Today on the local Phoenix news, illegal immigration was a majority of the news, so apparently it is the big issue of the day. The interesting thing is that, being that it is a big issue, dogma has taken control. Those in favor cannot abide by dissenting opinion, and the same goes for those opposed. Odd isn't it?
I dare you to confront anyone in favor of illegal immigration (liberals and neo-cons, ironically) with a dissenting opinion, and see how far it goes before you get branded racist. The same would go, I'm sure, if you confronted the blue collar and union folk with a pro-illegality stance.
But, like many other "hot" issues" this is one I'm not allowed to voice my opinion on, so I'll drop it with the comment on the censorship of the masses. I ran into this same thing with abortion, it is impossible to ever find a good view on it, since inquiry becomes impossible due to the utter lack of rational stances, deep down every stance is purely emotional.
We don't need the government to censor our speech; we're good enough at it as a society. This chibi rant was in part came to by taking to my friend who was dealing with the fallout of a counter protest against illegals, where apparently the pro-people could even abide by hearing dissent. To quote my friend "yes, those asshole are trying to make millions of people felons! so these people have to protect them!" Who cares? Palatable solutions only exist in disagreement and opposition. A pure liberal state would be as terrible as the worst fascist tyranny. No one can make a good judgment without openness.
Sadly I must keep my mouth shut because I can understand both the humanitarian concerns of liberals, and the labor/wage concerns of the working class. As far as I see, BOTH sides are completely right. And I see the issue as far to complex to ever issue a "for or against" sound bite towards. And unlike many other "big issues" that present themselves in the modern era, this one cannot be easily dissected.
In stem cells and gay marriage, it boils down to humanism and rationality against some outmoded religion based morality. In illegal immigration it boils down to a complex matrix of actual problems that effect us all (legal or non). Letting them stay and continue to flood over the border has a big set of existent problems (as everyone sees), kicking them all out has big problems (its practicality contrary to the idiotic propaganda flick "a day without Mexicans" and massive economic problems), or legalizing all of them (massive economic problems). Enforcement itself has serious humanitarian and economic problems as well. Letting them flood over unrestricted and unassisted causes much human tragedy, property damage, and financial problems in vital sectors, not to mention the cultural factors (no more dual language ballots!). Notice how none of these problems can be fixed by assuaging any given side of the conflict? That means that this is a tough problem that can only be fixed by strong compromise. A compromise that is rendered impossible by entrenched ideologies. (Yes, see how far entrenched ideologies have gotten the abortion debate, which has degenerated into a series of unthinking and completely opposed clichés)
Perhaps over the next day, or so, I'll try to work out a complete matrix of this problem, containing the 3 points of view that I can think of at this moment. Liberal (pro), working (con), conservative (pro).
But in the mean time, I hope to open up some degree of rational, and unemotional debate on this. Abortion has already long passed the stage where any rational discussion is possible; perhaps immigration has not yet reached this point. We can hope.