Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders

The internet expands the bounds of acceptable discourse, so ideas considered out of bounds not long ago now rocket toward widespread acceptability. See: cannabis legalization, government-run health care, white nationalism and, of course, the flat-earthers.

Yet there’s one political shore that remains stubbornly beyond the horizon. It’s an idea almost nobody in mainstream politics will address, other than to hurl the label as a bloody cudgel.

I’m talking about opening up America’s borders to everyone who wants to move here.

Imagine not just opposing President Trump’s wall but also opposing the nation’s cruel and expensive immigration and border-security apparatus in its entirety. Imagine radically shifting our stance toward outsiders from one of suspicion to one of warm embrace. Imagine that if you passed a minimal background check, you’d be free to live, work, pay taxes and die in the United States. Imagine moving from Nigeria to Nebraska as freely as one might move from Massachusetts to Maine.

There’s a witheringly obvious moral, economic, strategic and cultural case for open borders, and we have a political opportunity to push it. As Democrats jockey for the presidency, there’s room for a brave politician to oppose President Trump’s racist immigration rhetoric not just by fighting his wall and calling for the abolishment of I.C.E. but also by making a proactive and affirmative case for the vast expansion of immigration. It would be a change from the stale politics of the modern era, in which both parties agreed on the supposed wisdom of “border security” and assumed that immigrants were to be feared.

As an immigrant, this idea confounds me. My family came to the United States from our native South Africa in the late 1980s. After jumping through lots of expensive and confusing legal hoops, we became citizens in 2000. Obviously, it was a blessing: In rescuing me from a society in which people of my color were systematically oppressed, America has given me a chance at liberty.

But why had I deserved that chance, while so many others back home — because their parents lacked certain skills, money or luck — were denied it?

When you see the immigration system up close, you’re confronted with its bottomless unfairness. The system assumes that people born outside our borders are less deserving of basic rights than those inside. My native-born American friends did not seem to me to warrant any more dignity than my South African ones; according to this nation’s founding documents, we were all created equal. Yet by mere accident of geography, some were given freedom, and others were denied it.

“When you start to think about it, a system of closed borders begins to feel very much like a system of feudal privilege,” said Reece Jones, a professor of geography at the University of Hawaii who argues that Democrats should take up the mantle of open borders. “It’s the same idea that there’s some sort of hereditary rights to privilege based on where you were born.”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 57January 20, 2019 2:37 AM

I admit the politics here are perilous. Although America’s borders were open for much of its history — if your ancestors came here voluntarily, there’s a good chance it was thanks to open borders — restrictions on immigration are now baked so deeply into our political culture that any talk of loosening them sparks anger.

People worry that immigrants will bring crime, even though stats show immigrants are no more dangerous than natives. People worry they’ll take jobs away from native workers, even though most studies suggests that immigration is a profound benefit to the economy, and there’s little evidence it hurts native workers. And if we worry that they’ll hoover up welfare benefits, we can impose residency requirements for them.

But these are all defensive arguments, and when you’re on defense, you’re losing. For opponents of the president’s xenophobic policies, a better plan is to make the affirmative case for a lot more immigrants.

Economically and strategically, open borders isn’t just a good plan — it’s the only chance we’ve got. America is an aging nation with a stagnant population. We have ample land to house lots more people, but we are increasingly short of workers. And on the global stage, we face two colossi — India and China — which, with their billions, are projected to outstrip American economic hegemony within two decades.

How will we ever compete with such giants? The same way we always have: by inviting the world’s most enthusiastic and creative people — including the people willing to walk here, to risk disease and degradation and death to land here — to live out their best life under liberty.

A new migrant caravan is forming in Honduras, and the president is itching for the resulting political fight.

Here’s hoping Democrats respond with creativity and verve. Not just “No wall.” Not just “Abolish ICE.”

Instead: “Let them in.”

by Anonymousreply 1January 18, 2019 2:51 AM

[quote] Imagine moving from Nigeria to Nebraska as freely as one might move from Massachusetts to Maine.

