The results of the opposite of these policies (as practiced by many other countries) are, generally speaking, worse. Undocumented immigrants are necessarily an economic underclass, but whether they will be a lawless underclass is a deliberate choice that pretty much entirely boils down to whether you make it unsafe for them to turn to the police. (I mean, the first part, creating an underclass at all, is also a deliberate choice—that of having immigration laws of the post-WW2 kind—but any alternatives seem to have been thoroughly pushed out of the Overton window.)
Can you name another country in which I can enter without inspection, commit a crime, and then be released, all without having anyone ask, "what is your basis for being in this country"?
Argentina. Possibly Brazil. (Kurdish / KRG) Iraq released me as an illegal after the cops decided they liked me, they even gave me a police card in case I ran into further trouble. Kurdish part of Syria will not check either, they're 'stateless' people so see such enforcement as tyrannical. Most ethnic enclaves of Lebanon would similarly work, particularly if you are Druze or something.
Also in Argentina you can arrive, on day 1 file court case for citizenship, which bars deportation. Then stall case for 2 years until you meet criteria. I personally have seen court case documents that did this successfully for criminal who arrived with fake passport.
So should we model our immigration system on that of those countries? My point is that we are a country of laws, based on rule of law, and therefore must start by impartially enforcing the laws we have. Syria and Iraq (to name two of your examples) are certainly not what I would describe as countries based on rule of law. As you yourself point out, in Iraq the police liked you, so they let you go. I do not want to see such a system in the USA.
> My point is that we are a country of laws, based on rule of law, and therefore must start by impartially enforcing the laws we have.
Would be nice if that were the reality. But we have a POTUS with 34 counts giving out a presidential medal of freedom to a crooked guy with melting hair goo and releasing all J6ers with a pardon.
Honestly, I would hate to live under the rule of law in the USA. Everyone that waited 31 days to register for the draft would be a felon, the guy who gets wasted and takes a nap instead answering the census worker would be in jail, and about 10% of the USA would be in the federal pen for 10 years because they own a squirrel hunting gun while also at sometime in the past year smoking a marijuana cigarette.
Meanwhile the so called people enforcing the "rule of law" are bagging people up all masked up, no visible credentials, shifting them around in jurisdictions faster than their lawyer can keep up, then sending them in 3rd world shithole prisons even if there is an active order barring that from happening.
If you want to show me rule of law, first of all show me a government that even vaguely follows the very constitution that authorized its existence in the first place. I would rather have anarchy than rule of law enforced by bandits.
I've lived in a failed state. The US government brutalized me far worse.
In the failed state I joined a militia, and we actually were able to fight off the people trying to brutalize us. In the USA if you tried this they would just insta Waco you.
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our requests to stop. Not cool.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with.
I could run away and abandon any hope of fixing my country and also abandon my children. It wouldn't put me in any morally superior position.
Just telling people "You should run away" because the country is run by people grossly violating the constitution isn't the flex you think it is, and in fact I think it is attitudes like the one you've just presented that help get us into these kinds of situations.
I said anarchy was better than "rule of law" by bandits. Somehow you read that as I need to move away because those are the only two options.
Even if we do suppose for the sake of argument, that anarchy is better than rule of law by bandits, and those are literally the only two options -- even then I don't see merely moving away and letting my children deal with it as a clear superior option. It's merely possibly more convenient for me.
