mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Border Fight
Mexican Foreign Minister: We Do Not Accept Trump Refugee Plan
Features Icon
show comments
  • Suzy Dixon

    Haha. Too funny. The Mexicans are making it too easy for Trump to shame them, as well as too easy to justify tariffs and a general cooling of relations for their transgressions.

    • Unelected Leader

      Very true. Trump can throw up a tweet and a FB post about it which will be seen by 20million+ He can bring it up in speeches anytime he wants. And if the dying, clueless MSM writes about it they’ll only be helping expose the unsmart mexican FM and his inane comment

  • Proverbs1618

    This is not how that works. This is not how any of this works.

  • leoj

    Another reason to set up safe zones in Syria. I bet baba ganoush would work extremely well in a burrito.

  • QET

    This problem was already solved once before, in 1986, by the sort of bipartisan grand bargain that policy wonks and editorialists slaver over. That “comprehensive immigration reform” allowed all of the illegals to remain (with just a few preposterous conditions designed to permit the GOP officeholders to pretend they had actually done something other than completely capitulate) with the promise that “Never Again.”

    30 years on, and here we are, again. And it’s even worse this time, the numbers are far greater. What polls show that (ignorant) Mexicans believe matters not to a nation committed, unlike Mexico, to the rule of law. Trump should keep calling Mexico’s bluff, if need be by having the military enter Mexico to the depth of, say, 20 miles, where we can deposit the deportees, and then see if Mexico just lets them sit there and die in the desert. Trump could not possibly be hated or vilified for such an action more than he already is. That is one predictable consequence of the media–Left and Right alike–piling onto Trump without pause or reflection every single hour of every single day, that when Trump finally does something that reasonably can cause reasonable people to be aghast (even if it is necessary, like battlefield surgery), there will be no fresh stock of moral indignation or morally indignant rhetoric to draw upon.

    • Angel Martin

      “having the military enter Mexico to the depth of, say, 20 miles, where we can deposit the deportees, and then see if Mexico just lets them sit there and die in the desert. ”

      No. Far more beneficial to the USA would be for the US military to invade and occupy the Mexican border States of Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, Baja and Tamaulipas, expel the corrupt politicians and the drug traffickers, and set up a new free state of Northern Mexico for the deportees to be returned to.

      And if the Mexican gov’t refuses to accept the expelled narco-politicians and their drug cartel friends, let those fine folks die in a desert no-man’s land.

    • Beauceron

      “This problem was already solved once before, in 1986, by the sort of bipartisan grand bargain that policy wonks and editorialists slaver over.”

      Part of that deal was that the Left was going to stop pushing for mass immigration, and would stand firm against illegal immigration. They lied, plain and simple. Illegal immigration did not even slow and the Left remained staunch supporters of a borderless world (along with, let us never forget, certain quarters of the right).

      The truth is that America has been permanently changed by the mass immigration that has taken place over the last 40 years. The 21st Century America is no longer the same country it was through the 18th, 19th and 20th Centuries. Both political parties, and most of its members, absolutely refuse to deal with that. Our demographics have changed more profoundly and more quickly than any other country’s in history, excluding invasion. We have a higher foreign born population than at any other time in our history. That in itself will put stresses on any culture. But the bigger problem here is not the rapid demographic change, it’s the Left. You combine that profound change in demographics with the Left’s brand of Identity Politics– and this month’s DNC leadership conference demonstrated a full-on embrace of Identity Politics by Democrats– and you create a tinderbox.

      As that continues, and whites- now the permanent foil for People Of Color– become a minority population, we are going to have a civil war. Not today, not next year, but within the next 20 years. It’s just inevitable.

      • Jim__L

        It’s not inevitable in any way. We weren’t overrun by Southern and European anarchists a hundred years ago, we’re not going to be overrun by Hispanics today.

        We’re going to shut the border down like we did then, probably ship a significant number back, then assimilate the rest.

        It worked before, it can work again, particularly with DeVos at DoEd.

        There are absolutely solutions to be tried before despair sets in.

