Certainty Isn’t Necessarily a Good Thing
It’s the birthday of F. Scott Fitzgerald who said, “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.”
This, in turn, reminds us of this gem from Bertrand Russell: The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.
And that brings us to an important, if sad, aspect of our civilization today, at least in the US: we want pat answers; we long for black and white certainties that explain our world to us and offer an easy-to-follow guidebook as to how to solve our problems. Thinking takes effort, and most of us don’t like to work too hard.
Think for a minute of all the people who believe that the core problems that our society faces are caused by immigrants. To end our miseries, all we really need to do is vote for the presidential candidate who will build a wall between here and Mexico, while banning Muslims from entering the country. Facts like these don’t seem to matter:
• The number of illegal aliens in the US has been steadily falling for over a decade (see graph below), and
• You have a greater probability of being killed by falling furniture than by a radical Muslim terrorist.
We’ve made up our minds, and we’re going to act accordingly.
Most people are unaware of some of these facts. For example, I was unaware that the number of illegal aliens in the U.S. has been falling. In addition, most people are not very good at evaluating and dealing with risk. Of course the destruction of the World Trade Center was a disaster. However, the number of people killed in that disaster was a small fraction of the number of people killed every year in road accidents or as the result of medical errors in hospitals. Even so, the World Trade Center disaster seems to receive more attention.
A more rational way to deal with risk would be to list the causes of premature death and the number of people who died as the result of each cause. Then, the greatest emphasis should be placed on the most common causes of premature death, although without ignoring the other causes. That is not what we are doing.
The probability of being killed by a Muslim terrorist perhaps should be near the bottom of the list.
Do you really think that the undocumented population is shrinking as the graph from CMS suggests? Or, are undocumented numbers just be converted into legal residents through executive decrees by King Obama? I spend the winters on the Rio Grande and have not seen any decrease in the colonia population. The authorities leave them alone until they demand their squatter villages receive electricity, sanitation and security lights. These colonia villages are an extension of Mexico on our side of the border and there are thousands of these villages within 50 miles of the border. Nobody pays taxes but after a short period of time the rest of us are forced to do the humanitarian thing and pay to bring them out of a third world nightmare. I do not believe that this is the way to be compassionate.
Larry,
The majority of illegal immigrants do not get here by crossing the border between the U.S. and Mexico on land. Rather, they get here by airplane. Also, it is widely believed that, partly because of improved conditions in Mexico, the number of people illegally immigrating by crossing the boarder has decreased. A casual observation by observers of a limited area may be of some value, but its accuracy is questionable.
Trump and others have pushed for a wall or fence between Mexico and the U.S. to stop people from crossing over. I have seen very little of the boarder first hand. However, I have seen pictures of parts of the boarder where building a barrier would be very impractical. The terrain is far different from being like a billiard table. Parts rough, mountainous, and there are rivers and streams crossing the boarder. In addition, the existing boarder fence has made it difficult or impossible for some U.S. citizens to access their own farmland on the U.S. side. Thus, it is highly unlikely that a border barrier will ever be built across all, or even most, of the border. The existing barriers have caused illegal immigrants to cross in much more dangerous areas resulting in a much higher fatality rate. And, of course, a barrier would not prevent illegal immigrants from arriving by air.
Although the above facts are definitely not a secret, most U.S. citizens are not aware of them mainly because the popular media provide inadequate information. So, politicians are able to get away with making inaccurate statements which inflame passions instead of leading to practical solutions.
Obviously illegal immigration is not a good thing, but before implementing possible solutions, we must be sure that they would not make a bad situation worse. Already, the “solutions” are creating unnecessary problems for people. For example, many people in Fiji have to take a roundabout and more expensive route to get to Canada because they are unable to get a pass-through visa to land briefly in the U.S.
I have no first hand information to indicate whether or not TOTAL illegal immigration is declining, but from what I’ve read, it does appear that illegal immigration from Mexico is declining. Probably there will never be total agreement on this since getting accurate statistics would be very difficult.
Larry, each of us draws from our experiences in life to form conclusions and to some extent educated guesses about how the world operates. I have traveled a bit and spent some time in third world countries on several continents. On this basis I hope to add to rather than object to conclusions from your experience.
There are many corporations seeking to profit from overseas operations. And there are many people in many countries who welcome the hoped for wealth. But I am concerned that in many places the hoped for wealth does not include enough of the population to make a difference for the country. There are exceptions and there are several reasons suggested.
One is that we are just better people and they are not. Therefore we prosper and they don’t. This is a variation on an old theme that was written about by Max Webber and is associated with the “Protestant ethic,” http://www.dictionary.com/browse/protestant–work–ethic … originally that wealth was a sign of God’s favor.
Regardless it seems senseless to assume that someone will travel hundreds to thousands of miles through many different forms of transportation, dealing with dangerous coyotes, taking drugs to survive a two day walk through a desert and in many ways tempting death… just to be a rapist or murderer.
