The Atlantic: How Democrats Lost Their Way on Immigration

[Ronnie]

In this article, Peter Beinart argues that, in recent years, liberals have ignored the real and difficult consequences of undocumented immigration, going as far as expunging any mention of border security and immigration control from the Democratic Party's platform.  But is this the right path forward?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-democrats-immigration-mistake/528678/

Do progressives on this forum agree with Beinart's premises and conclusions?  Or should we continue on the path we are on?

[RINO Tom]

Very good article, thanks for posting.  I won't tell a liberal what to think, but I think immigration coming to the forefront over the past 5-6 years especially has really shown who's who in the "liberal" side of the spectrum in America.  Some Democrats care a lot more about not being the type of person that would "oppose (illegal) immigration" rather than being the type of person that would vote for what's best for the most vulnerable Americans ... the latter has usually more often defined a liberal in American politics.

[Santander]

Very good article, thanks for posting.  I won't tell a liberal what to think, but I think immigration coming to the forefront over the past 5-6 years especially has really shown who's who in the "liberal" side of the spectrum in America.  Some Democrats care a lot more about not being the type of person that would "oppose (illegal) immigration" rather than being the type of person that would vote for what's best for the most vulnerable Americans ... the latter has usually more often defined a liberal in American politics.

Americans is the key word. There is nothing that is not liberal or progressive about supporting immigration policy that protects vulnerable Americans, not Hondurans or Syrians.

[RINO Tom]

Very good article, thanks for posting.  I won't tell a liberal what to think, but I think immigration coming to the forefront over the past 5-6 years especially has really shown who's who in the "liberal" side of the spectrum in America.  Some Democrats care a lot more about not being the type of person that would "oppose (illegal) immigration" rather than being the type of person that would vote for what's best for the most vulnerable Americans ... the latter has usually more often defined a liberal in American politics.

Americans is the key word. There is nothing that is not liberal or progressive about supporting immigration policy that protects vulnerable Americans, not Hondurans or Syrians.

I meant to convey that if I didn't.

[Santander]

Very good article, thanks for posting.  I won't tell a liberal what to think, but I think immigration coming to the forefront over the past 5-6 years especially has really shown who's who in the "liberal" side of the spectrum in America.  Some Democrats care a lot more about not being the type of person that would "oppose (illegal) immigration" rather than being the type of person that would vote for what's best for the most vulnerable Americans ... the latter has usually more often defined a liberal in American politics.

Americans is the key word. There is nothing that is not liberal or progressive about supporting immigration policy that protects vulnerable Americans, not Hondurans or Syrians.

I meant to convey that if I didn't.

Ah, okay.

Anyway, this article does raise good points. If only Democrats would listen.

[JA]

Here's an important question: how enthusiastic would these Progressive cheerleaders of large-scale and undocumented immigration be if the overwhelming majority of those coming into our country were highly educated and/or highly skilled? If the degree-required jobs were the ones where native Americans were being displaced, dominated by Spanish speakers, and saw wages decreased, would they still champion these immigration policies? If the people who mow your lawn, clean your house, make your food, and build your houses were instead competing with you for your position out of college (or even admission to college), would your attitude towards them change at all? If not, then that's great - your values regarding immigration are sincere. But if you have the slightest adverse reaction to that thought, then you are a damnable hypocrite.

Personally, I believe in providing a pathway to citizenship for all undocumented immigrants without a violent criminal history, increasing our intake of refugees, and implementing a points-based immigration system similar to Australia. I do not want to stop immigration by any means, but an open-door or continuation of our current policy, in a capitalist society where the motivation is to decrease labor costs, will only be a disaster for low-skilled and working class Americans.

[Virginiá]

Here's an important question: how enthusiastic would these Progressive cheerleaders of large-scale and undocumented immigration be if the overwhelming majority of those coming into our country were highly educated and/or highly skilled?

They wouldn't be - at least not like now. That is a guarantee. Though, that does happen to a degree. Tech companies have been angling to bring in as many immigrants as possible to fill IT jobs at a lower cost, and that peeves me like you wouldn't believe. I know those immigrants are just looking for work, but what really makes me angry is the corporations who are so obsessed with profits that they would sell out the Americans who made their companies what they are, just to make a couple extra bucks. I'm willing to accept the inevitably of machines eventually automating me out of a career (mine is safe until AI really becomes powerful, I think), but not immigrants being shipped into the country by greedy tech companies just so they can make a little more profit that they don't even need. Most of these companies aren't starving. They are just greedy.