This is not a realistic comparison, because people are not going to be moving from Nebraska to Nigeria.

by Anonymousreply 2January 18, 2019 3:02 AM

Open borders are not a good thing. You can’t just let ANYONE in, especially when no one else lets just anyone in to stay. It’s not realistic.

by Anonymousreply 3January 18, 2019 3:03 AM

Of course not! Those of us here in our gated communities need those people from our open borders to build our homes, clean our homes, grow our flowers, raise our children, walk our pets, and build more gated communities! How will we survive??

by Anonymousreply 4January 18, 2019 3:05 AM

The number of illegal border crossing apprehensions has been steadily falling for 20 years. There is no "open borders" problem.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 5January 18, 2019 3:09 AM

There’s a population problem.

by Anonymousreply 6January 18, 2019 3:10 AM

I agree, OP! In fact, why stop there? Let's get rid of locks on doors and curtains on windows while we're at it. So excluding. If we just eliminated these artificial boundaries, we'd all be that much closer to that Utopia where the unicorns shoot rainbows out their asses.

by Anonymousreply 7January 18, 2019 3:17 AM

We have enough believers in degenerate religion in this country. No need to bring in more.

by Anonymousreply 8January 18, 2019 3:18 AM

I’m generally for open borders, I.e., if you want to come here and you’re not a criminal, come on in.

by Anonymousreply 9January 18, 2019 3:19 AM

Until the economy sinks.

Then we get Lord of the Flies.

by Anonymousreply 10January 18, 2019 3:22 AM

I too believe in open borders. A criminal background check should be sufficient to get into the US. Just make sure the immigrants know they will get no government assistance. So they will need to have 1) a church/mosque/synagogue to sponsor them, 2) a job/college acceptance letter lined up, or 3) family already here who are willing to take them in until they can get on your feet. That and a clean background check should be enough to enter.

Welcome to America!

by Anonymousreply 11January 18, 2019 3:27 AM

[quote] a church/mosque/synagogue to sponsor them

Absolutely not. The government should not encourage anyone, foreign or domestic, to associate with degenerate religions.

by Anonymousreply 12January 18, 2019 3:32 AM

This would solve the shutdown.

by Anonymousreply 13January 18, 2019 2:22 PM

So we want to implement more social programs for both legal and illegal immigrants - free healthcare, free tuition, universal basic income. And on top of that, let's open our borders to let anyone enter the country and benefit from those programs. Just think about that for ten seconds.

Honestly, if this is where the party is headed, I'm no longer a Democrat.

by Anonymousreply 14January 18, 2019 2:39 PM

Someone will deny r14 was ever a Democrat in 3...2...1...

by Anonymousreply 15January 18, 2019 2:46 PM

I'm a Democrat, although not as far left as most of this board has become (at least on non-transgender issues). I'm all for welfare, Medicaid/healthcare, etc. Not so much on free tuition, and definitely not for universal income.

But if people can't see the idiocy of combining these platforms - creating services that we give away to all residents, then opening borders to let an unlimited number of immigrants in the country - I think we may be beyond hope. Socially, it might be a wonderful concept; but fiscally it's just not possible.

by Anonymousreply 16January 18, 2019 3:08 PM

The NY Times is brave to publish this.

by Anonymousreply 17January 19, 2019 12:27 AM

What decade are you posting from? There was this little incident called 9/11 that sort of changed everything.

by Anonymousreply 18January 19, 2019 12:33 AM

They'ew aware, hon at r18. Open borders would be sort a slow 9/11.

by Anonymousreply 19January 19, 2019 1:03 AM

So we should have social program for these people? Their children? Their senior citizens? How do we insure they have a good quality of life?

We can't take care of our own children, seniors, vets.

Where exactly is this money supposed to come from?

And if they are religious what about that? We already have to contend with American citizens of some goddamn faith. We should be encourage people to emigrate. Not the other way around. Middle easterners who are Muslim? Fuck them. Hispanics who are catholic? Fuck them. Christians who adhere to the Bible? Fuck them too. Jews are ok because they make good musicals.

by Anonymousreply 20January 19, 2019 1:24 AM

[quote] We can't take care of our own children, seniors, vets.

