In my world, there is a problem that us, as Americans, have not solved since the beginning of time, which is Illegal Immigration. It's a situation, that no matter how much we have fussed and consulted with the government, hasn't been dealt with appropriately. Iwould like to share how this issue stands my eyes.
In my eyes, these immigrants just want something that we were automatically given. We were blessed and fortunate enough to be born in the "land of opportunity", the land where globalization has had an extreme impact on society. Back in their homeland, there is a tremendous effect on how globalization has affected their economy, created a greater inequality among the upper class and the lower class.
And since we see this problem at hand, wouldn't it be the United States, as a apart of the United Nations, duty to help lift these people out of their situation? Since history, the U.S. has taken upon themselves to help every nation in need. In Vietnam, they took it upon themselves to protect South Vietnam from not subcumbing to Communist influences. So, therefore, should we take it upon ourselves to help these people instead of turning our backs to them?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
there are a number of issues with your last post that I would like to point out to you.
First you refer to the United States as the "Land of Opportunity". As stated "the" implies "the only" or "the best". It implies that other nations are therefore only "a land of opportunity". From the start, like many Americans, you make the assumption that Americans or America is somehow superior to the rest of world. This is one reason why so many other nations view America with such contempt.
Second you say that "globalization has had an extreme impact on society". Is this not also true of Mexico, a major source of illegal immigration? After the implementation of NAFTA, businesses flocked to Mexico for cheaper labor. The impact of globalization in Mexico is equivalent to that in the United States. They're just on the other end of it. This end is not necessarily negative. Granted the pay is not what it is in the US but NAFTA has created tens of thousands on jobs in developing countries.
Third you note, "Since [the beginning of American] history, the US has taken [it] upon themselves to help every nation in need." False, the US had a strict isolationist policy until the turn of the 19th century and was not considered interventionist until the Cold War 50 years later. Thus, with respect to history, interventionism is a relatively new and unofficial policy.
Furthermore, the reason for Vietnam was more a result of the red scare and the American policy of containment. There really was no great humanitarian endeavor to save the Vietnamese from the "evils of Communism.
I too see a lot of bias in your post, but at the same time I can see that you were not exactly trying to hide what you feel. From the very beginning of this post you've stated that this is your take, opinions, feelings, musings etc on the United States' obligation as a wealthy nation to help those less fortunate. Mike has pointed out some holes in your thoughts and arguments, but perhaps you can use those to think deeper, raise more questions and become less biased and absolute in your next post!
Post a Comment