Creating a world where responsible

people have the right to live and to

work wherever they choose.

More
 
Why Immigration
For Seniors
For Students
For Conservatives
For Progressives
Photo Download Page

  _MG_7881_web.jpg

Download Exclusive RadicalImmigration.com photos by clicking here.

Follow Us
http://www.facebookloginhut.com/facebook-login/
Join our mailing list






Observations
Whatever reforms are initiated must take into account the needs and desires of native-born Americans
Carol M Swain
in Debating Immigration
Cambridge University Press 2007
 
How Can I Help?
 
Beyond Borders Documentary

 

Beyond Borders Documentary


 
Readers Poll
How much immigration should be allowed into the United States?
 
A New Path? PDF Print E-mail
Written by Simon   
Friday, 12 June 2009

The American Friends Service Committee has recently published a report titled  A New Path, Toward a Humane Immigration Policy.   You can download a copy by going to their web site .

The Friends (sometimes called the Quakers) were one of the earliest groups to be active in the fight against slavery that began in the late 1700's.  The movie Amazing Grace tells the compelling story of the Quaker MP William Wilberforce and his 30 year struggle to end the British slave trade.  Would the Friends in the USA in 1845 have published a report titled "A New Path: Toward a Humane Slavery Policy?

 

 

No they would have published a broadside titled "End Slavery Now." They did not concede the right of the state to allow slavery.  But on immigration the Friends mince their words.

A New Path says unequivocally that immigrant's rights and dignity must be respected but then it goes on to say that immigration is a privilege that nations can allow or not allow.  They concede "that under principles of sovereignty nation states may develop border and migration policies."  This is a huge error "principles of sovereignty" do not allow nations to legalize slavery, second class citizenship for women or imprisonment people without trial and these "principles of sovereignty" should not allow nations to restrict were responsible people choose to live.  By erroneously conceding this point the Friends in A New Path are breaking from their human rights tradition.  The power of nation states to do what they want has been tempered by Rousseau's idea of human rights that transcend nations by international advocates for these rights and by the emerging right of people to vote with their feet and leave oppressive places.  By conceding that nations have the right to restrict immigration the authors of A New Path are unintentionally supporting the oppressors. 

 

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Write comment

smaller | bigger
security image
Write the displayed characters

busy
Last Updated ( Friday, 12 June 2009 )
 
< Prev   Next >