Friday, September 16, 2016

We need to talk about slavery...

When you're able to paint people who are against illegal immigration as the bad guys, you know something's wrong.

And something is very, very wrong.  Democrats have been patting themselves on the back, believing they thoroughly occupy the high ground, every time they ridicule Donald Trump for his ideas about curbing illegal immigration.  But you've got to ask yourself, what are they really saying?  Nothing good, I'd say.

At its heart, you do have to admit it's evil to tell people desperately fleeing terrible situations that they can't find a new home, especially one that seems to be the polar opposite of what they're leaving behind.  America is a land of immigrants.  I get that.  (I also get that although we've kind of had a tepid show of solidarity with the Standing Rock Sioux over the Dakota Access Pipeline, I think you'd have to stretch the truth considerably to find anyone to have argued Red Lives Matter quite as much as an actual slogan I'm sure you can name.)  The problem is, what they'll find here is only marginally better.  What they're really getting is the promise of a better future, and likely for the next generation. 

Listen, because of my own job history, I've actually worked alongside illegal immigrants.  I know the tenuousness of their situation.  I've even seen plenty of evidence that they struggle a lot more than we think.  (I worked in a shoe department where boxes were always ending up empty, or filled with highly inadequate replacements, so to say.)  You can't make a blanket statement like calling them hard-working and expect that to summarize them perfectly.  The bottom line is, for every illegal immigrant who will get to benefit from businesses willing to turn a blind eye to their status, there's another who will only get exploited in far less appealing ways.  These are the lowest-earning members of our society.  They round out the bottom line, a line that keeps shrinking because businesses are always eager to ship their bottom lines to another country, so they can pay even less to get the work done.

What Democrats are arguing is actually pretty hateful.  To put it in perspective, the Civil War happened because it would have been terrible for the Southern economy to lose its free black labor.  Which is to say, slavery was absolutely essential, from that mindset.  We tend to think bigotry came first.  No, it was money.  It's always money.  And that's what Democrats are rallying for.  Whether they admit it or not.

Anytime you have a situation that exploits the helpless in society, there's really no other way to describe it other than forced servitude.  Slavery. 

There are better ways to handle immigration.  For one thing, that's why legal immigration exists.  That's what documentation is about.  If we somehow don't have enough immigration agents, I would certainly be proposing that kind of immigration reform rather than loudly criticizing the other guy's ideas, personally.  Because the end result is the same: lessened illegal immigration. 

Immigration is always about desperation.  Someone doesn't decide to do something like that just on a lark, because they're bored.  They know it's going to be difficult.  They know they're risking their lives.  And they probably know what's waiting for them.  It may be a thousand times better than what they had before, but I kind of think we know better than they do what they're actually accepting.  We tend to have this absurd notion that it's the American way to claw your way to the top.  But I also think we all know not every American has to.  I think we know plenty of Americans who never had to struggle a day in their life.  Why would we possibly say that's the best of all possible worlds, one where such disparity exists?  Is that the American way?

Because it's convenient.  Like slavery.  Illegal immigration is nothing better than slavery.  It is slavery.  We know this.  It's the same as Black Lives Matter, the biggest hoodwink you'll find in the media, besides all the blind support for Hillary Clinton.  Listen, we all know black people have had it rough.  We know this.  The thing is, why does the media report the deaths of black people by police, when they ignore the conditions that lead to such tragedies?  This is the kind of moral outrage that is itself outrageous, and criminally misleading.  None of these victims have anything on Emmett Till.  Not to make light of any of their deaths, but none of them died as horribly as Emmett Till, and they've all died for very different reasons.  If you have no idea who Emmett Till is, and how he died, maybe you should have a look at history, and find some perspective.

We have absolutely no perspective today.  We lost perspective sometime, I think, in the '60s, when the counterculture began to bleed into the culture, become it, and suddenly all our moral rage was turned on permanently.  The fight for equality is a good thing.  It will always be a good thing.  But the lack of perspective is very, very bad.

This isn't about how my life has turned out, or anyone else's.  The problem is that we fight for change without knowing what needs to change.  Illegal immigration needs to change.  Slavery needs to end.  In all its forms.  We can't keep supporting those who terrorize us in our own society, by our own rules, by our own implicit support. 

I don't care how much of an idiot Donald Trump is.  I don't care how many trumped up (heh) allusions you can make to Hitler.  The truth is, before Americans entered WWII, we weren't falling all over ourselves saying how terrible Hitler was.  It's not that we didn't see what he was doing.  In a lot of ways, we wholeheartedly supported his ideas.  Even refusing to enter the war for as long as we did, we supported him.  That's the bottom line.  Until we chose to fight, we were on Hitler's side.  Sins of omission are still sins.  They say Trump's nationalist, isolationist ideas are what amounts to his Hitler tendencies.  Well let me tell you something, Americans have been arguing for nationalism and isolationism from the very start.  If you don't know that, you don't know history at all.

