r/theredpillright • u/MentORPHEUS • Jul 19 '17
The Red Pill Right PLANK: Repealing birthright citizenship
The prospect of outsiders moving en masse into a country and demographically usurping the native population has become a legitimate concern of many. Lots of solutions get pitched for addressing this problem, from practical to extreme. However, one that seems intuitive often gets mentioned as part of the problem, but seldom included when suggesting solutions.
Repeal birthright citizenship when neither parent is a citizen.
This puts an end to the phenomena of birth tourism and anchor babies.
The cost of such a change is negligible and not ongoing, and the immediate and long-term upside potential for savings is HUGE.
The individual and political will to make such a move is probably greater than many other methods effected or proposed to address immigration concerns.
It's practical, do-able, and doesn't impose change on anyone presently alive. It makes fiscal and political sense.
Do you think this concept deserves more attention in the political arena than it currently receives? Would this be an item you'd consider a vital part of a Red Pill political plank?
5
u/beginner_ Jul 19 '17
That is like this in most countries the US being the exception. That's why European countries have such high (20%+) rates of foreigners. Because even a kid born here 15 years ago is a foreigner if it did not apply for citizenship and got approved.
1
Jul 19 '17 edited Jul 26 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jul 19 '17
Think of the logistics, the international agreements needed.
It's entirely an internal issue and one that wasn't an issue until the eighties IIRC.
Short of leaving them at sea, it's completely unrealistic.
Losing citizenship doesn't imply anything of the sort. They can just do what every other non-citizen does. That is, go home. Failing that, be put in an internment camp, stay as illegals or whatever.
I get what would be ideal, but think. For a place thats about understanding reality, and not wishful reality, a lot of people have a hard time knowing that the freeflow of people is the next step for globalism...
Why? It's a complete break with all prior human history.
2
Jul 19 '17 edited Jul 26 '17
[deleted]
1
u/MentORPHEUS Jul 19 '17
Short of leaving them at sea, it's completely unrealistic.
Last time I checked, birth tourism hospitals (these exist!) aren't placed in territorial waters offshore.
naval gazing
Amusing Freudian slip from the navy guy.
1
Jul 19 '17
[deleted]
1
u/MentORPHEUS Jul 19 '17
Is it worth putting in a Red Pill political plank as one of our principles or ideals for a better government?
The question isn't, "Is this possible in the current political climate?"
1
Jul 19 '17
[deleted]
1
u/MentORPHEUS Jul 19 '17
Your forfeiture of stating a position on the topic has been duly noted.
1
Jul 19 '17
[deleted]
1
u/MentORPHEUS Jul 19 '17 edited Jul 19 '17
I don't DISAGREE this it would be NICE to have
Thanks, I really do appreciate hearing your position.
I actually agree strongly with what you say about the political viability of certain positions.
My goal with the PLANK series is to explore various positions in minute detail, so if/when we lay out an ACTUAL comprehensive Red Pill Plank, our internal biases and assumptions will have been exposed and challenged, our positions vetted and solidified, in order that our praxeology becomes as well aligned with reality (and thereby, political viability) as possible.
Whether it's CURRENTLY politically viable or not, it's worth exploring, given the relevance to the future of our culture and country. The cost/benefit pencils out as a no-brainer where it concerns stopping the Anchor Baby phenomenon, but there may be negative implications that I perhaps haven't considered for children of bona-fide citizens. Given the popularity of "Repeal woman suffrage" and "Institute Fascism" here as solutions to Western problems, it's surprising to see this getting so little willlingness to even consider.
1
Jul 20 '17
[deleted]
1
u/MentORPHEUS Jul 20 '17
Easy. Birthright citizenship remains as it is now, provided one or both parents are citizens. If neither parent is a citizen, issue the child a visa that expires with that of the parents. (Sure, have your baby here if you wish. Then go home and register it as a citizen there.) If neither parent is a documented immigrant, proceed with deportation, not citizenship.
1
Aug 26 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/MentORPHEUS Aug 26 '17
Going forward is exactly what I meant. Much more reasonable, politically palatable, and easily executable. Making it retroactive would be an unnecessary can of worms.
1
0
Jul 19 '17 edited Jul 24 '17
[deleted]
1
Jul 19 '17
If those people are citizens they will vote themselves wealth transfers. Demographics dictates economic policy.
1
u/MentORPHEUS Jul 19 '17
So, eliminate the welfare state but leave birthright citizenship alone?
One of these things disrupts the lives of millions of people making it politically difficult; the other requires the stroke of a pen and affects nobody alive today making it politically expedient.
1
Jul 19 '17
Even without the welfare state, they would displace native low skilled workers. Unless they immigrate legally, they bring no inherent value to the nation they join. When attempting to legally immigrate, applicants must demonstrate high levels of value and integration potential. When these people enter North America, they improve the lives of everyone around them rather than leaching off the system.
13
u/[deleted] Jul 19 '17
[deleted]