So this is something I've always hated about the Democratic Party during the Obama years. They have completely abdicated responsible and fair approaches to illegal immigration for partisan reasons (and special interest influence). It's ridiculous. Having a pathway to citizenship and all that is fine, but the party is pretending like immigration is no big deal and, frankly, can anyone say with a straight face that if Democrats controlled everything, that they would enact policies that aimed to reduce illegal immigration and tried to protect American workers from some aspects of it? I just don't believe it. They'd give tech companies everything they want, and they'd avoid border security issues for as long as possible.

I mean, let me put it this way: Hillary and Bernie literally allowed themselves to be backed into a corner during that Univision debate, and basically promised they wouldn't deport anyone but felons. Seriously?

[publicunofficial]

The idea that Hillary would have won if she moved to the right on immigration is laughable.

[Jeffster]

For many Democrats, it's only about importing voters. For the wealthy 1%, it's about importing cheap labor to drive down wages for American workers.

We are entering a time where automation will do away with all sorts of low-skilled labor, so there is no need to keep bringing in more people when we will have fewer jobs for them, and it will make funding a UBI even more expensive. Immigration should be limited to highly skilled people needed to fill positions where we have a shortage of available talent, and the business should be required to pay above the prevailing wage for that type of job. If the supply of that specialized labor is less than the demand, wages would rise. Businesses shouldn't be able to just import a foreign worker at a lower wage, who is then tied to that company over fear of being sent home, in order to drive down wages for other qualified Americans.

Also, people who are worried about climate change need to explain how they can support a system that requires constant population growth to function? We live on a planet with finite resources, so how do expect to ever reach sustainability if you want to grow the population in your country forever through immigration? If that isn't your goal, then tell us at what population level we stop immigration.

[Famous Mortimer]

The idea that Hillary would have won if she moved to the right on immigration is laughable.

I agree. Supporting immigration is smart politically. It's terrible policy-wise though.

[krazen1211]

The Democratic party calculated that importing swarms of illegals invaders that vote 2-1 Democrat would help them win the occasional election regardless of the cost to Americans.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

The Democratic party calculated that importing swarms of illegals invaders that vote 2-1 Democrat would help them win the occasional election regardless of the cost to Americans.

As opposed to the GOP's owners calculating that the benefits of having a permanent underclass to exploit and leverage against citizens' labor would be worth it, regardless of the cost to America.

[Beet]

The GOP strategy

1. Suppress the middle class with plutocratic economic policies
2. Blame some 'Other' be it Blacks, Immigrants, etc.
3. Win Power by Blaming the 'Other'
4. Return to Step 1

[Jeffster]

The GOP strategy

1. Suppress the middle class with plutocratic economic policies
2. Blame some 'Other' be it Blacks, Immigrants, etc.
3. Win Power by Blaming the 'Other'
4. Return to Step 1

Then all Democrats have to do is take a tougher stance against immigration, both illegal and legal, and they'd win. Instead they have sold out to the wealthy 1% to increase the supply of labor for big business all so they can replace their older voter base with new arrivals. So they are also playing along with that whole "Suppress the middle class with plutocratic economic policies."

Why do you guys have to play this stupid game of being all-in for every Democratic position, or all-in for every Republican position? Why can't you realize that the Democrats are wrong on this issue and work to change them from within?

This is not the late 19th/early 20th century anymore. We don't need a constant stream of immigrants to settle the sparsely populated west, or work the newly built factories. Increasing the supply of labor through immigration at this point only leads to depressing wages, and increased strains on housing, healthcare, and education.

[krazen1211]

The Democratic party calculated that importing swarms of illegals invaders that vote 2-1 Democrat would help them win the occasional election regardless of the cost to Americans.

As opposed to the GOP's owners calculating that the benefits of having a permanent underclass to exploit and leverage against citizens' labor would be worth it, regardless of the cost to America.

Is this a bizarre reference to miscreants like Meg Whitman and her illegal housekeeper? If so, I believe those folks joined your tribe and are thus your problem.

