• Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t see how she’s crazy. She’s right. How are you going to accept a giant copper statue, place it at what was considered at the time to be the entrance to our country, which all immagrants would see, and then put a plaque on it that says:

      “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

      How are you going to do all that, then kill the inhabitants of this land, and then call Mexicans (which owned like 1/3rd of the land now called America) illegal?

        • Art3mis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          I cant speak for what they are saying but thats what im saying. Borders only exist to prop up the owning class and pit the working classes against eachother.

          • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Sure, but borderless doesn’t mean lawless. I’m a world with no borders you’d have no immigration. But you’d still have laws applied when people are born, which is effectively the same thing. Giving them an ID. Making sure they’re getting their education and vaccines. Etc.

            And if you somehow avoided doing those things, that’s breaking the law and you’d be illegally outside the system.

        • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          “So you’re saying that the people who stole the land and murdered the inhabitants can’t tell other people they can’t come onto stolen land??”

          Rephrased to be more accurate

          • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Yeah. I don’t agree with that. I think it’s quite reasonable that the country that now exists can have laws governing intake of people.

            What other options are there?

            I get the vibe. But give me one reasonable alternative.

            Edit: I see nine down votes, one insult, and one option that only is reasonable if the resulting country would rely on the US for defense. Which is to say, there’s no reasonable option behind this cool catch phrase. It’s just a cool catch phrase. And I get down voting because I’m insulting. Your cool catchphrase. But we’re not going to get anywhere if we’re working off vibes.

              • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                I could see this working in a world where people were sensible. I’d certainly support giving back some portion of the country and saying “ok you’re your own country now, have at it”.

                Where people will fight to the death is: which parts and how much land.

                But this at least is could be the framework for a reasonable option.

            • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              You act like the people that were here before didn’t have laws or society or ways of dealing with outsiders, and that’s pretty fucking gross of you

              • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Nope. That’s actually my point. Can’t have a society without rules for entry.

                So “no one is illegal on stolen land” is saying “you stole the land and built a society, and that society can’t have the rules necessary to exist.”

                It poses no next step and no real solution to the problem. It feels nice and gets us nowhere.

                • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Mkay, then your point is based solely on xenophobia and incorrect assumptions. I hope you take a moment to reflect on that, and try and come up with something better.

        • Bahnd Rollard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Better countries have proven they do not need to be the way they are. The EU Shengen area let the policies of the era of empires and kingdoms fall away while preseving a countries identity. The current US system can be described as “cruel by design” and needs to be removed and its facilitators barred from civil service.