as an chance at a better life. You see exploitation of power where they see an oppurtunity to improve themselves. And in your drive to seem compasionate, you want to take that chance to improve their life away from them.

And don't go blaming an economic system like 'leave alone' economics for their troubles. And don't try to call me a racist again for pointing out that things are not as good there as they are here. People coming in with guns may have had a part in their lot in life, but the freedom to deal with others as they please without people forcing them at the end of a gun is not one of the problems.

And it certainly can't be laid at the feet of the people now trying to employ these folks. One person selling something freely to a willing buyer is not the same as taking over their goverment by force no matter how you want to define colonialism.

You know, if someone tried to say that all immigrants are (fill in the blank) some folks would be screaming about bigotry. But you don't seem to have a problem in painting all employers as trying to poison their workers. The illegals working as nannies, gardners, construction, etc I knew don't seem to be missing many limbs or dying in terrible accidents every week. It is the job of the goverment to prevent people from doing harm to others and it seems that the factories in other countries should be regulated by these goverments to do just that of that is the case.

But the goverments that have the power to come in and force you to do the right thing have at least as bad a record. We just saw the 20th anniversery of Cherynobel. Have you read the accounts of how the goverment founded on the premis of forcing people to do the right thing actively suppressed the things that would have saved a lot of lives and left the area more free of contamination. Their interests were not that of a regulating agency divorced from the benifits of the company and they did things that were simply criminal.

It is the rule of reality that the more you try to give the goverment power to come in and force people to do the right thing, instead of merely trying to prevent them from actively doing harm to others, the worse the goverment becomes.

So the idea that you can prevent people who want to work for a certain wage is intrusive. No matter how many ways you try to place the blame on someone else, the person keeping them from improving their lives is people like you.

And hey, I bet as a martial artist you just would not pay as much for a seminar by Joe Blow as you would with Bruce Lee. You would not care if Joe could not be as good as Bruce because he had to work a full time job to take care of his parents, or was raised in an area were there were no MA schools. All you care is that one is worth more to you than the other. I bet when you went to your teacher, you did not choose him for anything other than the skills you wanted from him and did not ask if you should pay him more because of his family situation. You naughty, naughty man. But of course you want other people to not pay others what they think they are worth, but what you think they should be paid based on their situation. And if you can't, then you would deny them the chance to improve themselves in any fashion. If you demand that people pay as much for Joe Schmoe's seminar as they would for Bruce Lee's, do you honestly think many people would go?

So you keep people down with your compassion. You are quiet free to donate your entire life savings to helping those you can look down on, but I think the typical recipient of your compassion would be insulted when you told them they can't take a job.

And in the case of immigration, maybe we should be a little less compassionate. We pay for the education of their kids, their hospital visits, and we can't even ask if they are illegal immigrants or not. Maybe that should change. I would think that if someone brought in their 12 year old for emergency mendical care, we could agree that the police should not be called. I do not want kids to suffer for their parents stupidity. But everything else should be just cut off IMO. The good-nicks can donate money to private clinics if they want, but no tax payer money for someone who came here illeagally. If that makes the trip here not worth their effort, then fine with me.

 

[Makalakumu]

Somehow, capitalism has become some sort of religion. I blame Ayn Rand...

You are repeating the same mantra of greed and envy that I have heard time and time again. You talk as if the employer has a gun to the person head. In a lassiz faire system, both sides can say yes or no and it takes both to make an agreement.

We've already discussed how the "gun to the head" analogy is not analogous to what is happening. I've pointed out that "environmental pressure" is a much better descriptor. Thus far, you've ignored that point, told me that enviromental pressure does not exist, and then pointed out in the same paragraph that it does exist. So which is it?

While it is true that no one is holding a gun to someones head telling them to take a certain job, the desperate environment experienced can still "force" someone to make choices that are inhumane by any standards.

These people were not dying in droves of starvation before these factiries and jobs in America spang up. But my grandfather thought that working from sun up to sun down on his farm was just the accepted reality. That is still the case in many places in Mexico.

Yes they were. Ever hear of Potosi? Ever hear of Kubatau? Probably not. Also, working from sun up to sun down is not a virtue. Just ask your kids...

So what you call harsh working conditions, they think of as an chance at a better life. You see exploitation of power where they see an oppurtunity to improve themselves. And in your drive to seem compasionate, you want to take that chance to improve their life away from them.