Actually, we can. We choose not to, so that we can have super-wealthy.

by Anonymousreply 21January 19, 2019 1:28 AM

Read my reply at R11 where I specify "no government assistance."

by Anonymousreply 22January 19, 2019 1:29 AM

R21 I realize that. I totally agree. So it will just add people to citizens who we choose not to help or help minimally.

R11 Works in theory but how can you not help people who are here but still need assistance? Have them starve? Give them no medical services in emergencies? And younger people who bring children and their parents who will be a further strain. People here who have been paying into pension plans, insurance policies and social security are already being fucked over.

by Anonymousreply 23January 19, 2019 1:43 AM

That's why they will need to have a sponsor, a job/college acceptance letter, or family already living here per my post at R11.

by Anonymousreply 24January 19, 2019 3:05 AM

Immigrants have always made the US a greater place than any other.

by Anonymousreply 25January 19, 2019 3:07 AM

R24 and these sponsors will be able in practice to take on ALL financial responsibilities? Really? You're serious?

R25 There have always been restrictions on immigrants. This is nothing new. People were forced into Canada and South America because they couldn't get into the US.

by Anonymousreply 26January 19, 2019 4:03 AM

And by the way I think the wall is one of the most stupid, wasteful and idiotic things I have ever heard of in my life. What is this the US version of the Berlin Wall?

by Anonymousreply 27January 19, 2019 4:14 AM

Open borders is probably always going to be an impossible sell to any country. But from what I read (which ain't much, let's be real), when the border was more porous back in the 30s and 40s, it wasn't that big a deal. Mexicans poured into Texas, harvested, and left, and everyone was cool with it. Not all this stupid trauma. But maybe that is a myth. Not sure, but could a porous border be the answer?

by Anonymousreply 28January 19, 2019 4:17 AM

NOT ONLY let 'em all move in this guy will actually have a welcoming meal for all of you. enjoy!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 29January 19, 2019 4:18 AM

Why are lefties control freaks about everything from guns to pronouns to eating meat, but where borders are concerned, totally lackadaisical?

Oh right. Open borders mean more dem voters.

by Anonymousreply 30January 19, 2019 4:29 AM

Whichever side you're on, folks should become informed about the history and current issues in this discussion. We need to stop being manipulated and start making well-considered choices.

[quote]The transformation of open borders into a (progressive) position is a very new phenomenon and runs counter to the history of the organized Left in fundamental ways. Open borders has long been a rallying cry of the business and free market Right. Drawing from neoclassical economists, these groups have advocated for liberalizing migration on the grounds of market rationality and economic freedom. They oppose limits on migration for the same reasons that they oppose restrictions on the movement of capital. The Koch-funded Cato Institute, which also advocates lifting legal restrictions on child labor, has churned out radical open borders advocacy for decades, arguing that support for open borders is a fundamental tenet of libertarianism, and “Forget the wall already, it’s time for the U.S. to have open borders.” The Adam Smith Institute has done much the same, arguing that “Immigration restrictions make us poorer.

Many people who've argued for workers' rights have historically argued that open borders and the importation low wage and low education workers forces them into competition with domestic workers as a way to continue to exploit both groups for the benefit of the wealthy.

The fact that the Koch brothers and Cato used to advocate open borders is a nefarious sign.

This is a LOT more complicated than deplorable racial bigotry - and could easily be another case of using their stupid against them (case in point, r30.)

by Anonymousreply 31January 19, 2019 4:31 AM

Interesting point, r30.

by Anonymousreply 32January 19, 2019 4:32 AM

[quote] People were forced into Canada and South America because they couldn't get into the US.

