A Tale of Two Borders: The United States and Israel

Salve. Well, I'm back.

The United States and Israeli border problems are some of the worst border crises in history. The reactions by the United States government are similarly some of the worst in United States history. Thus I arouse from my inactivity to give my two cents on these issues. I shall address our border first.

I want America to have at least half a billion citizens, if not more. I truly do. The average person who comes to this country will do far better off here than elsewhere, and I want as many people as possible to share in the glory that is "the American dream." I believe that, if well-dispersed across America, this new influx of immigrants could well serve the United States and help themselves along the way.
That said, a lot of the security of the United States is based on how well our borders are maintained. We made a treaty with Canada that neither of us would secure the U.S.-Canada border, and we don't have any threats coming from the north, so that border is essentially maintained. We have made no such pact with Mexico, and Mexicans are crossing the border in record numbers. It seems to me now that only two options are on the table:

1. The Republican conservative option: Secure the border, and deport illegal immigrants as necessary.

2. The Democrat liberal option: Provide amnesty to illegal immigrants, and put off border control for a later time.

I would like to humbly request a few more solutions that, though radical, would at least mollify the situation:

1. Build more immigration stations. It would solve the quandary behind the plight of the illegal immigrant, and the security that accompanies the immigration station would (at least slightly) secure the border. Illegal immigrants would be able to achieve their dream of coming to America, and the Democrats and least would be at the loss of an argument.

2. Purify the Mexican government. This gets to the root of the problem: identifying why illegal immigrants want to come to America and bringing it to Mexico. We take out as much corruption as possible, we implement similar benefit systems, and we uplift Mexico. If we supply the money, we can supply the conditions for how that money is used.

3. Annex Mexico. This is probably the most controversial option, but it is also effective. How much better would Mexico run as an American state? It could run relatively independently, but it could be held in check by her neighboring states and by the federal government. The Mexican people could be citizens, and we'd have a far easier war on drugs.

Now, these last two options would have dramatic international implications. Although the Mexican people would be happier, the United Nations would not be. I guess one could say the same about Israel.

Israel is the one nation with guts anymore. Most wars nowadays happen when a stronger nation wants something that a smaller nation has, or when two small neighboring nations have a relatively large dispute. Israel, with no regards to international criticism, makes plans to invade the Gaza Strip. They are not afraid of consequences, and they do everything that they possibly can to protect their citizens. I guess the United States should take a lesson from Israel. Be bold.

Fourth of July Post: Anti-Nationalism

Salvete. Well, I missed the one-year anniversary post, but I can sure as heck continue the Fourth of July posts. Thus, I listen to fireworks blast outside like gunshots, I will talk about the exact opposite of the first Fourth-of-July post: anti-nationalism.

It seems like the people in charge of America are trying a different tactic to try and win the favor of the people: anti-nationalism. According to a recent poll that I heard about recently (Quinnipiac, I believe), there is an astounding percentage of Americans who don't feel patriotic. When viewing a battalion of young drum majors on television, one of them wore a dress comprised of the British flag. Oh, the irony.

Both nationalism and anti-nationalism are forms of propaganda and are equally devastating, but the former brings order, while the latter brings chaos. It all depends on the intent of the wielder, and it explains the reason why conservatives are so nationalist and the liberals are so anti-nationalist. One of the main differences between the two is that the end result of anti-nationalism is far easier to spot than the end result of nationalism. An anti-nationalist society would resent its government to lead to drastic governmental changes, perhaps to the point of overthrowing the government. The end result of nationalism is an out-of-control populace who will simply become permanently brainwashed to the point of no return.

Yet anti-nationalism is far more prominent in modern-day America than in other nations or time periods. Why? I believe it is because of two distinct factors. The first is because of the underdog effect. People want to resist something, whatever it be. Big business and big government are two of the largest targets. Because it is hard to paint the United States of America as an underdog, America has become a thing to resist.

The second lies in the events of the past fourteen years. We have seen America decline on the international front, and we have seen her crumble from the inside from the weight of bureaucracies. There is no achievement in which America can take pride, and the past two administrations have not helped to mollify the situation. We have "lost" more wars in the 21st century than we have in all of our previous wars combined. Yet because of the anti-war, anti-interventionist sentiment of America, there is little that this government can do anymore to boost the morale of the American populace. It is sad but true.

I pledge allegiance
To restoration
Of the honor and dignity of America
And to the hope
That one day
In God's will
We shall reclaim our power
And show our liberty and justice to all.

Now, if the fates (and the fireworks) allow, I shall get some good night's sleep.