As the Biden administration responds to the “crisis” at the border primarily by building a more efficient amnesty infrastructure, they’ve recognized the critical threat to their lax immigration policy is press coverage of said policy. The locus of their efforts is not in preventing individuals from coming here, not at the same time they reinstituted catch and release. It’s about building sufficiently suitable quarters for the new influx to avoid endangering their standing with a Far Left they’ll need to wrangle for a filibuster-eliminated amnesty bill that wasn’t supposed to be next in line.
We are about to see a lot more obfuscation here as we enter the predictable rounds of Mainstream Media defense. We’re exiting the ‘it’s Trump’s fault’ phase, and currently in the ‘Biden caught between Right and Far Left’ defense with constant reference to his poll numbers. After that will be the ‘Go Big’ effort, where the far-left casts Republicans as racist and trial balloon ideas are floated around mass amnesty. If those do not engender a sufficient blowback, and with the Overton window boarded up, then Biden might move to claim the crisis requires him to enact mass amnesty now.
As we get swept into the coming political cycles, let’s take a moment to recount a longer arc of how we got here and reground ourselves in some basic principles. To do so is to better prepare for the fight ahead, the stakes of which we are still catching up to:
1. Immigration is the lifeblood of our country. It refreshes and renews us. It is core to the American experiment, and it is a public good.
2. We are, all of us, guilty. Through our personal actions or our support of a pre-Trump bipartisan consensus against enforcement, we are all implicated. We’ve all in some way enjoyed the benefits of the rights-less second class of labor we allowed in America for the past 40 years. If we hadn’t, we wouldn’t have accepted the de facto policy for so long.
3. Many of the individuals who came over here did so because, again, our de facto policy was one of looking the other way. So, the understanding via which many of these individuals ventured to America was one in which the chances of finding employment were high and their risk of being deported low.
However, that does not obligate the citizens of the United States to continue that de facto policy into perpetuity, and at no time did our citizenry commit to offering illegal aliens that deal into perpetuity either. Put more simply, there is no moral requirement for amnesty.
We remain sovereign. We may soon choose, after abiding the obvious, Biden-ignored national consensus to secure the border, to grant a subset of these individuals amnesty, accepting that we’d end up kicking the can down the road for another few decades. However, we may not – a sovereign people may choose differently. Do not be waylaid by those who would equate that choice with xenophobia or racism. Beyond the question of amnesty, a word loaded but plain in meaning, let’s be clear: enforcement of existing federal immigration law is not xenophobic or racist, nor is it – as constantly described for the past few years – hardline.
After decades of high legal and illegal immigration, the percentage of foreign-born U.S. residents is at its highest level in roughly 100 years. That presents both economic opportunity and cultural enrichment, as well as some challenges. We’re doing better with it than we did in the 1920s I’d suggest, but assimilation isn’t always easy. We stand at a crossroads now. We can limit illegal immigration and asylee abuse and turn the boil into a simmer, or we can accept the Democrats’ plans and undergo one of the most aggressive alterations to the demographics of our country in its history.
Joe Biden isn’t listening to you. But as it relates to immigration policy and the great gambit Democrats are making, your local representatives of both parties will. Make yourself heard and engage with those with whom you disagree. Reject the accusatory crutches of the Tammany Hall Left. Our border security can no longer be up for debate. Call your local representatives and tell them these three words: We Demand Sovereignty.