“Unfortunately for the second, the third generation there is a sort of regression toward their origins, their ethnic origins.”That is a big problem with immigration. Even if an immigrant has a lot of great qualities, we are likely to see regression in his descendants.
The issue was not considered in Should We Have Open Borders? A Soho Forum Debate. The side for open borders won a greater share of the audience.
Also pushing meritocracy is Vivek Ramaswamy, who says racial disparities come from fatherlessness. I like some things he has to say, but that is ridiculously.
2 comments:
Roger,
as a matter of FACT, there is a huge disparity statistically between children raised in homes with and without fathers. This is especially crucial to boy, who due to their aggressive natures have their first experience with authority from their father. If a boy experiences his behavioral limits with his father, it's a learning experience which will allow the boy to learn social limits and allow him to curb many excesses that can grow worse if not caught early. If a boy experiences his behavioral limits with a police officer... well, let's just say things rapidly go a different direction quite quickly. You might want to look at the statistics of single mother incarcerated felons especially for violent crimes, it's ridiculously high. According to some judges, over 90 percent of felon cases come from father absent homes.
This is not to say that you can't have a well behaved boy from a single mother, just that the odds of a serious behavioral problem are significantly higher.
I would also note, you can not have a functioning legal system without borders. There is no such thing as a law that is not delineated by a border. Every legal law the world has ever had can be circumscribed by a border on a map. If you feel otherwise, please provide an example of a single law which is not determined solely by inscribed jurisdiction. This prevents such stupidity as one country trying to force their legal standards somewhere they have no jurisdiction or legal standing... like America trying to make China follow OSHA worker guidelines for example. I would also note that many countries violate this truth all the time, but it is not a legal argument, just a 'might is right' argument which has had no western legal standing since Medieval Times. Having the ability to force someone else in another country to do something is not based on any law, just the power to do so.
The problem with power arguments is that they destroy the moral and ethical basis of justice and laws entirely.
Post a Comment