What do Democrats mean when they call a wall or barrier “immoral”?












23















I don't want arguments for or against the wall/barrier on the United States' southern border. I would like to understand what Nancy Pelosi means when she or any other member of the Democratic party claim that a wall is immoral.










share|improve this question




















  • 8





    Everyone is overthinking this. They just mean "We hate Trump". If there was no wall, something else he did would be labelled "immoral" instead. The rest is just media soundbites. "Political morality" is an oxymoron.

    – alephzero
    Feb 17 at 13:32






  • 4





    I agree with @alephzero totally. I consider much of what the democratic party currently supports "immoral", especially abortion and certain sexual lifestyles, so in my eyes they are "swallowing a camel and gagging on a fly" so to speak. Of course, no one wants to open their eyes and see that Bush and Obama, the two previous doemocratic presidents built on to the fence that is there now. They supported that, obviously, so it is plain to see the issue is simply a "We Hate Trump!" situation.

    – The Mattbat999
    Feb 17 at 14:48






  • 6





    @Mattbat you refute your own argument here: Why should it be useful to build a wall when there's already a fence? It's just utter nonsense. Also, Bush was Republican. And to what "sexual lifestyles" are you referring?

    – miep
    Feb 18 at 10:31


















23















I don't want arguments for or against the wall/barrier on the United States' southern border. I would like to understand what Nancy Pelosi means when she or any other member of the Democratic party claim that a wall is immoral.










share|improve this question




















  • 8





    Everyone is overthinking this. They just mean "We hate Trump". If there was no wall, something else he did would be labelled "immoral" instead. The rest is just media soundbites. "Political morality" is an oxymoron.

    – alephzero
    Feb 17 at 13:32






  • 4





    I agree with @alephzero totally. I consider much of what the democratic party currently supports "immoral", especially abortion and certain sexual lifestyles, so in my eyes they are "swallowing a camel and gagging on a fly" so to speak. Of course, no one wants to open their eyes and see that Bush and Obama, the two previous doemocratic presidents built on to the fence that is there now. They supported that, obviously, so it is plain to see the issue is simply a "We Hate Trump!" situation.

    – The Mattbat999
    Feb 17 at 14:48






  • 6





    @Mattbat you refute your own argument here: Why should it be useful to build a wall when there's already a fence? It's just utter nonsense. Also, Bush was Republican. And to what "sexual lifestyles" are you referring?

    – miep
    Feb 18 at 10:31
















23












23








23


3






I don't want arguments for or against the wall/barrier on the United States' southern border. I would like to understand what Nancy Pelosi means when she or any other member of the Democratic party claim that a wall is immoral.










share|improve this question
















I don't want arguments for or against the wall/barrier on the United States' southern border. I would like to understand what Nancy Pelosi means when she or any other member of the Democratic party claim that a wall is immoral.







united-states donald-trump democratic-party trump-wall






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Feb 17 at 15:35









Machavity

18.1k65887




18.1k65887










asked Feb 15 at 23:42









CarsonCarson

947721




947721








  • 8





    Everyone is overthinking this. They just mean "We hate Trump". If there was no wall, something else he did would be labelled "immoral" instead. The rest is just media soundbites. "Political morality" is an oxymoron.

    – alephzero
    Feb 17 at 13:32






  • 4





    I agree with @alephzero totally. I consider much of what the democratic party currently supports "immoral", especially abortion and certain sexual lifestyles, so in my eyes they are "swallowing a camel and gagging on a fly" so to speak. Of course, no one wants to open their eyes and see that Bush and Obama, the two previous doemocratic presidents built on to the fence that is there now. They supported that, obviously, so it is plain to see the issue is simply a "We Hate Trump!" situation.

    – The Mattbat999
    Feb 17 at 14:48






  • 6





    @Mattbat you refute your own argument here: Why should it be useful to build a wall when there's already a fence? It's just utter nonsense. Also, Bush was Republican. And to what "sexual lifestyles" are you referring?

    – miep
    Feb 18 at 10:31
















  • 8





    Everyone is overthinking this. They just mean "We hate Trump". If there was no wall, something else he did would be labelled "immoral" instead. The rest is just media soundbites. "Political morality" is an oxymoron.

    – alephzero
    Feb 17 at 13:32






  • 4





    I agree with @alephzero totally. I consider much of what the democratic party currently supports "immoral", especially abortion and certain sexual lifestyles, so in my eyes they are "swallowing a camel and gagging on a fly" so to speak. Of course, no one wants to open their eyes and see that Bush and Obama, the two previous doemocratic presidents built on to the fence that is there now. They supported that, obviously, so it is plain to see the issue is simply a "We Hate Trump!" situation.

    – The Mattbat999
    Feb 17 at 14:48






  • 6





    @Mattbat you refute your own argument here: Why should it be useful to build a wall when there's already a fence? It's just utter nonsense. Also, Bush was Republican. And to what "sexual lifestyles" are you referring?

    – miep
    Feb 18 at 10:31










8




8





Everyone is overthinking this. They just mean "We hate Trump". If there was no wall, something else he did would be labelled "immoral" instead. The rest is just media soundbites. "Political morality" is an oxymoron.

– alephzero
Feb 17 at 13:32





Everyone is overthinking this. They just mean "We hate Trump". If there was no wall, something else he did would be labelled "immoral" instead. The rest is just media soundbites. "Political morality" is an oxymoron.

– alephzero
Feb 17 at 13:32




4




4





I agree with @alephzero totally. I consider much of what the democratic party currently supports "immoral", especially abortion and certain sexual lifestyles, so in my eyes they are "swallowing a camel and gagging on a fly" so to speak. Of course, no one wants to open their eyes and see that Bush and Obama, the two previous doemocratic presidents built on to the fence that is there now. They supported that, obviously, so it is plain to see the issue is simply a "We Hate Trump!" situation.

– The Mattbat999
Feb 17 at 14:48





I agree with @alephzero totally. I consider much of what the democratic party currently supports "immoral", especially abortion and certain sexual lifestyles, so in my eyes they are "swallowing a camel and gagging on a fly" so to speak. Of course, no one wants to open their eyes and see that Bush and Obama, the two previous doemocratic presidents built on to the fence that is there now. They supported that, obviously, so it is plain to see the issue is simply a "We Hate Trump!" situation.

– The Mattbat999
Feb 17 at 14:48




6




6





@Mattbat you refute your own argument here: Why should it be useful to build a wall when there's already a fence? It's just utter nonsense. Also, Bush was Republican. And to what "sexual lifestyles" are you referring?