        • Beauceron

          I reject comparisons with previous immigration swells. The comparison is inapposite. 1) There is a marked cultural difference between Europeans and, say Somalis or El Salvadorans. It is simply willful blindness to pretend otherwise. 2) There was a broad belief in assimilation back then– both among the native population and the new arrivals. That is gone– indeed it isn’t just gone, it is forbidden. You start telling people to assimilate and you’re a bigot. Indeed on many campuses (all of the UC and U of Wisconsin campuses, for example) phrases like “melting pot” are banned by university speech codes as racist microaggressions. In any case, most, if not all, immigrants in this day and age want to retain their own cultures. And why shouldn’t they? Stronger cultures should not have to cede ground to weaker cultures. Weaker cultures have always given way to more powerful ones.
          I suspect you’ll argue that American/Western culture is stronger than Somali or El Salvadoran culture– but that’s patently false. Back in Somalia and El Salvador their cultures remain mostly unchanged. There is and will always be a Somalian culture and an El Salvadoran one– American culture is the one that will disappear. This effect is more noticeable in Europe. So, for example, France will Islamisize and French culture– the art, the literature, the sexiness– will be gone in a half century. North Africa will remain essentially the same culturally, it is France that will change. So who’s culture is stronger, the one that disappeared beneath the waves of history, or the one that took the other over? Sweden has been pretty open about this. An ad currently running in Sweden talks about how the “old Swedes” must adapt and change for the “new Swedes.” But of course the “new Swedes” are not Swedish, and have no desire to be.
          Our immediate future is growing balkanization. I see that in my own neighborhood. City sponsored ads that were once in English moved to both English and Spanish. Recently, the signs changed to be only in Spanish. The automatic ads I sometimes get while online are now mostly in Spanish– I assume bots know my zip from my ISP. University students are now demanding dorms and services buildings that are non-white and only for People of Color. That is the beginning of balkanization.
          My assumption that this will eventually devolve into a civil war is based on the fact that as whites become, say 40% of the population then 30%, the laws and regulations that grant special privileges to People of Color– in employment, education, government contracts, etc. — will be harder to support as they come at the expense of what was a majority population. As the population that supported those special minority privileges dwindles to a minority and the once minority population who get special rights grows and becomes the majority, the equation won’t be sustainable. Do you honestly ever see a scenario where, for example, the lower acceptance requirements for blacks and latinos at universities will be rescinded? I don’t. Those are permanent features of our national landscape now.
          I assume at some point whites will become sick of that unfairness and grow weary of being blamed for every ill past and present. But I accept I may be wrong about that. Whites in America are incredibly submissive as a group– indeed they are not even permitted to think of themselves as a group except when they are the target of blame, so I suppose they may just take it until they disappear.
          Pessimistic, I know. But it is the ugly truth of it.

          • ljgude

            I think there is some evidence that the white working class has already spoken up against their own disappearance in both the US and the UK. But you make the pessimistic case well and I agree with it. . I would add a distinction – the difference between Western Christian culture and Muslim culture. I think the difference between Salvadoran culture and Somali culture is that the former are reconcilable with American values while the latter are not. Individual Somalis yes, but as a culture, no. Almost all those people coming from Mexico and Central and South America are Roman Catholics. Like Paul Ryan. Or Rubio or Cruz – take your pick. I’ll take all three gladly. 😉

          • solstice

            Dude, take a chill pill. Seriously, given your predilection for predicting the imminent demise of civilization and the return of the Dark Ages, it is quite clear that Beauceron needs some Halcion.

            In predicting that Europe will become Islamic, you once again ignore the myriad divisions and weaknesses within Muslim populations, collapsing Muslim birth rates, the sizable number of Muslims in the West who have assimilated and adopted Western values (and whose voices are drowned out by Islamists), the exponential rise of populist nationalism in recent years, and the growing backlash against political correctness, multiculturalism, globalism, and open borders. I agree that Western Europe will continue to experience extreme turbulence for the foreseeable future as a consequence of the disastrous immigration policies of its current rulers, but that is not equivalent to a complete Islamic takeover.

            You vastly overstate the power of academia and ignore that universities are bubbles that are often completely detached from their broader populations, that the influence of universities is declining as online learning technologies advance, that many young people are quietly rebelling against the left-wing indoctrination of these institutions, that many of them are exposed to different points of view via the Internet, that many graduates become more right-wing as they grow older and experience the job market, and that, although the insane social justice warrior types may be the loudest voices on campuses, they do not constitute a majority of students.

            You use the leftist divide-and-conquer propaganda term “people of color” and absurdly imply that such people constitute a monolithic bloc that demands “special privileges” and rejects “white” culture. You ignore the many similarities between non-white and white cultures and the resentment that many legal immigrants feel toward illegal immigration. You also ignore that many second- and third-generation “people of color” in America are heavily influenced by “white” culture, intermarry with whites, and have become completely Americanized. But let’s just ignore all of these salient facts in favor of a baseless, doom-and-gloom, whites vs. non-whites dystopian vision of the future.