[krazen1211]

The GOP strategy

1. Suppress the middle class with plutocratic economic policies
2. Blame some 'Other' be it Blacks, Immigrants, etc.
3. Win Power by Blaming the 'Other'
4. Return to Step 1

Interesting theory.

Nearly every Republican elected President in the last century has succeeded a Democrat, so one wonders who exactly is doing (1).

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

[Jeffster]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

Oh please, spare me the "throwing them under the bus" garbage. Their own countries can take care of them, it's not our responsibility. We have to take care of our own citizens first, then if there is anything left over we can give aid to foreign countries. Why is it that you guys always seem to care more about the welfare of foreigners than your own countrymen? It's that perception of your priorities that cost you an easily winnable election, and gives greater credence to the idea that you only care about importing future voters.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

Oh please, spare me the "throwing them under the bus" garbage. Their own countries can take care of them, it's not our responsibility. We have to take care of our own citizens first, then if there is anything left over we can give aid to foreign countries. Why is it that you guys always seem to care more about the welfare of foreigners than your own countrymen? It's that perception of your priorities that cost you an easily winnable election, and gives greater credence to the idea that you only care about importing future voters.

An in turn spare me that nativist crap our immigrant forefathers got coming off the boats. The facts are the facts and illegals don't rank high in violent offenses, they take jobs no else will do, and don't drain welfare system compare to natural citizens

[Jeffster]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

Oh please, spare me the "throwing them under the bus" garbage. Their own countries can take care of them, it's not our responsibility. We have to take care of our own citizens first, then if there is anything left over we can give aid to foreign countries. Why is it that you guys always seem to care more about the welfare of foreigners than your own countrymen? It's that perception of your priorities that cost you an easily winnable election, and gives greater credence to the idea that you only care about importing future voters.

An in turn spare me that nativist crap our immigrant forefathers got coming off the boats. The facts are the facts and illegals don't rank high in violent offenses, they take jobs no else will do, and don't drain welfare system compare to natural citizens

The time periods aren't the same at all. Stop comparing them because it makes you look foolish. There is no need for more unskilled labor when we already have so many people out of the workforce, and automation is doing away with more an more jobs every year. They do not take jobs Americans won't do, that is some scumbag wealthy elitist talking point. You are supposed to be the party of the working class, yet you talk like someone from the rentier class. Americans will do those jobs if the pay is high enough, which it won't be so long as you allow immigrants to undercut those wages. If your argument is that we need a permanent underclass of exploitable cheap labor otherwise goods will be too expensive, then you sound like someone from the 19th century trying to justify slavery.

[Famous Mortimer]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

Oh please, spare me the "throwing them under the bus" garbage. Their own countries can take care of them, it's not our responsibility. We have to take care of our own citizens first, then if there is anything left over we can give aid to foreign countries. Why is it that you guys always seem to care more about the welfare of foreigners than your own countrymen? It's that perception of your priorities that cost you an easily winnable election, and gives greater credence to the idea that you only care about importing future voters.

An in turn spare me that nativist crap our immigrant forefathers got coming off the boats. The facts are the facts and illegals don't rank high in violent offenses, they take jobs no else will do, and don't drain welfare system compare to natural citizens

Immigrant headed families most definitely drain the welfare system.

As to "our immigrant forefathers", they came to America when this country had no welfare system at all.

Additionally, they came during the Gilded Age, when robber baron capitalism was at its worst, wages were low, and workers were abused. Kind of like now. Do you know how we stopped it back then? We basically stopped taking in new immigrants for about 50 years, that's how we stopped it.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

Oh please, spare me the "throwing them under the bus" garbage. Their own countries can take care of them, it's not our responsibility. We have to take care of our own citizens first, then if there is anything left over we can give aid to foreign countries. Why is it that you guys always seem to care more about the welfare of foreigners than your own countrymen? It's that perception of your priorities that cost you an easily winnable election, and gives greater credence to the idea that you only care about importing future voters.

I will believe someone talking about "taking care of our own citizens first" when they're willing to stop the predatory financial sector, the destructive corporations, the abusive billionaires and the captive government. If you ignore these while complaining about immigration, you're focusing on hangnails while you bleed to death internally. (And I truly don't know where you stand on any of this.)