– miep
Feb 18 at 10:31







@Mattbat you refute your own argument here: Why should it be useful to build a wall when there's already a fence? It's just utter nonsense. Also, Bush was Republican. And to what "sexual lifestyles" are you referring?

– miep
Feb 18 at 10:31












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















35














Here are some examples of statements by Democratic politicians and my best guess at interpretation:



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called President Trump's planned border wall 'immoral'




“A wall, in my view, is an immorality. It’s the least effective way to protect the border and the most costly. I can’t think of any reason why anyone would think it’s a good idea — unless this has something to do with something else.”
Source




What Speaker Pelosi seems to be saying here is that the border wall is immoral because it's costly but it's not even effective, and would therefore be immoral waste of taxpayer money.



Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States, so in her view, not letting them enter could be perceived as a violation of their rights, which could be considered immoral.




Rep. Adam Smith, the new chair of the House Armed Services Committee, who, echoing many other Democrats, claims that Trump’s campaign for a border wall is rooted in “xenophobia and racism.”
Source




So in Rep. Adam Smith's view, if the border wall is rooted in 'xenophobia and racism', then the border wall is immoral because xenophobia and racism are immoral.



Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, stated




“I hope folks have realized walls are deadly,” she said. “When people are so desperate they will flee their country to go to another, a wall doesn’t stop them. It just pushes them out to more treacherous, dangerous, deadly crossings where migrants die in the desert or drown in rivers.”
Source




So, in Rep. Escobar's view, the wall would be immoral because it would make migrants' journeys more dangerous and expose them to potentially greater harm that if there weren't a wall.






share|improve this answer





















  • 4





    @Shadur Talking about asylum seems to be a reference to the caravan. One of the mitigating problems is that the caravan crossed several other countries trying to get to the U.S. In other words, they didn't request asylum at the earliest opportunity. Does that affect the legality of their actions? It at least makes their motives suspect. Also, is the internationally accepted way to enter the country legally and then ask asylum, or does the internationally accepted way allow for illegal entry? What happens to those entering illegally who are denied asylum?

    – jpmc26
    Feb 16 at 23:35








  • 11





    Pelosi’s quote is a great find, but I don’t think you quite unpacked her meaning. The key here is “unless this has something to do with something else.” This vague “something” strongly insinuates something immoral—my guess is racism towards South Americans and that piece of Trump’s rhetoric. With this in mind, Pelosi is saying here that the wall is “an immorality” not just because it is a waste of taxpayer money, but because it is a product of “something else” — something sinister, something immoral. This falls in line with Rep. Adam Smith’s comment.

    – Daniel
    Feb 17 at 6:09








  • 8





    Regarding the AOC quote: Instead of relying on some rather shady "news" sites to filter what she actually said through various ideological lenses I added the primary source: A video where she actually makes that statement.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:21






  • 3





    I'm on board with Daniel for this one. She leaves unspoken what she feels the true "immorality" is, and that's her implication that the actual reason for the wall is based on xenophobic fear-mongering vs actual needs, and her belief that wasting national resources for that kind manipulation is immoral.

    – PoloHoleSet
    Feb 18 at 19:35






  • 3





    Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States She doesn’t say that in the linked clip, and as far as I can tell from Googling, she’s never said that.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 19 at 9:16



















12














In terms of cultural references, it is worth mentioning a powerful image dating from the Cold War: the fence that separated Europe in two (and surrounded West Berlin) during the Cold War was called "the Wall of Shame". Its numerous photographs were the symbol of the totalitarian oppression of the Soviet Union. It was also transcontinental, since it went uninterruptedly "from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic", in the words of Winston Churchill (5 March 1946).



It had a strong impact on European mentalities, but on the US culture as well. US President Ronald Reagan famously stated "Mr. Gorbachev, if you love peace... open this gate! (...) Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" (June 7, 1987).



Philosophically, there is a duality in walls, especially when they go from coast to coast: even though they are purportedly built to protect the people on this site from contamination (the German Inner Wall was justified as an "anti-fascist protective rampart"), they are often meant the other way: "to keep the other people in"; in other words, to keep people as prisoners.



Furthemore, let us not forget that in US cities, actual walls or bureaucratic walls were built to segregate black populations from white ones, in the fear of an "invasion" of "people bringing drugs and crime" (Chicago's housing system left a strong memory of this; see also N.Y. Times's book review, 20 June 2017). That explains why the N.Y Times used the term "wall of shame" (24 January 2019) about issues of racial discrimination:




The wall of Donald Trump’s campaign and presidency has always operated
both as a discrete proposal — an actual structure to be built under
his leadership — and as a symbol with a clear meaning. Whether praised
by its supporters or condemned by its opponents, the wall is a
stand-in for the larger promise of broad racial (and religious)
exclusion and domination.
It’s no surprise, then, that some Americans use “Build the wall” as a
racist chant, much like the way they invoke the president’s name. And
it’s also why, despite the pain and distress of the extended
government shutdown, Democrats are right to resist any deal with the
White House that includes funding for its construction
.




The term wall of shame has two connotations here: the first as a metaphor for immorality, the second as a reference to the Berlin Wall.



Hence, in the US, the question of the Mexican Border Wall does evoke two images, both of which are profoundly immoral in modern US culture: the Iron Curtain across Europe as tool of political oppression, and racial segregation in the planning of US cities (and these two images were already connected in the first place).



To moderator



This post uses abundant references. Please be more specific/helpful, to avoid your moderation being considered as overzealous.






share|improve this answer















Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










  • 2





    Many highway projects are effectively walls that divide neighborhoods.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 15:51






  • 2





    @emory - People didn't vote for a president so that they could build a highway, they voted to "protect the people on this site from contamination" (aka: racism) by means of a wall. Isolationism is immoral when you pick and choose, and don't hate everyone equally.

    – Mazura
    Feb 16 at 16:00











  • I don't know why others voted for Trump. I voted for Clinton. However, some highway projects have the same impure motives that you ascribe to Trump's wall. Trump is not the first grifter on the scene.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 16:07






  • 2





    Please note that the question explicitly asks for claims by members of the Democrats, not for personal opinions.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:04






  • 1





    On StackExchange, relevance of content is measured by points. It is not up to you (if you are a moderator), to express opinions or censor upon what is relevant or not to a question. A moderator's job is to ensure that the answer fits formal requirements, using objective criteria.