Ouch!

by Anonymousreply 33January 19, 2019 4:33 AM

387 people dug a hole under the border fence in Arizona and entered the United States.

by Anonymousreply 34January 19, 2019 4:44 AM

Borders hasn't been open for several years. You might try Barnes & Noble.

by Anonymousreply 35January 19, 2019 6:27 AM

Make America Caliphate!

by Anonymousreply 36January 19, 2019 7:09 AM

How could you effectively plan infrastructure and services if it's a free for all with no borders?

by Anonymousreply 37January 19, 2019 7:11 AM

If they economy needs to be regulated, then immigration needs to be regulated, too.

by Anonymousreply 38January 19, 2019 7:11 AM

The US has a very complex history of immigration. Immigration was basically open in the early years of the country, but the country was unknown to a lot of Europe, considered dangerous and many in Europe felt that it was unproven whether the new government would or could work. However, after 1830, the floodgates opened. In particular, after the Irish potato famine of the late 1840s , Irish streamed in - by the millions. Also Germans came, also by the millions. The only groups deliberately excluded (after the building of the railroads was nearly complete) were the Chinese and some other Asians. Late in that century, and up until about 1920, Jews and Italians came by the millions. During a long stretch, 1880-1920, in each census the percentage of foreign born people living in the US averaged close to 15%. There was a lot of grouching in that period from "nativist' groups (read white nationalists), who started arguing that southern and eastern European people were inferior and unlikely to be able to adapt to US customs and traditions. (Italians, Jews, and Russians). Finally, Congress passed a law in 1924 rigidly clamping down on European immigration by using a quota system, and favoring northern and western Europeans over southern and eastern Europeans. This was the reason that Jews were not able to immigrate here even when it was obvious that Hitler was planning to slaughter them. However, during this period, from 1920 to 1960, there were very few restrictions on immigration from the western hemisphere. Mexicans moved across the border pretty freely, and Canadians as well.

by Anonymousreply 39January 19, 2019 8:32 AM

Now, even with the huge influx of Asian migrants in the past couple of decades, the US is still only about 12-13 percent foreign born. But some states have a large percentage, and many have miniscule percentages of foreign born. California, New York and New Jersey are the only states with over 20% (California is close to 30%). Florida, Texas, Nevada, and Hawaii are in the upper teens. Arizona, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Washington, Virginia, and Maryland are in the lower teens. Every other state is in the single digits of foreign born, including the vast majority of deplorable states, who, having almost no foreign born residents, are firmly aligned with Trump in believing that it's a life and death crisis and it's vitally necessary to keep those dangerous brown people out.

by Anonymousreply 40January 19, 2019 8:43 AM

This sort of Utopian Rhetoric by NYT will ensure another four years for you-know-who.

by Anonymousreply 41January 19, 2019 8:57 AM

The premise of the article--that the population is aging and, ergo, needs young workers coming in is flawed. With the increase of automation, there will be fewer jobs for unskilled and low-skilled workers. There's already tremendous concentration of wealth in this country, more low-skilled workers means wages getting pushed down and an even bigger wage gap between the very rich and everybody else.

California's a great example of this--it generates tremendous wealth, but it also has a ton of poor people who can't afford a place to live. The surge of immigrants makes it a dynamic place, but it also places a lot of stress on it.

And while the U.S. had open borders in its earlier years, it took a hell of a lot more effort to get here--people didn't just book a flight.

by Anonymousreply 42January 19, 2019 8:58 AM

I think the US should allow more legal immigration but not open borders, I like the idea of stapling a green card to most foreign students who get an education at a US university. Allowing unlimited immigration would just put a huge strain on large cities. Imagine the strain at your local emergency room. Class size in the US is already a problem, imagine a huge increase in school enrollment of non English speaking students from around the world.

The US has plenty of open spaces but immigrants largely don't want to move to these open spaces, they want to live in the major cities which would make them more crowded and congested than they already happen to be.

Saying open borders will solve the border problem is as idiotic as saying open the banks for anyone to make a withdraw will solve the poverty problem.

by Anonymousreply 43January 19, 2019 9:45 AM

Not all races and cultures are equal. Open borders would just be Blacks, Latinos, and Arabs leeching off of Whites and East Asians.