In a lot of ways, supporting illegal immigration is a lot like supporting Hitler.  Hitler was all about the supremacy of pure Germans.  Democrats like to say the only people who will knowingly support Trump are white Americans.  Except we all know there's no such things as pure Americans, just as there was never such a thing as pure Germans.  It's a lunatic association.  Hitler wanted a strong Germany, one that was far better than the wreck that emerged from the disastrous policies that ended WWI.  Trump does want a strong America.  So does Clinton.  She believes it already exists.  Sure, and Ryan Lochte is still technically an Olympic champion.  They took away a legitimate Olympic hero's medals for far less stupid mistakes.  Just look up Jim Thorpe.  (He was Native American, naturally.)  Clinton's America is one that supports a global community, which in itself is a noble thing.  So were Wilson's negotiations to end WWI.  But those negotiations did create Hitler.  You can't destroy a car and expect to sell it new again.  That's about as clear as the economics here can be explained.

I would never call someone Hitler just to get a cheap pop from my audience.  Hitler was a legitimate maniac, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.  He achieved nothing great (unlike past conquerors he can't even be called a military genius; he had people for that, which is kind of the mindset we've been using ever since, propping up one-trick ponies), and all his thoughts were hateful.  With the benefit of hindsight, we can see that now.  But Charles Lindberg, for instance, didn't.  (Philip Roth wrote a whole book of alternate history about that: The Plot Against America.)  Lindbergh continues to be celebrated as a great aviation hero.  It's always tricky to balance the achievements with the person behind them, but history seems to ignore the bad in favor of the good.  Wilson, by the way, loved the original Birth of a Nation.  You see how irony litters history? 

No, Trump isn't Hitler, and neither is Clinton.  But I'd much rather give my support to someone looking to find solutions to the moral abattoir we've created for ourselves than the other person who'd like us to pretend it doesn't exist, because one is inherently hateful and the other isn't.  I think you can tell which one I think is hateful. 

I'm not against illegal immigration.  But I'd certainly like for there to be a better outcome.  I think we can all agree on that, if we only stop to think about it.  Do you really want to be the person arguing for slavery in 2016?

32 comments:

Pat Dilloway said...

So you think a boondoggle of a wall and rounding up people to throw them out of the country are "solutions." They're both fiscal and physical impossibilities. This is what I was talking about on my blog today concerning your Miss Simon's Dime Novel "Han Shot First" thing: you're completely missing the practical reality of the situation. The wall would bankrupt the economy (and no way Mexico is paying for it despite what Trump said--we already saw how his mission to Mexico worked on that front) and be a complete logistical nightmare. It's as much a pipe dream as the Keystone Pipeline. Rounding up illegal immigrants is another costly logistical nightmare. That's why neither will happen.

If that's what you think of as "solutions" then you don't know diddly squat, bub.

Tony Laplume said...

Very often you only read what you want to read. I clearly state here that Trump is an idiot. My main thesis is that what he gets right is that things need to change. The mistakes I make in this post (and I will freely acknowledge that I can make mistakes in my thought process) don't include what you just concluded.

Pat Dilloway said...

So you didn't say: But I'd much rather give my support to someone looking to find solutions to the moral abattoir we've created for ourselves than the other person who'd like us to pretend it doesn't exist,

You honestly think Trump is "someone looking to find solutions?"

Tony Laplume said...

Well, yes, and contrary to how it might seem, he even seems willing to modify his thoughts. Talks like an idiot but is willing to publicly modulate himself. Sounds slightly less stupid than his opponents suggest.

Pat Dilloway said...

"Modify his thoughts" gee in 2004 that was called "flip-flopping" and the very same Republican Party Trump is heading now said that was bad, bad, bad. In the Donald's case he lies on an almost constant basis. Like many habitual liars he ends up not even being to keep his lies straight. And when people call him on it, he just lies some more.

Did going to the South suddenly turn your brain to mush or what?

Tony Laplume said...

There's a difference between flip flopping for political expediency (which is what Clinton demonstratively does) and actually changing your mind.

Pat Dilloway said...

And there's a difference between changing your mind and not being able to keep your lies straight.

Tony Laplume said...

Anyway, always fun talking with you, Pat...

Pat Dilloway said...

Ha. I don't like Clinton but your mental gymnastics to try and justify Trump are pathetic. I guess I can't blame you for wanting to just end the conversation.

Tony Laplume said...

As with the rest of the internet, you have a funny definition of "conversation."

Pat Dilloway said...

Yeah a real conversation requires two people of basic intelligence so really it's just me talking at an idiot. Stick to rambling vaguely about comic books.

Tony Laplume said...

With that might I dare hope you'll finally stop reading everything I write even though you hate all of it?