    – fralau
    Feb 18 at 19:34





















3














The 2016 Democratic platform says




The world is experiencing a major refugee crisis with more than 60 million people displaced as a result of conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe. We support President Obama’s call for an international summit to address this crisis so that every country assumes its responsibility to meet this humanitarian challenge. While Donald Trump proposes banning Muslim refugees, we will look for ways to help innocent people who are fleeing persecution while ensuring rigorous screening and vetting.




They also write




Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect [...]




Democrats with some Republicans passed the Refugee Relief Act of 1953 in reaction to the end of WWII and the start of the Cold War.
They did agree with most civilized nations that people who faced genuine political persecution deserved political asylum, and that there should be individual hearings in a legal process.



Asylum should happen in the first safe harbor after leaving the place of persecution. There is no right for the refugee to pick their destination. The problem with that is that most wealthy nations, those most able to cope with refugees, have declared their immediate neighbours as "safe" and tried to prevent asylum claims by other ways -- migrants have to get in illegally to get a hearing if they will get legal refugee status.



So you can see Democrats supporting some restrictions on refugees, while generally being more welcoming than Republicans.






share|improve this answer





















  • 3





    Note: Donald Trump, and perhaps some other ideologically-aligned conservatives, have claimed that Mexico is a country of rapists and criminals. This is inflammatory. However, by his own words, Trump is essentially saying that Mexico is NOT a safe harbor for refugees to settle. This is a great reason why Trump and his associates can't make the argument that Mexico could have been a first safe harbor for refugees. He can't make that argument without first walking back all of his previous attacks on the safety and crime factor of Mexico.

    – John
    Feb 18 at 19:21












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38815%2fwhat-do-democrats-mean-when-they-call-a-wall-or-barrier-immoral%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









35














Here are some examples of statements by Democratic politicians and my best guess at interpretation:



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called President Trump's planned border wall 'immoral'




“A wall, in my view, is an immorality. It’s the least effective way to protect the border and the most costly. I can’t think of any reason why anyone would think it’s a good idea — unless this has something to do with something else.”
Source




What Speaker Pelosi seems to be saying here is that the border wall is immoral because it's costly but it's not even effective, and would therefore be immoral waste of taxpayer money.



Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States, so in her view, not letting them enter could be perceived as a violation of their rights, which could be considered immoral.




Rep. Adam Smith, the new chair of the House Armed Services Committee, who, echoing many other Democrats, claims that Trump’s campaign for a border wall is rooted in “xenophobia and racism.”
Source




So in Rep. Adam Smith's view, if the border wall is rooted in 'xenophobia and racism', then the border wall is immoral because xenophobia and racism are immoral.



Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, stated




“I hope folks have realized walls are deadly,” she said. “When people are so desperate they will flee their country to go to another, a wall doesn’t stop them. It just pushes them out to more treacherous, dangerous, deadly crossings where migrants die in the desert or drown in rivers.”
Source




So, in Rep. Escobar's view, the wall would be immoral because it would make migrants' journeys more dangerous and expose them to potentially greater harm that if there weren't a wall.






share|improve this answer





















  • 4





    @Shadur Talking about asylum seems to be a reference to the caravan. One of the mitigating problems is that the caravan crossed several other countries trying to get to the U.S. In other words, they didn't request asylum at the earliest opportunity. Does that affect the legality of their actions? It at least makes their motives suspect. Also, is the internationally accepted way to enter the country legally and then ask asylum, or does the internationally accepted way allow for illegal entry? What happens to those entering illegally who are denied asylum?

    – jpmc26
    Feb 16 at 23:35








  • 11





    Pelosi’s quote is a great find, but I don’t think you quite unpacked her meaning. The key here is “unless this has something to do with something else.” This vague “something” strongly insinuates something immoral—my guess is racism towards South Americans and that piece of Trump’s rhetoric. With this in mind, Pelosi is saying here that the wall is “an immorality” not just because it is a waste of taxpayer money, but because it is a product of “something else” — something sinister, something immoral. This falls in line with Rep. Adam Smith’s comment.

    – Daniel
    Feb 17 at 6:09








  • 8





    Regarding the AOC quote: Instead of relying on some rather shady "news" sites to filter what she actually said through various ideological lenses I added the primary source: A video where she actually makes that statement.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:21






  • 3





    I'm on board with Daniel for this one. She leaves unspoken what she feels the true "immorality" is, and that's her implication that the actual reason for the wall is based on xenophobic fear-mongering vs actual needs, and her belief that wasting national resources for that kind manipulation is immoral.

    – PoloHoleSet
    Feb 18 at 19:35






  • 3





    Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States She doesn’t say that in the linked clip, and as far as I can tell from Googling, she’s never said that.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 19 at 9:16
















35














Here are some examples of statements by Democratic politicians and my best guess at interpretation:



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called President Trump's planned border wall 'immoral'




“A wall, in my view, is an immorality. It’s the least effective way to protect the border and the most costly. I can’t think of any reason why anyone would think it’s a good idea — unless this has something to do with something else.”
Source




What Speaker Pelosi seems to be saying here is that the border wall is immoral because it's costly but it's not even effective, and would therefore be immoral waste of taxpayer money.



Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States, so in her view, not letting them enter could be perceived as a violation of their rights, which could be considered immoral.




Rep. Adam Smith, the new chair of the House Armed Services Committee, who, echoing many other Democrats, claims that Trump’s campaign for a border wall is rooted in “xenophobia and racism.”
Source




So in Rep. Adam Smith's view, if the border wall is rooted in 'xenophobia and racism', then the border wall is immoral because xenophobia and racism are immoral.



Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, stated




“I hope folks have realized walls are deadly,” she said. “When people are so desperate they will flee their country to go to another, a wall doesn’t stop them. It just pushes them out to more treacherous, dangerous, deadly crossings where migrants die in the desert or drown in rivers.”
Source




So, in Rep. Escobar's view, the wall would be immoral because it would make migrants' journeys more dangerous and expose them to potentially greater harm that if there weren't a wall.






share|improve this answer





















  • 4





    @Shadur Talking about asylum seems to be a reference to the caravan. One of the mitigating problems is that the caravan crossed several other countries trying to get to the U.S. In other words, they didn't request asylum at the earliest opportunity. Does that affect the legality of their actions? It at least makes their motives suspect. Also, is the internationally accepted way to enter the country legally and then ask asylum, or does the internationally accepted way allow for illegal entry? What happens to those entering illegally who are denied asylum?

