Enforcing Immigration Law is not Racist, Xenophobic or Inhumane
The most humane thing to do about refugees and migrants is to hold governments accountable so that they provide the best conditions possible for people to remain where they belong.
feel sorry for people who only seem able to live in politically correct environments. I feel concerned about their political correctness police friends whose intolerance drives them to censor, ban and attack fellows whose opinions differ from theirs. Over the weekend, Brazilian President, Michel Temer, who will be ousted by popular vote in October, said that enforcing immigration law was an “inhumane act”.
It is mind boggling to see how a rapidly growing intolerant class, whose members are greatly poisoned by mentally lethal leftist ideological concepts and utopian ideals, invade media and popular discussions while demanding tolerance, equality and the destruction of society and humanity as we know it.
The latest chapter of this social nightmare is the use of epithets such as “inhumane”, “xenophobe” and “racist” used by politically compromised people, which are then regurgitated by mainstream media bought and paid for personalities and echoed by a growing segment of a mentally it populace.
They all believe that enforcing the rule of law, more specifically, immigration law, is xenophobic, racist and inhumane, because somehow, we all must be forced to accept their delirious thoughts about what they think is “social justice”.
Defending a nation’s borders and avoiding the entrance of criminals, illicit drugs and low skilled migrants is considered racist, inhumane and abhorrent, to cite a few insults.
The mainstream fake news media is directly responsible for current social unrest and balkanisation when it comes to immigration. Their reporters write, and their editors approve hundreds of inflammatory anti legal immigration articles, while labelling opponents of leaving borders wide open as “racists”, “inhumane” and “xenophobes”.
The practice of placing labels on their ideological “enemies” is easy to explain: They can win no argument on favouring illegal immigration, so they resort to insults to try to control the debate.
Take for example this article from the newspaper EL PAIS, from Spain, whose headline reads “The monster of xenophobia prowls the front door of Venezuelans in Brazil”. It refers to the resistance by Brazilians who live in border cities with Venezuela, to allow in thousands of Venezuelans that are fleeing Nicolas Maduro’s failed socialist utopia.
The article rightfully blames Brazilians for burning down a Venezuelan refugee camp, but presents the reasons behind such a burning as unjustified.
Previously, after the arrival of numerous Venezuelan refugees, people at the border city of Pacaraima, were victims of theft and physical attacks by Venezuelan refugees who in one case entered a local store, violently attacked its owner and then stole goods from the shelves.
Raimundo Nonato explains that despite his experience with Venezuelan migrants, neither he nor Brazilians in Pacaraima feel hateful, but people in the town want criminals to be put where they are supposed to be, in jail.
Pacaraima is a small town of just 12,000 people and it’s been experiencing daily arrivals of about 1,000 illegal Venezuelans. The migrants simply cross the border illegally, without showing any papers or manifesting their intentions. They do not apply for refugee status. Instead, they simply walk across the border and settle in improvised migrant camps.
Illegal immigration in Central America
Brazil is not the only country in South America that suffers from the continuous and ever growing number of illegal immigrants from Venezuela. Peru and Ecuador are two other nations that have taken measures to slow down the entrance of Venezuelans who attempt to escape Maduro’s burned down Venezuela.
In the meantime, in Central America, Costa Rica is going through their own illegal immigration nightmare. Another socialist wannabe thug, Daniel Ortega, also managed to ignite a fire in the social powder keg in the neighbouring country. As a result, hundreds if not thousands of Nicaraguans have come across the northern border.
It is fair to say that Costa Rica and Nicaragua share a not too happy past when it comes to illegal immigration. Nicaraguans have been illegally crossing the common border for decades.
Although many of these people are genuinely looking for a better future, it is also true that the out of control movement of Nicaraguans into Costa Rica facilitates the movement of criminals and drugs, much like at the Mexican-American border.
Lately, worsening conditions in Nicaragua have turned the heat up on Costa Rican politicians, who have been incapable of offering a solution to control who enters the country. Instead, paid provocateurs have taken it upon themselves to burn property, launch molotov cocktails and scream insults at the arriving Nicaraguan aliens.
