Migrant Caravan or Invading Army?

Does a country have borders? Or is a country merely an idea? Keep in mind, ideas do not have borders or boundaries or citizens. Believers in the dogmas of cosmopolitan multiculturalism believe that everyone should be a citizen of the world. Kant said it first, but Barack Obama made the phrase famous.

The caravan marches on. Pictures on the nightly news show either a group of disconsolate refugees fleeing chaos and anarchy or an army of invaders looking to exploit the stupidities of American immigration law.

Andrew Sullivan addresses the issue in New York Magazine. He notes that Democrats and their liberal allies in Europe have given up on policing the border. Even the more conservative Angela Merkel bought into the open borders delirium. Thus, Sullivan says, it has been left to the right to defend the nation’s borders and to keep the nation a nation.

Sullivan calls for Democrats to defend the nation’s borders. He does not mention that they have a reason for not doing so. They do not see a caravan of refugees or an army of invaders,; they see new voters who will invariably vote Democratic and will turn many red states purple, or even blue.

Of course, Democrats portray themselves as the humane, the empathetic party. It’s really just a way to appeal to female voters. Next week we will see how well it is working.

Sullivan asks this question:

What do we do when the caravan gets here? And more saliently: What do we do if many more caravans show up behind it? This is not an abstract question. It’s a pressing, practical, and in some ways existential one. It cuts to the core of whether the United States has to choose between being inhumane to the point of betraying some core moral principles and remaining a sovereign nation in control of who joins its population.

He notes a point that President Trump has been repeating over and over again. The migrants are merely exploiting loopholes that exist in American immigration law. Once they step foot in America, they can claim asylum and cannot be quickly deported:

These migrants are not seeking to enter the U.S. illegally, by subterfuge. They are seeking entry legally — by applying for asylum, as any noncitizen is entitled to do. It doesn’t matter how many resources we throw at border enforcement — because there is nothing here to enforce. The wall won’t help either, even if it were miraculously effective. In fact, the wall could hurt: As the border becomes harder to cross, it makes more sense simply to show up and turn yourself in to the border cops as an asylum seeker when you get here. It’s far cheaper than paying coyotes to get you across; and it’s much safer, especially in the numbers that the caravan has achieved. That’s why, as word about the caravan spread on social media, especially WhatsApp, so many impulsively decided to join.

And also:

For the most part, asylum seekers get a near-automatic entry into the U.S., temporarily in detention centers, eventually into the interior of the country, along with an ankle bracelet and a court date in the distant future. But nearly half of asylum seekers, especially those with weak cases, don’t show up in court. They simply melt away into the general population. And the number of asylum seekers who get physically deported is minimal. The result is not formally one of open borders. But they sure are ajar.

Sullivan will eventually hint at it, but the primary obstacle to changing immigration law is the Democratic Party. He also does not mention that Eastern European nations have effectively stopped all migrants from debarking on their soil.

Thus, Sullivan is simplifying when he says that it’s just a question of poor people seeking riches. In truth, it's a function of political action, or inaction. He does not allow for the simple fact that European politicians have allowed it to happen, as have American politicians. Most likely, the migrants do not understand immigration law. But they are being manipulated by people who do. Every time a judge overturns an administration edict, the doors open wider.

As long as the U.S. remains more peaceful, prosperous, and free than much of the Western hemisphere, it will be a magnet. And as more and more people see on social media what life in America is really like, and feel so much closer to it, and as the cost of travel continues to drop, the logic of mass migration north is close to unassailable. The same goes for mass immigration into Europe. When you look at the huge demographic surges in Africa and the Middle East, and when you factor in the impact of climate change and civil unrest in forcing people to leave their homes, all of this will intensify.

Blame it on climate change. Why not? And yet, Sullivan does not ask whether these migrants, especially in large numbers, will ever assimilate. Or will they end up occupying No-Go zones with their own customs and laws, off limits to the local constabulary, the local ambulances and the local fire fighters. Such is the case in France, and they have been at it for considerably longer than most other nations. Let’s not forget the Pakistani grooming gangs in Once-Great Britain… to say nothing about the surge in knifings in London.

Will migrants simply bring their native culture to their new home, thus undermining the resident culture. It is happening in Europe, even to the point where the European Court of Human Rights has now ordered that you can prosecute someone for blaspheming the Prophet Mohammed. If you think that the culture will not be changing, you are smoking the wrong cigarettes.

Like NeverTrumper David Frum, Sullivan warns liberals that they ought to be defending the nation’s borders and boundaries. Naturally, being slightly off-kilter, but Frum and Sullivan happily defame those who wish to defend borders as fascists:

David Frum is right: “If liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals will not do.” And unless the Democrats get a grip on this question, and win back the trust of the voters on it, their chance of regaining the presidency is minimal. Until one Democratic candidate declares that he or she will end illegal immigration, period, shift legal immigration toward those with skills, invest in the immigration bureaucracy, and enforce the borders strongly but humanely, Trump will continue to own this defining policy issue in 2020.

In the end, liberal democracy will be undone by an influx of refugees who have no use for it, who do not care about free markets or about free speech. So says Sullivan, and on this score he is right:

This is not a passing crisis. It is the new normal, and its optics do nothing but intensify the cultural panic that is turning much of the West to authoritarianism as a response. The porousness of the West’s borders are, in other words, becoming a guarantee of the West’s liberal democratic demise. This particular caravan will take a while to make it to the U.S. border, if it ever does. It will surely lose some followers on the way. It may peter out altogether.

But the caravan as a symbol? Its days are just beginning.