    – jpmc26
    Feb 16 at 23:35








  • 11





    Pelosi’s quote is a great find, but I don’t think you quite unpacked her meaning. The key here is “unless this has something to do with something else.” This vague “something” strongly insinuates something immoral—my guess is racism towards South Americans and that piece of Trump’s rhetoric. With this in mind, Pelosi is saying here that the wall is “an immorality” not just because it is a waste of taxpayer money, but because it is a product of “something else” — something sinister, something immoral. This falls in line with Rep. Adam Smith’s comment.

    – Daniel
    Feb 17 at 6:09








  • 8





    Regarding the AOC quote: Instead of relying on some rather shady "news" sites to filter what she actually said through various ideological lenses I added the primary source: A video where she actually makes that statement.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:21






  • 3





    I'm on board with Daniel for this one. She leaves unspoken what she feels the true "immorality" is, and that's her implication that the actual reason for the wall is based on xenophobic fear-mongering vs actual needs, and her belief that wasting national resources for that kind manipulation is immoral.

    – PoloHoleSet
    Feb 18 at 19:35






  • 3





    Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States She doesn’t say that in the linked clip, and as far as I can tell from Googling, she’s never said that.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 19 at 9:16














35












35








35







Here are some examples of statements by Democratic politicians and my best guess at interpretation:



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called President Trump's planned border wall 'immoral'




“A wall, in my view, is an immorality. It’s the least effective way to protect the border and the most costly. I can’t think of any reason why anyone would think it’s a good idea — unless this has something to do with something else.”
Source




What Speaker Pelosi seems to be saying here is that the border wall is immoral because it's costly but it's not even effective, and would therefore be immoral waste of taxpayer money.



Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States, so in her view, not letting them enter could be perceived as a violation of their rights, which could be considered immoral.




Rep. Adam Smith, the new chair of the House Armed Services Committee, who, echoing many other Democrats, claims that Trump’s campaign for a border wall is rooted in “xenophobia and racism.”
Source




So in Rep. Adam Smith's view, if the border wall is rooted in 'xenophobia and racism', then the border wall is immoral because xenophobia and racism are immoral.



Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, stated




“I hope folks have realized walls are deadly,” she said. “When people are so desperate they will flee their country to go to another, a wall doesn’t stop them. It just pushes them out to more treacherous, dangerous, deadly crossings where migrants die in the desert or drown in rivers.”
Source




So, in Rep. Escobar's view, the wall would be immoral because it would make migrants' journeys more dangerous and expose them to potentially greater harm that if there weren't a wall.






share|improve this answer















Here are some examples of statements by Democratic politicians and my best guess at interpretation:



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called President Trump's planned border wall 'immoral'




“A wall, in my view, is an immorality. It’s the least effective way to protect the border and the most costly. I can’t think of any reason why anyone would think it’s a good idea — unless this has something to do with something else.”
Source




What Speaker Pelosi seems to be saying here is that the border wall is immoral because it's costly but it's not even effective, and would therefore be immoral waste of taxpayer money.



Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States, so in her view, not letting them enter could be perceived as a violation of their rights, which could be considered immoral.




Rep. Adam Smith, the new chair of the House Armed Services Committee, who, echoing many other Democrats, claims that Trump’s campaign for a border wall is rooted in “xenophobia and racism.”
Source




So in Rep. Adam Smith's view, if the border wall is rooted in 'xenophobia and racism', then the border wall is immoral because xenophobia and racism are immoral.



Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, stated




“I hope folks have realized walls are deadly,” she said. “When people are so desperate they will flee their country to go to another, a wall doesn’t stop them. It just pushes them out to more treacherous, dangerous, deadly crossings where migrants die in the desert or drown in rivers.”
Source




So, in Rep. Escobar's view, the wall would be immoral because it would make migrants' journeys more dangerous and expose them to potentially greater harm that if there weren't a wall.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Feb 17 at 10:19









Philipp

41.8k15123149




41.8k15123149










answered Feb 16 at 0:07









TheLeopardTheLeopard

1,380418




1,380418








  • 4





    @Shadur Talking about asylum seems to be a reference to the caravan. One of the mitigating problems is that the caravan crossed several other countries trying to get to the U.S. In other words, they didn't request asylum at the earliest opportunity. Does that affect the legality of their actions? It at least makes their motives suspect. Also, is the internationally accepted way to enter the country legally and then ask asylum, or does the internationally accepted way allow for illegal entry? What happens to those entering illegally who are denied asylum?

    – jpmc26
    Feb 16 at 23:35








  • 11





    Pelosi’s quote is a great find, but I don’t think you quite unpacked her meaning. The key here is “unless this has something to do with something else.” This vague “something” strongly insinuates something immoral—my guess is racism towards South Americans and that piece of Trump’s rhetoric. With this in mind, Pelosi is saying here that the wall is “an immorality” not just because it is a waste of taxpayer money, but because it is a product of “something else” — something sinister, something immoral. This falls in line with Rep. Adam Smith’s comment.

    – Daniel
    Feb 17 at 6:09








  • 8





    Regarding the AOC quote: Instead of relying on some rather shady "news" sites to filter what she actually said through various ideological lenses I added the primary source: A video where she actually makes that statement.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:21






  • 3





    I'm on board with Daniel for this one. She leaves unspoken what she feels the true "immorality" is, and that's her implication that the actual reason for the wall is based on xenophobic fear-mongering vs actual needs, and her belief that wasting national resources for that kind manipulation is immoral.

    – PoloHoleSet
    Feb 18 at 19:35






  • 3





    Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States She doesn’t say that in the linked clip, and as far as I can tell from Googling, she’s never said that.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 19 at 9:16














  • 4





    @Shadur Talking about asylum seems to be a reference to the caravan. One of the mitigating problems is that the caravan crossed several other countries trying to get to the U.S. In other words, they didn't request asylum at the earliest opportunity. Does that affect the legality of their actions? It at least makes their motives suspect. Also, is the internationally accepted way to enter the country legally and then ask asylum, or does the internationally accepted way allow for illegal entry? What happens to those entering illegally who are denied asylum?

    – jpmc26
    Feb 16 at 23:35








  • 11





    Pelosi’s quote is a great find, but I don’t think you quite unpacked her meaning. The key here is “unless this has something to do with something else.” This vague “something” strongly insinuates something immoral—my guess is racism towards South Americans and that piece of Trump’s rhetoric. With this in mind, Pelosi is saying here that the wall is “an immorality” not just because it is a waste of taxpayer money, but because it is a product of “something else” — something sinister, something immoral. This falls in line with Rep. Adam Smith’s comment.