Perhaps, just perhaps we need to stop saying what we don’t like and start asking some intelligent questions, like perhaps why are people leaving their home community, their towns in areas where community and family is so much more important than we generally experience here. We may find that these people are leaving conditions that are unsustainable in an economic rather than an environmental sense. But if we come to that point then we may just have to accept that these people we label “immigrants” and “foreigners” are refugees and yes, in some cases desperate.
We could spend money building walls and jails and adding police. Or we could try and see what aid could be offered to improve conditions so that people would not be inclined to leave their homes. In answer to the question “Why should we spend money on them…,” It is pure economics. Unfortunately it is often the defense contractor who can afford more lobbyists.
It is no mystery why immigration to the US from the southern border has slowed considerably in recent years. People come for jobs. It has been very hard to find work since 2008, when the US economy turned sour. This is not speculation it is reports to me from those most affected. Many have even gone home because they can’t find work here.
Breath,
I am aware of the doctrine that wealth is a sign of God’s favor. However, that has never been the majority Christian viewpoint. In fact, the majority of Christians do not support that viewpoint. Whether that idea originated with John Calvin I’m not sure, but he strongly and successfully promoted it. He also promoted the doctrine of predestination which is anathema to many Christians but supported by a significant minority.
In any case, there is the principal of separation of church and state which I strongly support.
Frank I was referring to the roots of the concept and its Christian beginnings. Like many religions and life itself, Christianity is full of conflicts and compromises. Christianity has also largely promoted the concept of giving to others. I think it somewhat useless to “blame a religion” for any particular belief as I believe people tend to take what they want from the organizations to which they belong.
But as you look around today do you honestly think that the idea of the wealthy being more “entitled” to dictate policy is no longer present in society? Certainly the Koch brothers operate as if their wealth also gives them a right to rule.
Although we ostensibly are a democracy (republic,) economic wealth is a type of power that is easily applied to governing. Perhaps there has always been a special allowance to the wealthy and the Protestant ethic was only a way to justify a de facto deference? I am not particularly concerned with that here, but with the implication. If there is a deference to the wealthy it seems that there is a certain prejudice against those with less means. If that were not the case would there be any need for a doctrine like “the Good Samaritan.” If we follow this logic then perhaps it is not immigrants, or illegal aliens we dislike but the poor in general and those coming across our southern border are just a particularly easy target.
Breath,
It is quite clear that wealthy people have been given more influence. Perhaps a good example is the poll tax which is no longer used. Its intent was to disenfranchise poor people. At one time, only land owners could vote. Even though we obviously have a long way to go, we have moved away from that sort of thing.
An argument used against illegal aliens, and immigrants in general, is that they take jobs away from Americans. An argument used against equality for blacks was that it would take jobs away from white people who were superior and more deserving.
“Doctrine” of the Good Samaritan? I don’t see it as a doctrine at all. The second part of the Summary of the Law, in which Jesus quoted from the OT, was to love one’s neighbor as oneself. The parable of the Good Samaritan was given to expand the definitions of love and neighbor. It certainly did not have anything to do with superiority or inferiority, nor was their any implication that the traveler who had been robbed and left for dead was poor. Whether or not He was describing an actual event matters not at all; it was a story to clarify the meaning of the second part of the Summary of the Law which it did very well.
Frank, you have a good point about difficult segments along the border where a wall would be difficult or impossible.
I spend the winters about 2 miles from Mexico on the lower Rio Grande. The border is not marked. The theoretical border is located by the placement of survey markers about 100 yards back from the river on each side. The border bisects these points. This portion of the river and its flood plain is a wildlife sanctuary. It is like a jungle. The border patrol keeps surveillance on the edges of the sanctuaries aided by helicopters, blimps, officers on horseback and ATV,s. Powerful boats patrol the river. Electronic detectors monitor paths cut out by illegals. I think that most of the illegals are caught as they emerge from the sanctuaries. The problem is not the lack of a wall but the catch and release policy of the present political power structure. The border patrol is fed up with having to turn these people loose after spending billions of dollars to capture them.
Larry,
You increased my knowledge of the border problem. What the policy at the border should be I don’t know, but what we are doing does not seem reasonable or effective.
It may be that, through honest discussion with people who clearly and fully understand the problem, a better policy could be devised. But politicians continually making statements lacking a factual basis whose main aim is to gain political points are unlikely to improve matters.
Breath of the a Wind, you seem to think that immigrants and the poor in general are disliked by those who want to secure the border. If you lock the doors on your home are you disliking a class of people or are you just trying to protect hose inside your home?
The Good Samaritan story is directed at pious religious people not at government policy. All the demands that government out of Christian compassion take responsibility for the human condition is not legitimate if you truly believe in the separation of church and state. Christians as individuals or through their churches are compelled to take care of the poor but this in my opinion is a case where the render unto Caesar the things that are in his domain and leave the rest for God’s people.
It is hard for Christians to find enough money to take care of the poor when we are paint for inefficient government programs that do not help the poor but feather the nest of politically connected corporate elites. Private charities in general are much more responsible with resources.