We need a national dialogue about
the morality of Mexico exporting millions of their poor, illiterate, criminal,
and frequently pregnant over our borders, and our own government’s tacit
collusion in this invasion.
It’s not from generousity or concern
for the poor of a foreign country that most of the Fortune 500 are generous
donors to the Mexican Fascist Party of La Raza – “The Race”.
It’s all about exploitation. The
American worker having to compete with the desperate and exploited Mexican
worker exported by their own corrupt country.
*
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, October 5, 2009
Father PATRICK BASCIO has a remarkably different perspective on illegal immigration from that of most Christian clergymen-one he’s outlined in a remarkable new book entitled
On the Immorality of Illegal Immigration: An Alternative Christian View.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Father PATRICK BASCIO has a remarkably different perspective on illegal immigration from that of most Christian clergymen-one he’s outlined in a remarkable new book entitled
On the Immorality of Illegal Immigration: An Alternative Christian View.
*
On
The Immorality of Illegal Immigration: A Priest Poses an Alternative Christian
View
By
C.S. Patrick J. Bascio
Editorial Reviews
Father Bascio presents a strikingly different perspective on
illegal immigration from that of most Christian clergymen. He turns his
spotlight on the harm of officially tolerated illegal immigration to America's
own struggling workers in the form of joblessness, shrinking wages and poorer
working conditions. African-American workers, already plagued by job
discrimination, bear the heaviest burden of the illegal invasion, which locks
them out of many workplaces or drives wages below acceptable levels. The chronic
non-enforcement of immigration laws is no accident: Congress has little stomach
for ending something so profitable for their most powerful donors and the
voters they can muster. The author fears that many committed Christians are
blinded to these abuses by their church leaders' preoccupation with charity
toward illegal aliens, while ignoring the plight of millions of low-wage
Americans. He deftly rebuts the self-serving myth of employers' and
politicians' that illegals "do jobs Americans won't do." Bascio also
sees the profit motive behind legal immigration policies that lure the third
world's best and brightest to America, stripping poorer nations of their
physicians, teachers and scientists. As a Catholic priest, the author admits
the unpleasantness of taking a position not shared by his Church's hierarchy,
which is driven by the prospect of rising membership. Bascio sees unchecked
illegal immigration as having grave consequences for overall U.S. tranquility:
disdain for the rule of law, street gangs, document fraud and identity theft,
staggering welfare and education costs and creeping "Balkanization"
that threatens the national principle of E Pluribus Unum. Father Bascio's book
is a resounding appeal to Christians to re-examine their churches' conventional
view of illegal immigration and consider the hardship it brings for fellow
Americans and its dangers for the nation as a whole.
About the
Author
Father Patrick Pascio is a retired Catholic priest, international
human rights expert, professor and writer whose long ministry has included
assignments in the U.S., Tanzania and the Caribbean islands. In Trinidad he
taught at the University of the West Indies and, in Grenada, advised the Prime
Minister and represented that country on U.N. committees. He founded and
directed Salve Regina University's PhD program and directed its Master's
program in Humanities. He is a U.S. Air Force veteran of World War II. Father
Bascio has two master's degrees in the social sciences and a doctorate. A
prolific writer, Bascio's works since 1994 include The Failure of White
Theology: A Black Theological Perspective (1994); Gorbachev and the Collapse of
the Soviet Communist Party (with Evgueny Novikov -1994); Defeating Islamic
Terrorism: The Wahabi Factor (2006); and Perfidy: the Government Cabal that
Knowingly Abandoned Our Prisoners of War (2008).
*
The Mexican
Invasion................................................
Mexico prefers to export its poor,
not uplift them
March 30, 2006 edition
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0330/p09s02-coop.html
Mexico prefers to export its poor,
not uplift them
At this week's summit, failed
reforms under Fox should be the issue, not US actions.
By George W. Grayson WILLIAMSBURG,
VA.
At the parleys this week with his
US and Canadian counterparts in Cancún, Mexican President Vicente Fox will
press for more opportunities for his countrymen north of the Rio Grande.
Specifically, he will argue for additional visas for Mexicans to enter the
United States and Canada, the expansion of guest-worker schemes, and the
"regularization" of illegal immigrants who reside throughout the
continent. In a recent interview with CNN, the Mexican chief executive excoriated
as "undemocratic" the extension of a wall on the US-Mexico border and
called for the "orderly, safe, and legal" northbound flow of
Mexicans, many of whom come from his home state of Guanajuato. Mexican
legislators share Mr. Fox's goals. Silvia Hernández Enriquez, head of the
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations for North America, recently emphasized
that the solution to the "structural phenomenon" of unlawful
migration lies not with "walls or militarization" but with
"understanding, cooperation, and joint responsibility." Such rhetoric
would be more convincing if Mexican officials were making a good faith effort
to uplift the 50 percent of their 106 million people who live in poverty. To
his credit, Fox's "Opportunities" initiative has improved slightly
the plight of the poorest of the poor. Still, neither he nor Mexico's lawmakers
have advanced measures that would spur sustained growth, improve the quality of
the workforce, curb unemployment, and obviate the flight of Mexicans abroad.
Indeed, Mexico's leaders have turned hypocrisy from an art form into an exact
science as they shirk their obligations to fellow citizens, while decrying
efforts by the US senators and representatives to crack down on illegal
immigration at the border and the workplace. What are some examples of this
failure of responsibility? · When oil revenues are excluded, Mexico raises the
equivalent of only 9 percent of its gross domestic product in taxes - a figure
roughly equivalent to that of Haiti and far below the level of major Latin
American nations. Not only is Mexico's collection rate ridiculously low, its
fiscal regime is riddled with loopholes and exemptions, giving rise to
widespread evasion. Congress has rebuffed efforts to reform the system.