    • ggm281

      Why does everyone forget that Bill Clinton signed a big amnesty bill in 1996? Again with promises that it would be the last because of the the new enforcement rules (including Everify). Over Clinton’s 2 terms, around 6 million Mexican and Central Americans became US citizens – double the number granted amnesty in 1986. And sure enough the next big push for amnesty started on that 10 year schedule, in 2005. More liberal versions of the 2005 bill have been floated 2 more times in the last decade. Obviously, the people are not going to agree to another blanket amnesty with a vast expansion of unskilled, uneducated workers we neither need nor want. If they want to pass a reform, it is going to have to be of benefit to the country. A focus on skills based visas sans ANY “family reunification” beyond spouse and minor children should be the basis! And some limited legal status for people illegally in the country who have filed 1040s for more than tax credits, haven’t committed benefits fraud by lying about income or number of children, and have no criminal record (and not just for violent crimes). That would probably only be about 2 million of the 12.

  • Anthony

    Well, a political community exits in large part to benefit itself; that is, to advance the common good of its citizens. In that vein, President Trump has catalyzed a country wearied and rightly concerned about immigration. The concern and debate (as well as actionable measures) will probably continue on for several years. Still, the immigration issue and its fallout (consequences) – relative benefits and harms of allowing high rates of immigration – desperately needs national attention. For a related discussion see:

    “Many Americans believe that their constitution presumes or appeals to certain timeless, universal moral truths that apply to all humans beings. But the U.S. Constitution itself – like the constitutions, fundamental laws, and commonly affirmed norms and rules of all political communities – is nonetheless instantiated in a particular place, rooted in a particular tradition. It also pertains and applies only to people who are members of the political community known as the United States of America.”

  • Beauceron

    The Mexican government has been directly involved in aiding and abetting its citizens crossing the border illegally. This has been true for decades.

    These are not citizens of the US– they are citizens of Mexico. Mexico can take them back or we can send the military across the border to seize a temporary “buffer” area. We can deport Mexican citizens to that zone, put them up in tents or temporary housing, then retreat back across the border leaving Mexican citizens in Mexico.

  • lukelea

    “probably the ones who surf it rather than riding it” fix that metaphor

  • lukelea

    I biometric national ID, not a wall, not e-verify without an ID, is the only practical way to enforce our immigration laws. The sensible thing would be to modernize our current cardboard Social Security card, which is a joke, probably deliberately so.

    • FriendlyGoat

      Not so many years ago, conservatives were the main opposition to a national ID card (let alone biometric), no?

      • ggm281

        Real ID was biometric. And you are right. It was the libertarian wing of the GOP that opposed it. (Remember the RFID fear mongering). But in the end, it was Janet Napolitano who suspended implementation her first month as Sec. DHS. Even though 3/4 of states had set up the necessary systems she insisted it was too large a burden on states.

  • Disappeared4x

    The idea that a “…shift trade to services away from manufacturing…” has not worked out too well for America, despite the prophesies from the 1990’s. What if the assumptions behind ‘post-industrial economy’ were wrong? As for American retirees? Most prefer English-speakers for many services, even when needed in the USA.

  • Proud Skeptic

    So, after someone breaks into your home and sets up housekeeping, the right thing to do is to compromise and just let him inhabit the spare room?

    Nope. Either a nation has the right to control its borders or it isn’t a real nation. Mexicans are welcome to their opinion as to whether they should be able to move freely into the US in violation of our laws. But in the end it boils down to two things…what does the law say? and are we serious about enforcing them?

    With the election of Trump, the toothpaste is out of the tube. He can survive a lot of things but buckling under to the Mexicans isn’t one of them.

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    Beclowning themselves.

  • Joel W

    The same Mexico that gives you up to ten years in prison if you are an illegal there? The same Mexico that has a southern wall of their own? Who gives a fuck about Mexico. Like Canada, they only exist because a few centuries ago somebody here decided to let the canucks keep the unbearably cold areas and the Mexis keep the unbearably hot areas of North America.

  • ljgude

    I think this a canny post in that it points out that there may be a deal to be struck here. I think the bigger sticking point is NAFTA, but after the posturing on both sides some deal between the russet haired Viking and his Hispanic machismo driven counterparts may be thrashed out.

  • Pete

    What! Even the Mexican government doesn’t what its peasant class back. Sorry, but Mexico is going to get them one way or another.

    • ggm281

      I know right. We need to make sure that Mexico understands how vital these workers are to economic prosperity!!

  • Proud Skeptic

    Step one…insist that the president of Mexico acknowledge publicly that Mexicans residing illegally in the US have no right to be here.

    Step two…until you get the right answer in step one, show no mercy.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service