    – Daniel
    Feb 17 at 6:09








  • 8





    Regarding the AOC quote: Instead of relying on some rather shady "news" sites to filter what she actually said through various ideological lenses I added the primary source: A video where she actually makes that statement.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:21






  • 3





    I'm on board with Daniel for this one. She leaves unspoken what she feels the true "immorality" is, and that's her implication that the actual reason for the wall is based on xenophobic fear-mongering vs actual needs, and her belief that wasting national resources for that kind manipulation is immoral.

    – PoloHoleSet
    Feb 18 at 19:35






  • 3





    Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States She doesn’t say that in the linked clip, and as far as I can tell from Googling, she’s never said that.

    – Justin Lardinois
    Feb 19 at 9:16








4




4





@Shadur Talking about asylum seems to be a reference to the caravan. One of the mitigating problems is that the caravan crossed several other countries trying to get to the U.S. In other words, they didn't request asylum at the earliest opportunity. Does that affect the legality of their actions? It at least makes their motives suspect. Also, is the internationally accepted way to enter the country legally and then ask asylum, or does the internationally accepted way allow for illegal entry? What happens to those entering illegally who are denied asylum?

– jpmc26
Feb 16 at 23:35







@Shadur Talking about asylum seems to be a reference to the caravan. One of the mitigating problems is that the caravan crossed several other countries trying to get to the U.S. In other words, they didn't request asylum at the earliest opportunity. Does that affect the legality of their actions? It at least makes their motives suspect. Also, is the internationally accepted way to enter the country legally and then ask asylum, or does the internationally accepted way allow for illegal entry? What happens to those entering illegally who are denied asylum?

– jpmc26
Feb 16 at 23:35






11




11





Pelosi’s quote is a great find, but I don’t think you quite unpacked her meaning. The key here is “unless this has something to do with something else.” This vague “something” strongly insinuates something immoral—my guess is racism towards South Americans and that piece of Trump’s rhetoric. With this in mind, Pelosi is saying here that the wall is “an immorality” not just because it is a waste of taxpayer money, but because it is a product of “something else” — something sinister, something immoral. This falls in line with Rep. Adam Smith’s comment.

– Daniel
Feb 17 at 6:09







Pelosi’s quote is a great find, but I don’t think you quite unpacked her meaning. The key here is “unless this has something to do with something else.” This vague “something” strongly insinuates something immoral—my guess is racism towards South Americans and that piece of Trump’s rhetoric. With this in mind, Pelosi is saying here that the wall is “an immorality” not just because it is a waste of taxpayer money, but because it is a product of “something else” — something sinister, something immoral. This falls in line with Rep. Adam Smith’s comment.

– Daniel
Feb 17 at 6:09






8




8





Regarding the AOC quote: Instead of relying on some rather shady "news" sites to filter what she actually said through various ideological lenses I added the primary source: A video where she actually makes that statement.

– Philipp
Feb 17 at 10:21





Regarding the AOC quote: Instead of relying on some rather shady "news" sites to filter what she actually said through various ideological lenses I added the primary source: A video where she actually makes that statement.

– Philipp
Feb 17 at 10:21




3




3





I'm on board with Daniel for this one. She leaves unspoken what she feels the true "immorality" is, and that's her implication that the actual reason for the wall is based on xenophobic fear-mongering vs actual needs, and her belief that wasting national resources for that kind manipulation is immoral.

– PoloHoleSet
Feb 18 at 19:35





I'm on board with Daniel for this one. She leaves unspoken what she feels the true "immorality" is, and that's her implication that the actual reason for the wall is based on xenophobic fear-mongering vs actual needs, and her belief that wasting national resources for that kind manipulation is immoral.

– PoloHoleSet
Feb 18 at 19:35




3




3





Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States She doesn’t say that in the linked clip, and as far as I can tell from Googling, she’s never said that.

– Justin Lardinois
Feb 19 at 9:16





Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that all Latinos wherever they're from have the right to enter the United States She doesn’t say that in the linked clip, and as far as I can tell from Googling, she’s never said that.

– Justin Lardinois
Feb 19 at 9:16











12














In terms of cultural references, it is worth mentioning a powerful image dating from the Cold War: the fence that separated Europe in two (and surrounded West Berlin) during the Cold War was called "the Wall of Shame". Its numerous photographs were the symbol of the totalitarian oppression of the Soviet Union. It was also transcontinental, since it went uninterruptedly "from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic", in the words of Winston Churchill (5 March 1946).



It had a strong impact on European mentalities, but on the US culture as well. US President Ronald Reagan famously stated "Mr. Gorbachev, if you love peace... open this gate! (...) Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" (June 7, 1987).



Philosophically, there is a duality in walls, especially when they go from coast to coast: even though they are purportedly built to protect the people on this site from contamination (the German Inner Wall was justified as an "anti-fascist protective rampart"), they are often meant the other way: "to keep the other people in"; in other words, to keep people as prisoners.



Furthemore, let us not forget that in US cities, actual walls or bureaucratic walls were built to segregate black populations from white ones, in the fear of an "invasion" of "people bringing drugs and crime" (Chicago's housing system left a strong memory of this; see also N.Y. Times's book review, 20 June 2017). That explains why the N.Y Times used the term "wall of shame" (24 January 2019) about issues of racial discrimination:




The wall of Donald Trump’s campaign and presidency has always operated
both as a discrete proposal — an actual structure to be built under
his leadership — and as a symbol with a clear meaning. Whether praised
by its supporters or condemned by its opponents, the wall is a
stand-in for the larger promise of broad racial (and religious)
exclusion and domination.
It’s no surprise, then, that some Americans use “Build the wall” as a
racist chant, much like the way they invoke the president’s name. And
it’s also why, despite the pain and distress of the extended
government shutdown, Democrats are right to resist any deal with the
White House that includes funding for its construction
.




The term wall of shame has two connotations here: the first as a metaphor for immorality, the second as a reference to the Berlin Wall.



Hence, in the US, the question of the Mexican Border Wall does evoke two images, both of which are profoundly immoral in modern US culture: the Iron Curtain across Europe as tool of political oppression, and racial segregation in the planning of US cities (and these two images were already connected in the first place).



To moderator



This post uses abundant references. Please be more specific/helpful, to avoid your moderation being considered as overzealous.






share|improve this answer















Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










  • 2





    Many highway projects are effectively walls that divide neighborhoods.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 15:51






  • 2





    @emory - People didn't vote for a president so that they could build a highway, they voted to "protect the people on this site from contamination" (aka: racism) by means of a wall. Isolationism is immoral when you pick and choose, and don't hate everyone equally.

