5 Worst Arguments For The ICE Raids
Over the past couple of weeks, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been committing more and more raid. The whole purpose is to capture illegals, send them to a camp and hope they die, and if they don’t, send them back.
As someone who is against them, I will admit that just showing a sad child will not convince anyone. The only people who care about the human costs of what ICE do were against these raids from the start. However, that does not mean that there are actual fact based arguments against them.
As a libertarian, my main take is the government should not have the power to stop people from moving over some magic line that separates the United States and Mexico. However, these people also don’t care about small government, the only ones who identify as libertarians that support this are Pinochet Incels — or Hoppeans.
However, if you want to convince libertarians such as myself to support these raids, here are the five worst arguments you can make.
One: But They’re Illegal Though
Okay, so what? The law in of itself is not proof something is wrong, it just means people in congress thought it was wrong. That’s a pretty big difference.
However, many people currently considered heroes also broke the law. Harriet Tubman broke the law when she helped free slaves. Many in the Civil Rights Movement broke the law when they peacefully sat at a counter of a White Only restaurant. Rosa Parks was arrested who not sitting on the back of the bus when a White passenger wanted that seat. Does that make what they did wrong?
Now that I think about it, it seemed like those people in Boston who threw a bunch of tea in the ocean broke the law. As did the Revolutionary Armies when they had firearms after King George clearly banned them. Guess it’s only illegal if you lose the war.
Of course, some will dismiss this comparison and scream “Are you comparing these illegal immigrants to these people I think are right in every single way?” Of course not. All I’m pointing out is maybe — just maybe — if your best argument against something is a piece of paper says it’s bad, it may not be all that bad.
Two: This Is A Statement Of Sovereignty
To start off, allow me to channel my inner Liberal for a moment and talk about how anti-American this argument is. The biggest threat to the American nation, according to these people, is 11 year old kids. If America is so bad that’s what can kill it, why don’t you just leave?
Okay, now to my real argument. Who’s sovereignty is being saved here? Clearly not the illegal immigrants who came here in the first place. For that matter, it also doesn’t protect the person who wishes to rent to them and the company who wises to hire them. In fact, one of the biggest things you people keep complaining about is that they keep taking our jobs.
National sovereignty is only okay if it does not violate property rights. Immigration restriction must violate property rights as it does not allow me to bring people without documentation on my property.
Three: Democrats Are Only Against This To Get Votes
The people who make this argument simply do not understand how elections work. First off, any state that allows illegal immigrants to vote if a Democratic stronghold anyway. California — one of the states with sanctuary cities — would have voted blue in 2016 even if only White people voted.
Even then, most of the people ICE are deporting are children. An 11-year-old cannot vote. They have never been able to vote. They more than likely will never be able to vote.
Also, have you people really never considered why that is? If I were in a camp because of tough-on-immigration policies and saw Republicans defending it, I would never vote Republican again. Maybe the answer is to — and just hear me out — not put kids in camps.
For that matter, let’s talk about who really cares more about power here. The Democratic solution is to let people cross over some imaginary line whenever they want. The Republican solution is to put a bunch of men with guns at the boarder to shoot people who cross the line.
Four: The Parents Are To Blame Anyway
This is just begging the question. What we should be asking is why these parents are doing this dangerous travel, the answer is because even that is better then where they came from.
For that matter, people who use this argument must have never researched the conditions of the Mayflower. If we were to follow this argument, then those who came here from Europe must have all just been bad parents. As were the parents who went to Ellis Island.
Five: The Native Americans Let White People In And Look How That Worked Out
I find it funny the people who make this argument are self-described as “pro-white,” because this is a very anti-white argument.
The Europeans were only able to conquer Native Americans after a large amount of the population was already killed. What killed them? By — usually not on purpose — spreading illnesses Europeans were immune to and Native Americans weren’t.
If a super-bug ever breaks out in Mexico, I may be willing to make an exception. In fact, there’s a super virus currently in the Arctic. As such, I would be willing to support a ban on all forms of immigration from the Arctic. However, considering medical technology has advanced greatly since 1492, I’m going to assume even if we did it would not be that big of a deal.
Not only that, but Native Americans were constantly waring with each other. Meaning it was easy for Europeans to divide and conquer the Native Americans because most of them were killing themselves. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but Americans tend to not be fighting with ourselves in any way that could be considered similar.