[Jeffster]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

Oh please, spare me the "throwing them under the bus" garbage. Their own countries can take care of them, it's not our responsibility. We have to take care of our own citizens first, then if there is anything left over we can give aid to foreign countries. Why is it that you guys always seem to care more about the welfare of foreigners than your own countrymen? It's that perception of your priorities that cost you an easily winnable election, and gives greater credence to the idea that you only care about importing future voters.

I will believe someone talking about "taking care of our own citizens first" when they're willing to stop the predatory financial sector, the destructive corporations, the abusive billionaires and the captive government. If you ignore these while complaining about immigration, you're focusing on hangnails while you bleed to death internally. (And I truly don't know where you stand on any of this.)

I am left leaning on the economy. I wanted Obama to break up the banks when we had the chance back in 2009. I wanted tougher regulations on CDS and other financial instruments that brought us to the brink of ruin back then. I want higher taxes on the wealthy and universal healthcare by expanding Medicare and Medicaid, not the piece of crap Obamacare that was a giveaway to private insurers. I want the debt ceiling to be eliminated so it can't be used as a hostage to cut spending programs that were already authorized by previous Congresses. I want tougher rules on campaign donations, and a constitutional amendment to limit wealthy people and corporations from flooding the airwaves with campaign commercials for their crony candidates.

But before you do any of that you need to gain control over your borders to determine what goods and people get to cross. Democrats had complete control over the government, and they could have nuked the filibuster to pass more progressive legislation, but they didn't do it. They are corporate whores that want to import the 3rd world so their masters get cheap labor, and they can use identity politics to get those new arrivals to become reliable Democratic voters, all while continuing a neoliberal agenda. It's the same playbook the Republicans ran for decades, only theirs was to use religious wedge issues to dupe their base. Trump was just the only chance I saw to shake up that system. Now he's looking more and more like another establishment Republican, so my only hope is the Democrats come around to my side on the issues of immigration and trade, otherwise I'll have no party.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Immigrants are people too, throwing them under the bus because muh americans is disgusting and unforgivable.

Oh please, spare me the "throwing them under the bus" garbage. Their own countries can take care of them, it's not our responsibility. We have to take care of our own citizens first, then if there is anything left over we can give aid to foreign countries. Why is it that you guys always seem to care more about the welfare of foreigners than your own countrymen? It's that perception of your priorities that cost you an easily winnable election, and gives greater credence to the idea that you only care about importing future voters.

I will believe someone talking about "taking care of our own citizens first" when they're willing to stop the predatory financial sector, the destructive corporations, the abusive billionaires and the captive government. If you ignore these while complaining about immigration, you're focusing on hangnails while you bleed to death internally. (And I truly don't know where you stand on any of this.)

I am left leaning on the economy. I wanted Obama to break up the banks when we had the chance back in 2009. I wanted tougher regulations on CDS and other financial instruments that brought us to the brink of ruin back then. I want higher taxes on the wealthy and universal healthcare by expanding Medicare and Medicaid, not the piece of crap Obamacare that was a giveaway to private insurers. I want the debt ceiling to be eliminated so it can't be used as a hostage to cut spending programs that were already authorized by previous Congresses. I want tougher rules on campaign donations, and a constitutional amendment to limit wealthy people and corporations from flooding the airwaves with campaign commercials for their crony candidates.

But before you do any of that you need to gain control over your borders to determine what goods and people get to cross. Democrats had complete control over the government, and they could have nuked the filibuster to pass more progressive legislation, but they didn't do it. They are corporate whores that want to import the 3rd world so their masters get cheap labor, and they can use identity politics to get those new arrivals to become reliable Democratic voters, all while continuing a neoliberal agenda. It's the same playbook the Republicans ran for decades, only theirs was to use religious wedge issues to dupe their base. Trump was just the only chance I saw to shake up that system. Now he's looking more and more like another establishment Republican, so my only hope is the Democrats come around to my side on the issues of immigration and trade, otherwise I'll have no party.

The Democrats will never come around on that issue because their base is now high end and technocratic.

Trump is not going to be the Calvin Coolidge of Republican Populism, he is morel ike the McKinley. McKinley was known for protectionism primarily, but his nomination pushed the party in a direction of being for business and against gov't leading to Presidencies like Coolidge. The first nomination pushing in that direction is going to look at lot more like the traditional nominee then the nominee to come a decade or two later as the that transformation continues.

[dead0man]

The American left hates poor Americans...we already knew that.