    – Mazura
    Feb 16 at 16:00











  • I don't know why others voted for Trump. I voted for Clinton. However, some highway projects have the same impure motives that you ascribe to Trump's wall. Trump is not the first grifter on the scene.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 16:07






  • 2





    Please note that the question explicitly asks for claims by members of the Democrats, not for personal opinions.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:04






  • 1





    On StackExchange, relevance of content is measured by points. It is not up to you (if you are a moderator), to express opinions or censor upon what is relevant or not to a question. A moderator's job is to ensure that the answer fits formal requirements, using objective criteria.

    – fralau
    Feb 18 at 19:34


















12














In terms of cultural references, it is worth mentioning a powerful image dating from the Cold War: the fence that separated Europe in two (and surrounded West Berlin) during the Cold War was called "the Wall of Shame". Its numerous photographs were the symbol of the totalitarian oppression of the Soviet Union. It was also transcontinental, since it went uninterruptedly "from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic", in the words of Winston Churchill (5 March 1946).



It had a strong impact on European mentalities, but on the US culture as well. US President Ronald Reagan famously stated "Mr. Gorbachev, if you love peace... open this gate! (...) Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" (June 7, 1987).



Philosophically, there is a duality in walls, especially when they go from coast to coast: even though they are purportedly built to protect the people on this site from contamination (the German Inner Wall was justified as an "anti-fascist protective rampart"), they are often meant the other way: "to keep the other people in"; in other words, to keep people as prisoners.



Furthemore, let us not forget that in US cities, actual walls or bureaucratic walls were built to segregate black populations from white ones, in the fear of an "invasion" of "people bringing drugs and crime" (Chicago's housing system left a strong memory of this; see also N.Y. Times's book review, 20 June 2017). That explains why the N.Y Times used the term "wall of shame" (24 January 2019) about issues of racial discrimination:




The wall of Donald Trump’s campaign and presidency has always operated
both as a discrete proposal — an actual structure to be built under
his leadership — and as a symbol with a clear meaning. Whether praised
by its supporters or condemned by its opponents, the wall is a
stand-in for the larger promise of broad racial (and religious)
exclusion and domination.
It’s no surprise, then, that some Americans use “Build the wall” as a
racist chant, much like the way they invoke the president’s name. And
it’s also why, despite the pain and distress of the extended
government shutdown, Democrats are right to resist any deal with the
White House that includes funding for its construction
.




The term wall of shame has two connotations here: the first as a metaphor for immorality, the second as a reference to the Berlin Wall.



Hence, in the US, the question of the Mexican Border Wall does evoke two images, both of which are profoundly immoral in modern US culture: the Iron Curtain across Europe as tool of political oppression, and racial segregation in the planning of US cities (and these two images were already connected in the first place).



To moderator



This post uses abundant references. Please be more specific/helpful, to avoid your moderation being considered as overzealous.






share|improve this answer















Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










  • 2





    Many highway projects are effectively walls that divide neighborhoods.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 15:51






  • 2





    @emory - People didn't vote for a president so that they could build a highway, they voted to "protect the people on this site from contamination" (aka: racism) by means of a wall. Isolationism is immoral when you pick and choose, and don't hate everyone equally.

    – Mazura
    Feb 16 at 16:00











  • I don't know why others voted for Trump. I voted for Clinton. However, some highway projects have the same impure motives that you ascribe to Trump's wall. Trump is not the first grifter on the scene.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 16:07






  • 2





    Please note that the question explicitly asks for claims by members of the Democrats, not for personal opinions.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:04






  • 1





    On StackExchange, relevance of content is measured by points. It is not up to you (if you are a moderator), to express opinions or censor upon what is relevant or not to a question. A moderator's job is to ensure that the answer fits formal requirements, using objective criteria.

    – fralau
    Feb 18 at 19:34
















12












12








12







In terms of cultural references, it is worth mentioning a powerful image dating from the Cold War: the fence that separated Europe in two (and surrounded West Berlin) during the Cold War was called "the Wall of Shame". Its numerous photographs were the symbol of the totalitarian oppression of the Soviet Union. It was also transcontinental, since it went uninterruptedly "from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic", in the words of Winston Churchill (5 March 1946).



It had a strong impact on European mentalities, but on the US culture as well. US President Ronald Reagan famously stated "Mr. Gorbachev, if you love peace... open this gate! (...) Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" (June 7, 1987).



Philosophically, there is a duality in walls, especially when they go from coast to coast: even though they are purportedly built to protect the people on this site from contamination (the German Inner Wall was justified as an "anti-fascist protective rampart"), they are often meant the other way: "to keep the other people in"; in other words, to keep people as prisoners.



Furthemore, let us not forget that in US cities, actual walls or bureaucratic walls were built to segregate black populations from white ones, in the fear of an "invasion" of "people bringing drugs and crime" (Chicago's housing system left a strong memory of this; see also N.Y. Times's book review, 20 June 2017). That explains why the N.Y Times used the term "wall of shame" (24 January 2019) about issues of racial discrimination:




The wall of Donald Trump’s campaign and presidency has always operated
both as a discrete proposal — an actual structure to be built under
his leadership — and as a symbol with a clear meaning. Whether praised
by its supporters or condemned by its opponents, the wall is a
stand-in for the larger promise of broad racial (and religious)
exclusion and domination.
It’s no surprise, then, that some Americans use “Build the wall” as a
racist chant, much like the way they invoke the president’s name. And
it’s also why, despite the pain and distress of the extended
government shutdown, Democrats are right to resist any deal with the
White House that includes funding for its construction
.




The term wall of shame has two connotations here: the first as a metaphor for immorality, the second as a reference to the Berlin Wall.



Hence, in the US, the question of the Mexican Border Wall does evoke two images, both of which are profoundly immoral in modern US culture: the Iron Curtain across Europe as tool of political oppression, and racial segregation in the planning of US cities (and these two images were already connected in the first place).



To moderator



This post uses abundant references. Please be more specific/helpful, to avoid your moderation being considered as overzealous.






share|improve this answer















In terms of cultural references, it is worth mentioning a powerful image dating from the Cold War: the fence that separated Europe in two (and surrounded West Berlin) during the Cold War was called "the Wall of Shame". Its numerous photographs were the symbol of the totalitarian oppression of the Soviet Union. It was also transcontinental, since it went uninterruptedly "from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic", in the words of Winston Churchill (5 March 1946).



It had a strong impact on European mentalities, but on the US culture as well. US President Ronald Reagan famously stated "Mr. Gorbachev, if you love peace... open this gate! (...) Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" (June 7, 1987).