No, I want to make sure that each of these people are treated the same human rights that we grant to our children. All you are trying to do is rationalize the mutilation, the poison, the child labor, the sheer brutality of the sweat shops. You want to turn this argument on its head and make it seem that THAT is opportunity. That is not opportunity. It is artificially induced desperation. And this is desperation that colonial policies specifically created.

And don't go blaming an economic system like 'leave alone' economics for their troubles.

Why not? "Anything goes" seems to describe the situation that is happening pretty darn well. The problem is that you've turned this economic system into some sort of religion and you are "unrepentent" so that means that you are unwilling to accept any sort of rational criticism of it.

And don't try to call me a racist again for pointing out that things are not as good there as they are here.

That isn't what you said initially...but you seemed to have mended your ways after I pointed out what I did.

People coming in with guns may have had a part in their lot in life, but the freedom to deal with others as they please without people forcing them at the end of a gun is not one of the problems

You still can't (won't) grasp the difference in power between the two groups. This exists. They (both sides) will tell you if you'll listen.

And it certainly can't be laid at the feet of the people now trying to employ these folks.

Okay, I get it. It is perfectly ethical to hire workers in an unsafe and polluted working environment when you know they will have an average lifespan of five years from working at that job. Yeah, their kids will really appreciate their wonderful life as they bury their mothers and fathers or take care of their disabled parents.

If the employers set a standard that is so low that it is literally killing the the people who are forced to take the job by the environmental pressure exerted by their homeland, then they are absolutely culpable for all damages.

One person selling something freely to a willing buyer is not the same as taking over their goverment by force no matter how you want to define colonialism

You are refusing to look at what colonialisn actually is. It is the movement of wealth from far away places to one centralized location. You are oversimplifying this by making it a black and white issue where one has to choose between military conquest and laissez faire. However, what you fail to realize that is that colonialism is a progression from conquest to laissez faire...as I have pointed out numersous times above.

You know, if someone tried to say that all immigrants are (fill in the blank) some folks would be screaming about bigotry. But you don't seem to have a problem in painting all employers as trying to poison their workers. The illegals working as nannies, gardners, construction, etc I knew don't seem to be missing many limbs or dying in terrible accidents every week. It is the job of the goverment to prevent people from doing harm to others and it seems that the factories in other countries should be regulated by these goverments to do just that of that is the case.

Not all employers of immigrant labor are doing so in an unethical way. However, many are. You just need to do the research. I can't read the stuff for you. Eric Schlosser has a couple of books you should check out.

But the goverments that have the power to come in and force you to do the right thing have at least as bad a record. We just saw the 20th anniversery of Cherynobel. Have you read the accounts of how the goverment founded on the premis of forcing people to do the right thing actively suppressed the things that would have saved a lot of lives and left the area more free of contamination. Their interests were not that of a regulating agency divorced from the benifits of the company and they did things that were simply criminal.

The key is balance. Regulation to promote ethics. Freedom to choose what those ethics are. If you ask the people working in sweat shops whether or not they wish their jobs could be better, emphatically, you get an affirmative answer. However, the very real difference in power between the employer and employee prevents this. The problem is that a small group of people in the countries in question have the ability to set standards for their own gain. And they do so, setting them at a point where they make the most money regardless of any ethical standards.

It is the rule of reality that the more you try to give the goverment power to come in and force people to do the right thing, instead of merely trying to prevent them from actively doing harm to others, the worse the goverment becomes.

Again, balance is important. I don't see anything wrong with a government demanding that workers have a safe working environment that does not poison them and does not completely remove them from their families. If you could even imagine yourself in the inverse of that situation, I have no doubt that you would agree.

So the idea that you can prevent people who want to work for a certain wage is intrusive. No matter how many ways you try to place the blame on someone else, the person keeping them from improving their lives is people like you.

Sorry, but this logic utterly fails. I don't set the standards of employment. The small group of people who compromise the employers does. By attempting to force the employer to raise his/her standards to something that does not kill the worker is in no way keeping that worker from improving their lives. I am actually saving a life. By rationalizing this, you are promoting this system and killing that person.

