Immigration is always a hot topic and Pres. Trump has been very outspoken regarding his stance on immigration, including allegedly using the term "shithole" recently to describe many poorer nations around the world during a closed door meeting with legislators, as well as instituting a “zero tolerance” policy which targets anyone crossing the illegally for detainment and deportation as opposed to focusing only on more “serious” threats as previous administrations have, which has drawn criticism from many who claim such ideas are contrary to the very values of America. We find ourselves in a unique position as a nation and as a state, especially given our history as a nation of immigrants, but the open door policies and ideals may no longer apply to a nation which finds itself intrinsically connected to the rest of the world (a world far more dangerous and frightening that it was early in our history), and we must decide how to proceed. Do we continue to advocate for immigration and hold the U.S. up as the paragon for a “better life” as we have historically? Don’t forget that the Statue of Liberty, the very symbol of freedom to so many throughout the years, bears a plaque at her feet which directs the nations of the world as follows:
“Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“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!"
And yet, how can we expect to protect our borders and citizens in today’s uncertain world if we hold the above ideal literally? It is the most basic of all governmental responsibilities to provide the people with security, but as we have seen in recent months in Europe, an open door immigration policy can endanger the citizenry in a very real and painful way. Shou0ld we have entrance exams as Trump has suggested, designed to determine where your loyalties lie? Should we build a huge wall which stretches across our entire southern border? For those who say such a wall can’t work, I would point to the success that Israel has had with their wall. Also, support of a border wall is not merely a Trump idea as many politicians (including Pres. Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi) have suggested/voted for a wall at various points in their careers. What about the recent use of troops at the border to prevent the migrant caravans from entering the US? Should we utilize force (ex. Tear gas as we recently saw under the Trump administration and have seen in the past with other administrations such as Pres. Obama’s) when those groups refuse to follow the immigration laws of the US? At the same time, is that what we want as a nation? Should we only accept immigrants from specific nations such as Norway, a nation Pres. Trump specifically mentioned by name during the same conversation that he allegedly made the "shithole" comment about other nations. Should the plaque at the feet of the Statue of Liberty therefore be amended to state immigrants are only welcome if they come from more prosperous, homogeneous European nations because some people assume that those people will not be reliant upon government handouts or a potential security threat to the nation and is that really the message we want to send to the rest of the world? Undoubtedly those who come to this country by escaping almost unfathomable circumstances in their home nations may need help or assistance as compared to those coming here from wealthier nations, but that does not mean that they do not or will not contribute to the betterment of the nation and create their own unique American success story by rising above their current status, and yet, how can we justify welcoming others into the nation when so many of our current citizens are struggling and in need of help. These are problems which some of the brightest political philosophers and the Founding Fathers have all wrestled with.
As with the first topic, there is no right or wrong answer here, as there are defensible arguments which can be made for either side. I’ve given you a long prompt with a lot of background on the issue and questions to answer, so consider your choice carefully and attempt to draw your own conclusion which is supported by the evidence found through your research.
Content: Using at least 4 sources (Internet, and/or library resources), with a minimum of 1 source being an academic journal/article relating to the topic, address the various sides (or positions) of your issue, come up with your own personal conclusions based on your analysis of the issue, and demonstrate an understanding of its complexities. Wikipedia and other online encyclopedias are NOT valid sources!! Sources must be verifiable and journalistically/academically sound.
Include a brief history of your issue.
Compare and contrast at least (2) different political perspectives (viewpoints)
Identify the strengths and weaknesses of each position you include
Present an informed evaluation of the evidence and different viewpoint surrounding the topic
What do you conclude? Which position do you agree with most and why?