nate33 wrote:payitforward wrote:No, that's not what he's saying. You might try reading a little more carefully, nate. You almost might think about maintaining context.
What Jefferson opposes here is a policy of bringing in huge numbers (i.e. relative to existing population) of immigrants in one fell swoop by going out and, in his words, "inviting them by extraordinary encouragements." Specifically he's opposing use of such a method to double our population in short order. This is why he offers the comparative example of "20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France."
Oh, I see now. It's reasonable to restrict immigration only if we are talking about "huge numbers". Of course, that depends on your definition of huge. Since your definition of huge happens to be bigger than mine, I'm an evil, ignorant racist who can't even seem to understand how to read, and you are a wise, benevolent person.
Dude... what are you talking about here? You made a claim as to what Jefferson believed. The claim was incorrect. I pointed out what the thrust of Jefferson's argument was about. What does any of that have to do w/ this response from you?
For the record, I do not think you are "an evil, ignorant racist." If I thought that, I wouldn't engage with you, Nate. I think you are incorrect in your thinking in a number of ways, and it's to that thinking I respond. I'm sure as well that you are correct across a wide range of matters you think about.
Nor do I think I'm "a wise, benevolent person." I hope in some ways I'm "benevolent" -- the Latin basis of which means "well-wishing." I try to be. Markieff Morris may be a terrible player, but I wish him well!
As to "wise," nah -- forget about it!
nate33 wrote:Furthermore, you are using wild conjecture to arrive at your argument that Jefferson only feared "huge numbers". Perhaps YOU should read more carefully. Jefferson arbitrarily picked the number 20 million simply to have a number so high that his point was inarguable. It does not mean he thought 19.9 million would be just fine. That would completely contradict the entire substance of his quote where he shows extreme concern about the deleterious societal effects of immigration. Even in a time when everyone acknowledged that they need more people, Jefferson was arguing against significant immigration...
Ok, so what you write above is inaccurate about Jefferson. You misread him, and it makes you come to a wrong conclusion. Here's what he was doing in that set of sentences:
1. Jefferson picked 20m in his comment about France, because he is discussing what would happen if you instantly doubled the population of a country by adding people who knew nothing of its ways, and 20m was the common notion at the time of the population of France.
2. You will note as well that, although I'm sure we'd agree that he thought "freedom" a superior value, he considers doubling the population of an absolute monarchy like France by suddenly adding an equal number of people versed in freedom (i.e. types like us) to its population as just as likely to have a deleterious effect on France as the opposite would on us. In fact, that is the explicit "thought experiment" he offers. In other words, he's not thinking about "values".
3. Jefferson wasn't "arguing against significant immigration" in the slightest: in fact, the US was certainly undergoing significant immigration at the time. He was arguing against a specific programmatic idea that through unusual efforts would invite immigrants in numbers that would double the population "instantly" (i.e. quickly). He was distinguishing such a program from what our attitudes ought to be to someone who got here on his own, to whom he advocates according citizenship. Surely, you are not arguing that when Jefferson writes "If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship" he means something other than the plain sense of his words?
nate33 wrote:And I find it convenient that you never come up with any criteria of what "huge" is, so that you can always appear to claim the moral high ground by advocating any number of immigrants.
? Where did I advocate "any number of immigrants" -- i.e. unlimited immigration, open borders? (I take it that's what you are suggesting I've advocated)
nate33 wrote:Do you think, perhaps, that a quadrupling of our foreign born population in just 40 years might be causing some strain? As I've pointed out over and over, median income has been stagnant for 40 years and has declined for the lower income quintiles, and 50-80% of immigrants from Central America and other 3rd world areas are on welfare for 21+ years. You blithely ignore the data, presumably because unskilled workers won't compete for YOUR job, but you might find a cheaper lawn guy.
A fair question, if slightly disingenuous. US population in 1960 was 181m; today it's 319m. So from 5.4% foreign born to 12.9% -- not quadruple, but unquestionably a significant rise: almost 2 and a half times percentage wise.
nate33 wrote:payitforward wrote:On the other hand, he says -- right there in the passage you quote, man! -- "If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship."
Please. You can't be this obtuse. (This is my attempt at a payitforward-style condescending insult at the beginning of every paragraph. How did I do?) In 1803, it was extremely difficult and expensive to come to America and often times it was not even feasible to turn immigrants away without sentencing them to their own deaths. That analogy no longer holds when you can just hop on a freight train and ride up through Mexico.
I can so be obtuse! If I want to be. But... I don't want to be. So I give you a B- on your attempt to condescend to me. That said, if I've been condescending to you, I would ordinarily be apologetic. Then again, you could help me out by reading texts accurately for what they actually say rather than bending every light ray towards the collapsed galaxy of your XIXth century point of view, whooh!!
Then again, here, for the first time in a while, you are right about something. It cannot be denied: Thomas Jefferson did
not take into account the not-yet-existing freight train that would easily get a person here from Syria I mean Mexico. And that means he is actually saying the opposite of what, actually, he says. If only, nate, he had that X-ray vision into the future, I'm sure he would have bought your fear of the millions of freight trains those bad bad Muslims would use to, in your words, "overwhelm our country." Do you realize the coal-pollution alone that those bazillions of Syrian-carrying freight trains would deposit in our true-American lungs? Plus, as we all know, those evil Muslims would only be coming here because they hate America and its way of life. I mean... why else would they want to be here?
nate33 wrote:payitforward wrote:As to your goofy thought experiment asking whether I want to let in 1 billion immigrants from 3d world countries all at once -- well... why not just read what Jefferson said; it gives you your answer.
Interesting. So you are for outright open borders...
Sigh... Did you even read the words I just put in bold above? Did you read what I was giving you as my answer, taken from Jefferson? Did you spend even that brief moment? Per Jefferson, rapid, massive changes in the population of a country pose problems no one would know how to solve.
Fortunately, as you well know, this is not a practical concern. It will not be possible for 1 billion, or even 1 million, people living on $1 a day (your "1 billion 3d world people") thousands of miles from here to get to the US. Indeed what I said was meant, precisely, to discuss the exception to that rule -- the exceptional individual...
payitforward wrote:... among them (who) has the fortitude to get himself here from the other side of the world, a person having essentially no $ or other resources, but can get it done only by using his brains and guts... you bet I want him here. I'm going to guess he'll do more for the future of this nation than most people born here.
Does that seem an unreasonable statement to you? I think it is more or less the classic description of the desirable immigrant to America.