And hey, I bet as a martial artist you just would not pay as much for a seminar by Joe Blow as you would with Bruce Lee. You would not care if Joe could not be as good as Bruce because he had to work a full time job to take care of his parents, or was raised in an area were there were no MA schools. All you care is that one is worth more to you than the other. I bet when you went to your teacher, you did not choose him for anything other than the skills you wanted from him and did not ask if you should pay him more because of his family situation. You naughty, naughty man. But of course you want other people to not pay others what they think they are worth, but what you think they should be paid based on their situation. And if you can't, then you would deny them the chance to improve themselves in any fashion. If you demand that people pay as much for Joe Schmoe's seminar as they would for Bruce Lee's, do you honestly think many people would go?

This is another inanalogous metaphor because you are again assuming that the two parties are equal parties. This is not the case. The difference in power exists, no matter how much you deny it.

So you keep people down with your compassion. You are quiet free to donate your entire life savings to helping those you can look down on, but I think the typical recipient of your compassion would be insulted when you told them they can't take a job.

Yeah, I can see it now. Through my grassroots efforts, I am suddenly able to get sweatshops to provide the proper safety equipment, properly use chemicals, pay workers decent wages, and schedule workers for reasonable hours...it is a really strange world where someone can see that as an insult. Further, the very fact that you can call that insulting really shows how utterly disconnected your arguments are from any from of reality or logic.

 

[Don Roley]

By attempting to force the employer to raise his/her standards to something that does not kill the worker is in no way keeping that worker from improving their lives.

So, employers are trying to kill their workers......by not paying the wage you happen to think they should.....

Maybe you should try owning a business sometime. If you think you have the ability to do so. Or try living in a place that gives the goverment the abilities you want them to do to make the people's lives a better place like China, Zimbabwe or Cuba.

Wow....

 

[Makalakumu]

So, employers are trying to kill their workers......by not paying the wage you happen to think they should.....

They are not trying to kill their workers. The workers are irrelevent and replaceable. Safety standards, environmental standards, higher wages, and reasonable hours cost more money in the short term. Most of the Third World industry in question, however is about making as much money, in the short term, as possible. Thus, standards that protect people, race to the bottom. This all begins when the country in question removes any worker protections, environmental standards, and workers rights in order to attract foreign investment by US/Multinational interests. The same people who run these countries also lower the taxes so that the people can't receive any sort of benefit in their homelands from this investment...ie roads, education, health care, etc. The end result is the endless, opportunitiless, poverty that drives those people here.

Maybe you should try owning a business sometime. If you think you have the ability to do so. Or try living in a place that gives the goverment the abilities you want them to do to make the people's lives a better place like China, Zimbabwe or Cuba.

This isn't a black or white argument. That you think this is telling. Alot of people treat capitalism as some form of religion...in a Biblical sense, that is idolatry. Thus it is impossible to criticize even the most minute details. And even those who accept some criticism are quick to point out that it is the best system we have and refuse to think outside the box. I think this is a narrow minded and dangerous assumption. There are real problems with how this whole thing works. For instance, the laissez faire policies of the multinational corporations have created the environment that forces immigrants across our borders. And when you really get into it, the ethical issues behind it are astounding. There are some serious abuses of human rights occuring right now in these places where the government refuses to protect their people from exploitation for economic reasons.

And the people in those countries are voting with their feet. They obviously don't want that if they are coming here. The American Dream that they see is the direct result of the Progressive movement in this country. 150 years ago, the conditions that are common in the Third World were common right here at home. We live in a land of opportunity that is somewhat free from exploitation because people voted and decided that conditions like those in the Third World were completely innappropriate and inhumane. The people were able to vote in a government that was sympathetic to their needs and had a mind for ethics.

In the Third World, nowadays, this isn't possible. The US government actively opposes any governments who seek to provide better conditions for their workers, toughen up environmental standards, and tax multinationals to build better roads, schools, hospitals, etc. We have even gone so far as to completely overthrow another countries government.

And this is not just our problem. The entire First World has been employing these policies around the world. Through colonialism, we have take these peoples wealth and made ourselves what we are. And now, everywhere in the First World, immigrants are a problem. France, Spain, England, Australia, you name the country, they are all instituting policies to control the flood of people trying to get into their countries and experience some of the wealth that was taken from their home countries. Free Trade and globalization will only make the problem worse. First because they make it easier for people to move around. And second because they expediate the process of resource removal and worsening conditions.

