Shitholes, Sanctuaries, and Springfield

I am convinced that so long as what we offer immigrants is a full adoption into our weird, sometimes dysfunctional family – an invitation to work hard, to be honorable citizens, to add what they find worthy and beautiful to what we find worthy and beautiful – Americans will never stop being and achieving the exceptional.

THAT’S the story I will tell my children – no matter which way the pendulum of common knowledge is swinging.

Amen Rusty

There are no other people’s children.

Really excellent piece, particularly the ending. As the father of a 13 year old who’s beginning to ask a lot more questions about current affairs it’s nice to be reminded of the importance of the long game when it comes to raising kids.

There’s a question that I’ve seen asked quite a bit after the Haitian story came out, and I don’t recall hearing it much (if ever) before that. It’s neither story nor narrative, really only a whisper on the wind: why is the US expected to take on every immigrant fleeing from anywhere within our hemisphere?

A version of this line of discussion has been circulating since Doge began making cuts to USAID as well, i.e. why is the US the only nation on the planet that can pay for HIV medicine/drilling water wells/insert valuable thing here.

I would be very interested to see any data about this specific line of analysis, especially once it leaves the confines of the let’s call them less-than-good-faith question askers and makes its way into the mainstream. I think a fair number of the pro-immigration folks (and I’ll include myself in that group) would be curious to hear the rationale behind the US bearing the majority of the disruption from mass asylum while other wealthy liberal democracies (looking at you, Canada) are seemingly exempt. That framing seems like one that could create real, genuine discussion about the future of immigration, what role the US should play, and the trade-offs that society is willing to accept. Or maybe I’m being needlessly optimistic.

Honestly, it’s one of a few things that I would have liked very much for an American administration to begin asking our allies in a constructive and cooperative, if pointed way that began behind closed doors. Why ARE we subsidizing defense/pharma/refugees/unstable states and any number of other things, bearing full criticism when we abandon it but never yielding credit for doing it in the first place? In a sense Trump tapped into the frustration of being taken for granted that I think a lot of Americans feel which is entirely warranted and…which is also sort of the price you have to pay to be The Hegemon.

Interestingly, I think that migration is probably one of our weaker cases for making this argument in earnest and in good faith, as most of the developed world is grappling with pretty similar situations.

Whatever, pray tell, do you mean “looking at you Canada”?

Terrific piece Rusty. Especially liked the way you closed it and what you’ll teach your children.

The notion of “Heritage Americans” means what? Something like, if you descended from someone who joined the club between 1492 and approx. 1960, you’re good; but everyone else is somehting less? It’s ridiculous on it’s face.

We are a nation of immigrants and stronger for it! Seems people forget that given current birthrates, we’d all better hope immigrants keep wanting to come here.

In one year—2023—the US accepted more refugee claims than Canada did over the last eight years.

Why is Europe expected to take refugees from the Middle East after US forever wars in the Middle East? I’ve discussed this in the past here but Europe takes more refugees than the US.

https://www.unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/statistics/#:~:text=By%20the%20end%20of%202022%2C%20Europe%20hosted%201%20in%203,2%2C439%20are%20dead%20or%20missing.

Yemen. Syria. Iraq. Libya. Afghanistan. Which parts of these environments has the US not had primary position in affecting the outcome of?

I’d also consider US as more responsible to their own refugee crisis from South America, as the rest of the world didn’t participate much in that region, is this not the case?

I’d say the accepting refugees as the cost of defense has been the defacto modus operandi. Otherwise US couldn’t claim to be the good guys while bombing children.

Before comparing brisket and back bacon, we should population adjust so the impact on local communities is proportional. Welcoming 1000 to Moose Jaw, the 4th largest city in Saskatchewan, would roil the waters a bit more than adding them to Austin, the 4th largest city in Texas. Seems the ratio of Yanks to Canucks is about 9:1. I have spent no time with the data or Canada’s immigration policy, but isn’t the ratio of 1/8 in the ballpark?

El Paso, the sixth largest city in Texas, added ~43,800 over two years (2023-2024). That represents around 6% of the existing population there. In your Moose Jaw example that would be like adding not 1,000, but 2,000 new people.

It would be if we were only contending with people coming in legally and through an orderly process. But that’s not the reality here. We have two systems—US and Canada, respectively—that operate with some rules. But in the US you have a whole separate (and much larger) channel that is not orderly, nor is it even close to manageable. If Canada declares they’re taking in 250,000 people who apply for legal immigrant status and then one month 37,000 people just stroll on in without doing the paperwork I imagine they’d have to make some adjustments to their model. Canada has the luxury of being able to set rules and not have to fight these huge externalities that pop up at seemingly random times.

DY- you’ll get no argument from this Texan that our prior attitude at the Mexican border needed serious attention. Canada played no role in our deranged policy under Biden.