Insufficient revenues mean that Mexico spends relatively little on two key
elements of social mobility: Education commands just 5.3 percent of its GDP and
healthcare only 6.10 percent, according to the World Bank's last comparative
study. · A venal, "come-back-tomorrow" bureaucracy explains the 58 days
it takes to open a business in Mexico compared with three days in Canada, five
days in the US, nine days in Jamaica, and 27 days in Chile. Mexico's private
sector estimates that 34 percent of the firms in the country made "extra
official" payments to functionaries and legislators in 2004. These bribes
totaled $11.2 billion and equaled 12 percent of GDP. · Transparency
International, a nongovernmental organization, placed Mexico in a tie with
Ghana, Panama, Peru, and Turkey for 65th among 158 countries surveyed for
corruption. · Economic competition is constrained by the presence of
inefficient, overstaffed state oil and electricity monopolies, as well as a
small number of private corporations - closely linked to government big shots -
that control telecommunications, television, food processing, transportation,
construction, and cement. Politicians who talk about, much less propose,
trust-busting measures are as rare as a snowfall in the Sonoran Desert.
Geography, self-interests, and humanitarian concerns require North America's
neighbors to cooperate on myriad issues, not the least of which is immigration.
However, Mexico's power brokers have failed to make the difficult decisions
necessary to use their nation's bountiful wealth to benefit the masses. Washington
and Ottawa have every right to insist that Mexico's pampered elite act
responsibly, rather than expecting US and Canadian taxpayers to shoulder
burdens Mexico should assume.
*
Is Illegal Immigration Moral?
By Victor Davis Hanson
11/25/2010
We know illegal
immigration is no longer really unlawful, but is it moral?
Usually
Americans debate the fiscal costs of illegal immigration. Supporters of open
borders rightly remind us that illegal immigrants pay sales taxes. Often their
payroll-tax contributions are not later tapped by Social Security payouts.
Opponents
counter that illegal immigrants are more likely to end up on state assistance,
are less likely to report cash income, and cost the state more through the
duplicate issuing of services and documents in both English and Spanish. Such
to-and-fro talking points are endless.
So is the
debate over beneficiaries of illegal immigration. Are profit-minded employers
villains who want cheap labor in lieu of hiring more expensive Americans? Or is
the culprit a cynical Mexican government that counts on billions of dollars in
remittances from its expatriate poor that it otherwise ignored?
Or is the
engine that drives illegal immigration the American middle class? Why should
millions of suburbanites assume that, like 18th-century French aristocrats,
they should have imported labor to clean their homes, manicure their lawns and
watch over their kids?
Or is the
catalyst the self-interested professional Latino lobby in politics and academia
that sees a steady stream of impoverished Latin American nationals as a
permanent victimized constituency, empowering and showcasing elite
self-appointed spokesmen such as themselves?
Or is the real
advocate the Democratic Party that wishes to remake the electoral map of the
American Southwest by ensuring larger future pools of natural supporters?
Again, the debate over who benefits and why is never-ending.
But what is
often left out of the equation is the moral dimension of illegal immigration.
We see the issue too often reduced to caricature, involving a noble,
impoverished victim without much free will and subject to cosmic forces of
sinister oppression. But everyone makes free choices that affect others. So
ponder the ethics of a guest arriving in a host country knowingly against its
sovereign protocols and laws.
First, there is
the larger effect on the sanctity of a legal system. If a guest ignores the law
-- and thereby often must keep breaking more laws -- should citizens also have
the right to similarly pick and choose which statutes they find worthy of
honoring and which are too bothersome? Once it is deemed moral for the
impoverished to cross a border without a passport, could not the same arguments
of social justice be used for the poor of any status not to report earned
income or even file a 1040 form?
Second, what is
the effect of mass illegal immigration on impoverished U.S. citizens? Does
anyone care? When 10 million to 15 million aliens are here illegally, where is
the leverage for the American working poor to bargain with employers? If it is
deemed ethical to grant in-state tuition discounts to illegal-immigrant
students, is it equally ethical to charge three times as much for out-of-state,
financially needy American students -- whose federal government usually offers
billions to subsidize state colleges and universities? If foreign nationals are
afforded more entitlements, are there fewer for U.S. citizens?
Third, consider
the moral ramifications on legal immigration -- the traditional great strength
of the American nation. What are we to tell the legal immigrant from Oaxaca who
got a green card at some cost and trouble, or who, once legally in the United
States, went through the lengthy and expensive process of acquiring
citizenship? Was he a dupe to dutifully follow our laws?
And given the
current precedent, if a million soon-to-be-impoverished Greeks, 2 million
fleeing North Koreans, or 5 million starving Somalis were to enter the United
States illegally and en masse, could anyone object to their unlawful entry and
residence? If so, on what legal, practical or moral grounds?
Fourth, examine
the morality of remittances. It is deemed noble to send billions of dollars
back to families and friends struggling in Latin America. But how is such a
considerable loss of income made up? Are American taxpayers supposed to step in
to subsidize increased social services so that illegal immigrants can afford to
send billions of dollars back across the border? What is the morality of that
equation in times of recession? Shouldn't illegal immigrants at least try to
buy health insurance before sending cash back to Mexico?
The debate over
illegal immigration is too often confined to costs and benefits. But ultimately
it is a complicated moral issue -- and one often ignored by all too many
moralists.
Victor
Davis Hanson
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist
and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient
of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.
No comments:
Post a Comment