This worldwide and systemic problem can be laid directly at the feet of capitalism. And if you are unwilling to accept any sort of criticism regarding this system, then we'll never ever be able to solve problems like the immigrant problem facing the world. We can kick them out, but they'll be back. We can build a fence, but they'll beat it down. We can close our borders and kill all who approach, but even that won't be enough in the end. There are alot more desperate people in the Third World then there are in the First. Ignoring the real cause of these problems and keeping people out will only turn our country into a lifeboat with people scrambling to get in. We can't hold back that tide forever.

The only way to stop it is to make it attractive for people to stay home and that will require that people face the very real, systemic, worldwide problems with capitalism.

 

[Don Roley]

This isn't a black or white argument.

Yes it is. Your standards for things is the standard you would impose on everyone, even if they agree among themselves. You keep jumping around definitions and such, but it comes down to the idea that if someone does not want to pay a certain amount, and get others that will agree to that lower price, then they are evil, murdering capitalists.

And nothing is going to change your mind and you won't try working as an employer to see how the folks you rail against look at things.

 

[Makalakumu]

Yes it is.

It isn't black and white...

Your standards for things is the standard you would impose on everyone, even if they agree among themselves.

You are assuming that the people running across our borders agreed to the standards that they are running from. I would definitely say that is a bad and baseless assumption.

You keep jumping around definitions and such, but it comes down to the idea that if someone does not want to pay a certain amount, and get others that will agree to that lower price, then they are evil, murdering capitalists.

No. I will make this simple. Ethical working conditions aren't cheap in the short term. Thus, countries that reduce worker safety requirements, environmental standards, worker's base pay, workers age, hours, etc become more competitive in the short term. The become even more competitive by lowering taxes to a point where good roads, schools, hospitals, etc can't be built. Thus, the race to the lowest ethical standard begins.

The people who are running to the First World aren't making these decisions to become more competitive. The First World has been promoting this for hundreds of years...even at the expense of democracy.

And nothing is going to change your mind and you won't try working as an employer to see how the folks you rail against look at things.

Who says I haven't worked as an employer?

Look, this argument is not complex. However, you will not see it because of your idolatric veneration of an economic system. Eventually, all of your opinions on this will be marginalized because everyone else will see the truth of what I'm saying. If you believe that capitalism has no part to play in creating the immigrant issue, then you are clearly wrong as I have shown again and again and again above.

 

[Don Roley]

It isn't black and white...

And yet you want to blame capitalism and not anything else.

But when you want to get complicated, you can't quite get things down in a logical manner. You make the jump to people getting poisoned and killed when I talk about unregulating wages. You say that a company that wants to hire workers is a colonolizing power in the same catagory as those that take over goverments by force. You won't apply the principles you use to choose a martial arts teacher to what you would make others do when they hire workers......

I am not going to change a mind such as yours and it looks like I flirted with danger already because you are a staff member here. I will bow out now.

 

[Makalakumu]

And yet you want to blame capitalism and not anything else.

But when you want to get complicated, you can't quite get things down in a logical manner. You make the jump to people getting poisoned and killed when I talk about unregulating wages. You say that a company that wants to hire workers is a colonolizing power in the same catagory as those that take over goverments by force. You won't apply the principles you use to choose a martial arts teacher to what you would make others do when they hire workers......

I am not going to change a mind such as yours and it looks like I flirted with danger already because you are a staff member here. I will bow out now.

Well, it was a good aggressive debate. Get some sleep. Sayonara...

 

[Doc]

The current protests and agitation in support of illegal aliens invading this country is a tremendous propaganda victory for world socialism (May Day was chosen for a reason) and proponents of open borders. Illegal aliens have become "immigrants" or "undocumented workers" who are protesting, not for the freedom to commit crime unpunished, but for their "civil rights," as if they are entitled to be in a country of which they are not citizens. I have watched with horror as criminal behavior has been redefined as a civil rights movement -- which is an insult to all those who have participated in legitimate calls for civil rights and actions towards that goal.

It is my hope that my fellow American citizens will finally recognize this large, hostile, illegal alien presence within the borders of our nation, that they will recognize these greedy calls for amnesty as the entitlement mentality they represent, that they will understand that those now pouring illegal into our country have no desire to assimilate and no wish to become productive members of our society. Instead, they wish to be allowed to remain as parasites -- outsiders who profit from the whole while refusing to participate in it, nevertheless sticking their paws out and demanding what they have not earned.

I am not very optimistic, however.

Amen brother.