Philosophically, there is a duality in walls, especially when they go from coast to coast: even though they are purportedly built to protect the people on this site from contamination (the German Inner Wall was justified as an "anti-fascist protective rampart"), they are often meant the other way: "to keep the other people in"; in other words, to keep people as prisoners.



Furthemore, let us not forget that in US cities, actual walls or bureaucratic walls were built to segregate black populations from white ones, in the fear of an "invasion" of "people bringing drugs and crime" (Chicago's housing system left a strong memory of this; see also N.Y. Times's book review, 20 June 2017). That explains why the N.Y Times used the term "wall of shame" (24 January 2019) about issues of racial discrimination:




The wall of Donald Trump’s campaign and presidency has always operated
both as a discrete proposal — an actual structure to be built under
his leadership — and as a symbol with a clear meaning. Whether praised
by its supporters or condemned by its opponents, the wall is a
stand-in for the larger promise of broad racial (and religious)
exclusion and domination.
It’s no surprise, then, that some Americans use “Build the wall” as a
racist chant, much like the way they invoke the president’s name. And
it’s also why, despite the pain and distress of the extended
government shutdown, Democrats are right to resist any deal with the
White House that includes funding for its construction
.




The term wall of shame has two connotations here: the first as a metaphor for immorality, the second as a reference to the Berlin Wall.



Hence, in the US, the question of the Mexican Border Wall does evoke two images, both of which are profoundly immoral in modern US culture: the Iron Curtain across Europe as tool of political oppression, and racial segregation in the planning of US cities (and these two images were already connected in the first place).



To moderator



This post uses abundant references. Please be more specific/helpful, to avoid your moderation being considered as overzealous.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Feb 19 at 15:04

























answered Feb 16 at 7:42









fralaufralau

2294




2294



Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.




Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.









  • 2





    Many highway projects are effectively walls that divide neighborhoods.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 15:51






  • 2





    @emory - People didn't vote for a president so that they could build a highway, they voted to "protect the people on this site from contamination" (aka: racism) by means of a wall. Isolationism is immoral when you pick and choose, and don't hate everyone equally.

    – Mazura
    Feb 16 at 16:00











  • I don't know why others voted for Trump. I voted for Clinton. However, some highway projects have the same impure motives that you ascribe to Trump's wall. Trump is not the first grifter on the scene.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 16:07






  • 2





    Please note that the question explicitly asks for claims by members of the Democrats, not for personal opinions.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:04






  • 1





    On StackExchange, relevance of content is measured by points. It is not up to you (if you are a moderator), to express opinions or censor upon what is relevant or not to a question. A moderator's job is to ensure that the answer fits formal requirements, using objective criteria.

    – fralau
    Feb 18 at 19:34
















  • 2





    Many highway projects are effectively walls that divide neighborhoods.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 15:51






  • 2





    @emory - People didn't vote for a president so that they could build a highway, they voted to "protect the people on this site from contamination" (aka: racism) by means of a wall. Isolationism is immoral when you pick and choose, and don't hate everyone equally.

    – Mazura
    Feb 16 at 16:00











  • I don't know why others voted for Trump. I voted for Clinton. However, some highway projects have the same impure motives that you ascribe to Trump's wall. Trump is not the first grifter on the scene.

    – emory
    Feb 16 at 16:07






  • 2





    Please note that the question explicitly asks for claims by members of the Democrats, not for personal opinions.

    – Philipp
    Feb 17 at 10:04






  • 1





    On StackExchange, relevance of content is measured by points. It is not up to you (if you are a moderator), to express opinions or censor upon what is relevant or not to a question. A moderator's job is to ensure that the answer fits formal requirements, using objective criteria.

    – fralau
    Feb 18 at 19:34










2




2





Many highway projects are effectively walls that divide neighborhoods.

– emory
Feb 16 at 15:51





Many highway projects are effectively walls that divide neighborhoods.

– emory
Feb 16 at 15:51




2




2





@emory - People didn't vote for a president so that they could build a highway, they voted to "protect the people on this site from contamination" (aka: racism) by means of a wall. Isolationism is immoral when you pick and choose, and don't hate everyone equally.

– Mazura
Feb 16 at 16:00





@emory - People didn't vote for a president so that they could build a highway, they voted to "protect the people on this site from contamination" (aka: racism) by means of a wall. Isolationism is immoral when you pick and choose, and don't hate everyone equally.

– Mazura
Feb 16 at 16:00













I don't know why others voted for Trump. I voted for Clinton. However, some highway projects have the same impure motives that you ascribe to Trump's wall. Trump is not the first grifter on the scene.

– emory
Feb 16 at 16:07





I don't know why others voted for Trump. I voted for Clinton. However, some highway projects have the same impure motives that you ascribe to Trump's wall. Trump is not the first grifter on the scene.

– emory
Feb 16 at 16:07




2




2





Please note that the question explicitly asks for claims by members of the Democrats, not for personal opinions.

– Philipp
Feb 17 at 10:04





Please note that the question explicitly asks for claims by members of the Democrats, not for personal opinions.

– Philipp
Feb 17 at 10:04




1




1





On StackExchange, relevance of content is measured by points. It is not up to you (if you are a moderator), to express opinions or censor upon what is relevant or not to a question. A moderator's job is to ensure that the answer fits formal requirements, using objective criteria.

– fralau
Feb 18 at 19:34







On StackExchange, relevance of content is measured by points. It is not up to you (if you are a moderator), to express opinions or censor upon what is relevant or not to a question. A moderator's job is to ensure that the answer fits formal requirements, using objective criteria.

– fralau
Feb 18 at 19:34













3














The 2016 Democratic platform says




The world is experiencing a major refugee crisis with more than 60 million people displaced as a result of conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe. We support President Obama’s call for an international summit to address this crisis so that every country assumes its responsibility to meet this humanitarian challenge. While Donald Trump proposes banning Muslim refugees, we will look for ways to help innocent people who are fleeing persecution while ensuring rigorous screening and vetting.




They also write




Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect [...]




Democrats with some Republicans passed the Refugee Relief Act of 1953 in reaction to the end of WWII and the start of the Cold War.
They did agree with most civilized nations that people who faced genuine political persecution deserved political asylum, and that there should be individual hearings in a legal process.



Asylum should happen in the first safe harbor after leaving the place of persecution. There is no right for the refugee to pick their destination. The problem with that is that most wealthy nations, those most able to cope with refugees, have declared their immediate neighbours as "safe" and tried to prevent asylum claims by other ways -- migrants have to get in illegally to get a hearing if they will get legal refugee status.