Such isolated behaviour was enough to spur a shower of generalised criticisms against Costa Rican people. Newspapers from EL PAIS to LA REPUBLICA have launched a campaign to condemn what they call xenophobia and racism by Costa Rican people, although they showed no proof of such accusation.
It is one of those cases of lazy reporters who in their ignorance forgot about their responsibility and chose to sit at their desks to write a heavily biased article in favor of illegal immigration. They condemned marches, protests and speech against the uncontrolled entrance of illegal aliens, but said nothing about how so-called refugees wreak havoc in neighbourhoods across the country.
Newspapers like LA REPUBLICA also chose to write positive pieces on immigrants, highlighting that foreigners contribute with 12% of Costa Rican production. However, they conveniently forgot to point out whether those immigrants that contribute positively are legal or illegal immigrants.
As it happens in the United States, most illegal immigrants who arrive in Costa Rica are low-skilled workers who enter the country in search for free housing, food and healthcare. At a time when Costa Rica is in deep trouble because of its out of control deficit, it is beyond anyone’s mind how and why a government would open its doors to more illegal immigrants who will only represent a burden to the country’s depleted coffers.
In a country of just 4.5 million people, having 11 thousand new refugee status requests in just three months is more than what anyone could handle. There are some 350,000 low skilled immigrants who entered Costa Rica to be exploited by multinational corporations that operate on Costa Rican soil. That is 15% of the country’s labor force.
Do you think there aren’t enough low skilled Costa Ricans who could be working in those positions? There sure are. Yet, three quarters of the immigrants that enter the country are Nicaraguans, with almost 180 thousand of them living in the Metropolitan Area.
Although articles such as the one cited above are poorly written and purposely one-sided in favor of open borders, other writers are simply and plainly ignorant in their assessment of the situation. Take for example this article from columnist Natalia Diaz, who highlights that Costa Rica has always been a country of “open doors”.
She disingenuously equals the arrival of Canadians, Americans and Nicaraguans as a sign of progress. She criticises Costa Rican people for having a short memory. She points out that the last Coup d’ Etat in Costa Rica was 70 years ago and that people don’t remember what is like to live in places like Nicaragua.
“In recent days hostile and fanatic messages have begun to appear, especially in social networks, where people still think that what you say has no impact, something that is not true, and the examples are redundant,” she says.
She adds that prisons in Costa Rica are filled with Costa Rican criminals, while implying that law abiding citizens should not demand security from foreigners who commit crimes against their property and relatives when Nicaraguans, Colombians or Cubans are the perpetrators.
Somehow, in her low IQ mind, people should be fine with crime and violence committed by foreigners because Costa Rican people also violate laws. Go figure!
Diaz blames the deficit for the relaxed border control policy and says that “something needs to be done about it”. Aren’t we surrounded by enough of these columnists who point out problems that have existed for decades and treat them as a novelty? Yet, despite such history they are incapable of offering solutions for them.
Ms. Diaz calls for a “humanitarian and responsible migration policy”, as if a country like Costa Rica could legislate on the problems born in its neighbouring Nicaragua. This is where most “experts” mistaken the rule of law with xenophobia or racism.
Out of control movement of people from one country to another is not for one nation to legislate, but for each individual country to solve internally. No law passed by the Costa Rican Congress will solve a problem that originates in Nicaragua just like no legislation born in the US Senate or House of Representatives will solve illegal immigration from Mexico or Central America.
The only result of allowing illegal movement of people is that cheapening of labor in a country, a region and even in a whole continent. This reality allows multinational corporations to exploit people in modern labor camps while paying no taxes for their usury of land, labor and resources in third world nations.
There is nothing humanitarian about letting corporations exploit workers anywhere in the world, just as there is nothing xenophobic or racist about enforcing immigration law.
The most humane thing to do about refugees and migrants is to hold governments accountable so that they provide the best conditions possible for people to remain where they belong: In their countries of birth, near their families; not working as modern slaves in air conditioned labor camps.
What does it mean to have a responsible and humanitarian migration policy? It means taking care of your own first, so that you can take care of others later. No father or mother takes care of a stranger’s offspring before feeding, dressing and housing their own children. Why should native born citizens accept to become second or third class people in their own country? Would you accept it?
If you feel passionate about this issue, leave your comments below.