Low Iq brown people are not entitled to White and East Asian spaces.

by Anonymousreply 44January 19, 2019 10:02 AM

The population of Africa is due to double in coming years. The current population is deeply unhappy and a large proportion wish for a better life by relocating. Ready to house 1 billion people, OP? Half a billion? Or just perhaps a teensy quarter of a billion? And that's just Africa. Let's not talk about Egypt or the rest of the middle east. Ready to accept the necessary decline in your current standard of living to support this human tsunami? Because when you open a tap like that, it's exceedingly difficult to turn it off.

Oh wait. You're living in your mother's basement, or equivalent. This is a pointless conversation.

by Anonymousreply 45January 19, 2019 10:06 AM

Open borders means unskilled, low-IQ baby factory pieces of shit with their hands out, demanding free everything. Fuck those people. I'm all for immigration, as long as it's quality people who can support themselves and don't have 25 fucking kids.

by Anonymousreply 46January 19, 2019 2:04 PM

In theory it sounds great but in practice never.

The day you open your house door and say anyone can come in and take what they want will be the time to discuss open Borders. The day as many people want to move to Afghanistan as the US we can discuss a Global society then you can take the millions.

May I remind you that in Europe you have a population seething with resentment and going further and further to the only people who will listen , the Right. If you believe just anyone can live wherever they want, then don’t be surprised that Gay Rights will fall in the dustbin of history. More countries hate Gays than love them . Their values, will eventually become society’s . But by all means let’s all commit suicide and let anyone move in.

by Anonymousreply 47January 19, 2019 2:23 PM

Over-population is not a pleasurable thing.

I've seen this in London as it gets more and more crowded. Quality of life has gone down in so many ways. (I can only talk about personal experience).

[quote]We have ample land to house lots more people, but we are increasingly short of workers.

Right, but most people choose to live in the same places - where other people live and where there is work.

Stupid unrealistic article.

by Anonymousreply 48January 19, 2019 2:36 PM

In the 1930, the British government wanted to estabish a homeland in NW Australis (around Broome, WA) for Jewish exiles.

It looked wonderful on paper, it would bring white settlers (Australia's then policy), it would settle an area that needed people and provide a defense to the countries of the North.

So why not do it? The Australian prime minister said, "Once they are in Australia, it would be fine, but they won't stay in NW Australia. They'll simply move to Sydney or Melbourne and we don't need anymore people there."

So it was cancelled.

The OP, going by his poster history is a troll. He is also starting race bait threads, which you all fall for too.

It would be like saying, "Instead of giving your child anything, let's only give him basic food and shelter, and every thing else you earn goes to help poor homeless people."

Would you do that? 'Cause open borders is exactly that. Immigrants for the most part are NOT NEEDED anymore nor have been since before the FIRST World War.

Every immigrant who has a job here, especially legal ones is taking a job from a citizen.

In Uganda in the 70s Idi Amin kicked out the Asians, who had a lock on the middle class merchant jobs. It was rough for a few years, but today Uganda has the strongest middle class amongst black African nations. Because once the immigrants left, the blacks now had opportunities denied to them.

by Anonymousreply 49January 19, 2019 3:57 PM

Can't wait for the 64 Official Languages!

by Anonymousreply 50January 19, 2019 6:34 PM

Egypt has a population of 100 million and 99 million are dying to immigrate to the US. No, they're not wanting to go to Montana or Nebraska. Canada eased its requirements for immigration to better populate the less-dense provinces. Instead, they went to Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver.

by Anonymousreply 51January 19, 2019 10:24 PM

We need open borders, medicaid, a guaranteed income, housing, food allowance, and utilities for all (including all newly arrived immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers, etc).

by Anonymousreply 52January 19, 2019 10:34 PM

This was really published by the New York Times? This world is really going to hell in a hand basket!

by Anonymousreply 53January 20, 2019 12:32 AM

I think this guy is wonderful!

by Anonymousreply 54January 20, 2019 12:33 AM

I love the photo - pretty girl and cute little children.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 55January 20, 2019 12:45 AM

The only people advocating open borders are Trump and the far right; and about ten people on the far left.

by Anonymousreply 56January 20, 2019 2:36 AM

[quote]The only people advocating open borders are Trump

Excuse me?

by Anonymousreply 57January 20, 2019 2:37 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!