So you can see Democrats supporting some restrictions on refugees, while generally being more welcoming than Republicans.






share|improve this answer





















  • 3





    Note: Donald Trump, and perhaps some other ideologically-aligned conservatives, have claimed that Mexico is a country of rapists and criminals. This is inflammatory. However, by his own words, Trump is essentially saying that Mexico is NOT a safe harbor for refugees to settle. This is a great reason why Trump and his associates can't make the argument that Mexico could have been a first safe harbor for refugees. He can't make that argument without first walking back all of his previous attacks on the safety and crime factor of Mexico.

    – John
    Feb 18 at 19:21
















3














The 2016 Democratic platform says




The world is experiencing a major refugee crisis with more than 60 million people displaced as a result of conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe. We support President Obama’s call for an international summit to address this crisis so that every country assumes its responsibility to meet this humanitarian challenge. While Donald Trump proposes banning Muslim refugees, we will look for ways to help innocent people who are fleeing persecution while ensuring rigorous screening and vetting.




They also write




Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect [...]




Democrats with some Republicans passed the Refugee Relief Act of 1953 in reaction to the end of WWII and the start of the Cold War.
They did agree with most civilized nations that people who faced genuine political persecution deserved political asylum, and that there should be individual hearings in a legal process.



Asylum should happen in the first safe harbor after leaving the place of persecution. There is no right for the refugee to pick their destination. The problem with that is that most wealthy nations, those most able to cope with refugees, have declared their immediate neighbours as "safe" and tried to prevent asylum claims by other ways -- migrants have to get in illegally to get a hearing if they will get legal refugee status.



So you can see Democrats supporting some restrictions on refugees, while generally being more welcoming than Republicans.






share|improve this answer





















  • 3





    Note: Donald Trump, and perhaps some other ideologically-aligned conservatives, have claimed that Mexico is a country of rapists and criminals. This is inflammatory. However, by his own words, Trump is essentially saying that Mexico is NOT a safe harbor for refugees to settle. This is a great reason why Trump and his associates can't make the argument that Mexico could have been a first safe harbor for refugees. He can't make that argument without first walking back all of his previous attacks on the safety and crime factor of Mexico.

    – John
    Feb 18 at 19:21














3












3








3







The 2016 Democratic platform says




The world is experiencing a major refugee crisis with more than 60 million people displaced as a result of conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe. We support President Obama’s call for an international summit to address this crisis so that every country assumes its responsibility to meet this humanitarian challenge. While Donald Trump proposes banning Muslim refugees, we will look for ways to help innocent people who are fleeing persecution while ensuring rigorous screening and vetting.




They also write




Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect [...]




Democrats with some Republicans passed the Refugee Relief Act of 1953 in reaction to the end of WWII and the start of the Cold War.
They did agree with most civilized nations that people who faced genuine political persecution deserved political asylum, and that there should be individual hearings in a legal process.



Asylum should happen in the first safe harbor after leaving the place of persecution. There is no right for the refugee to pick their destination. The problem with that is that most wealthy nations, those most able to cope with refugees, have declared their immediate neighbours as "safe" and tried to prevent asylum claims by other ways -- migrants have to get in illegally to get a hearing if they will get legal refugee status.



So you can see Democrats supporting some restrictions on refugees, while generally being more welcoming than Republicans.






share|improve this answer















The 2016 Democratic platform says




The world is experiencing a major refugee crisis with more than 60 million people displaced as a result of conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe. We support President Obama’s call for an international summit to address this crisis so that every country assumes its responsibility to meet this humanitarian challenge. While Donald Trump proposes banning Muslim refugees, we will look for ways to help innocent people who are fleeing persecution while ensuring rigorous screening and vetting.




They also write




Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect [...]




Democrats with some Republicans passed the Refugee Relief Act of 1953 in reaction to the end of WWII and the start of the Cold War.
They did agree with most civilized nations that people who faced genuine political persecution deserved political asylum, and that there should be individual hearings in a legal process.



Asylum should happen in the first safe harbor after leaving the place of persecution. There is no right for the refugee to pick their destination. The problem with that is that most wealthy nations, those most able to cope with refugees, have declared their immediate neighbours as "safe" and tried to prevent asylum claims by other ways -- migrants have to get in illegally to get a hearing if they will get legal refugee status.



So you can see Democrats supporting some restrictions on refugees, while generally being more welcoming than Republicans.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Feb 17 at 13:28

























answered Feb 16 at 6:50









o.m.o.m.

11.4k22447




11.4k22447








  • 3





    Note: Donald Trump, and perhaps some other ideologically-aligned conservatives, have claimed that Mexico is a country of rapists and criminals. This is inflammatory. However, by his own words, Trump is essentially saying that Mexico is NOT a safe harbor for refugees to settle. This is a great reason why Trump and his associates can't make the argument that Mexico could have been a first safe harbor for refugees. He can't make that argument without first walking back all of his previous attacks on the safety and crime factor of Mexico.

    – John
    Feb 18 at 19:21














  • 3





    Note: Donald Trump, and perhaps some other ideologically-aligned conservatives, have claimed that Mexico is a country of rapists and criminals. This is inflammatory. However, by his own words, Trump is essentially saying that Mexico is NOT a safe harbor for refugees to settle. This is a great reason why Trump and his associates can't make the argument that Mexico could have been a first safe harbor for refugees. He can't make that argument without first walking back all of his previous attacks on the safety and crime factor of Mexico.

    – John
    Feb 18 at 19:21








3




3





Note: Donald Trump, and perhaps some other ideologically-aligned conservatives, have claimed that Mexico is a country of rapists and criminals. This is inflammatory. However, by his own words, Trump is essentially saying that Mexico is NOT a safe harbor for refugees to settle. This is a great reason why Trump and his associates can't make the argument that Mexico could have been a first safe harbor for refugees. He can't make that argument without first walking back all of his previous attacks on the safety and crime factor of Mexico.

– John
Feb 18 at 19:21





Note: Donald Trump, and perhaps some other ideologically-aligned conservatives, have claimed that Mexico is a country of rapists and criminals. This is inflammatory. However, by his own words, Trump is essentially saying that Mexico is NOT a safe harbor for refugees to settle. This is a great reason why Trump and his associates can't make the argument that Mexico could have been a first safe harbor for refugees. He can't make that argument without first walking back all of his previous attacks on the safety and crime factor of Mexico.

– John
Feb 18 at 19:21


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38815%2fwhat-do-democrats-mean-when-they-call-a-wall-or-barrier-immoral%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Human spaceflight

Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

張江高科駅