Pat Dilloway said...

I don't hate all of it. Your last one you just wasted too much time blathering about Han and Greedo when the solution to that was so obvious.

Pat Dilloway said...

If you can say Trump is an idiot and still want to vote for him then I can say you're an idiot and still think (most) of your writing isn't terrible.

Tony Laplume said...

Look, I realize you project a very demeanor, but it just seems as if you enjoy antagonizing with nearly everything you say. This is not the basis of a relationship both sides are going to appreciate. It would be one thing if you were joking. You are clearly not joking.

Tony Laplume said...

For my own peace of mind, I really really really really need you to leave me alone.

Tony Laplume said...

*cue the response: "But then you really won't have anyone reading you!" To which I would say, that would be better.

Pat Dilloway said...

A very what demeanor? Tell me this post is a joke and I'd back off.

Tony Laplume said...

Gruff. You want to come off as disagreeable. You strike an attitude. It gets tiring.

Pat Dilloway said...

Boo hoo. You can't handle dissent, stop blogging and publishing books. Then you never have to hear a bad word from anyone.

Tony Laplume said...

I really, really don't want to further encourage you, but I realize that's not even relevant at this point. I ignore you, and you keep commenting. I respond, and of course you keep commenting. What you do isn't dissent. You just want to be a grump, and you think that's somehow to be interpreted also as a kind of friendship. It isn't, Pat. It just isn't. I don't understand how you don't get that.

Pat Dilloway said...

I don't always dissent, but when you say something idiotic like that Trump is searching for real solutions (instead of, you know, making grandiose, unattainable promises to placate his hateful base) then you can't expect me to agree with you. If you're going to post politics, you have to expect not everyone will agree. That's why they say not to discuss politics and religion.

And again if you don't want people to comment, then don't have blogs and publish books. Go off the grid and write your manifesto in some leatherbound journal.

Tony Laplume said...

We've officially circled back to the beginning. My first reply needs to be read again. I would be so much happier if your comments were more reasoned replies than emotional outbursts. Everyone bursts out emotional responses when talking. But writing gives us a chance to think things over a little more. That's the main difference between us right there. You'll say I don't do that. I'll argue that I at least try. You'll say I didn't. I'll say I did. You'll come back with another simplistic version of the debate. And we start over again. For instance: I talk about wrestling, you drop your obligatory comment that "it isn't real!!!!," and I wonder why you bother to to repeat this statement for the millionth time. And listen, I remember saying a few times that I didn't like your Sims characters. You may recall that this was also around the same time I stopped commenting on everything you wrote...

Pat Dilloway said...

WWE isn't real. The fact you can't deal with that is a good indication of why you're supporting Trump.

Tony Laplume said...

My final thought for you: Santa Claus isn't real either. *mind blown*

Pat Dilloway said...

Yeah that's why most people stop believing in Santa Claus by the time they're 8. They don't keep taking it seriously into their 30s.

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

Howdy, Tony ~
I was reading your recent exchange with Andrew Leon regarding religion, which brought me here. (I also remember your exchange with him a couple years back regarding Gun Control.)

You began your final paragraph of this post with:

>>... "I'm not against illegal immigration."

Just curious... Was that a typo? Or did you truly mean to say that you do not oppose illegal immigration?

~ D-FensDogG
Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...

Tony Laplume said...

I'm not against the immigrants. The people looking to explore cheap political points on ignoring the immigrants themselves, the real lives and not merely the dream being exploited...That's what I'm against.

Thanks for coming here.

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

Tony ~
Thanks for responding. I'm not sure I really understand what you wrote, but it doesn't matter. Anyone who argues with Andrew LOLeon is OK in my book.

~ D-FensDogG
Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends

Tony Laplume said...

I tend to make unusual associations, as you may have noticed. I have completely given up on Leon.

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

Good decision! LOLeon is a very "spe-eee-cial" waste of a person's time. The most arrogant, broad-brush painting, Kool-Aid drinking blogger I've ever encountered on the Internet.

But, hey, at least he will allow you to post opposing comments on his blog. Mine he deletes instantly, concerned that his minions will discover there's a person out there whom he fears to face in debate. (I've challenged him multiple times on 3 or 4 subjects but he always declines and deletes.)

Incidentally, I dig your cool avatar photo. It's got a sort of "Assassin from the Future" Sci-Fi look to it. Ha!

Well, anyway, best o' luck to you in your endeavors.

~ D-FensDogG
Stephen T. McCarthy Reviews...

Tony Laplume said...

He's as arrogant as anyone I've ever encountered, a huge chip on his shoulder, too many people telling him how special he is with too little to show for it...Eventually he'll find out how hollow his victories really are.

That picture was my attempt to emulate my favorite comic book creators. Hasn't helped me break into the biz, alas.

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...