Is Trumps Boarder Wall Antithetical To Jedi Doctrine?
Sorry for the repeat post. Still new to this forum
(I have, with an intent to see your side - looked through the doctrine. I can not see that a wall between two lawfully governed nations is any more against our doctrine than the colorbond fence that keeps my dogs in the yard....)
If you leave the dog outside in your car or even you yard without food or water in sweltering heat this is typically seen as animal abuse.
Well, obviously a WALL isn't against the doctrine.
If you don't live in the US, there are a lot of underlying elements that you probably aren't aware of.
It isn't JUST the wall, there is a lot of bigotry and racial tension behind the whole idea.
That's what it is about more than anything.
Not to mention our current Administration's habit of forcibly separating children from their parents and putting these kids in internment camps with inhumane living conditions.
This whole wall thing is an expression of power and bigotry, it has no real practical purpose.
That's why it is contradictory to our doctrine because it is literally all about discrimination, fear, prejudice, and it all stems from ignorance and a lack of compassion.
(and "lawfully governed" is a bit of a stretch, both nations have corrupt governments)
***CONTENT WARNING***:Below is posted word for word excerpts of the Jedi Doctrine. If you are sensitive to such views and perspectives as those promoted by this church, please avert your eyes while scrolling down to the next post***
I agree with everything stated above. The point which specifically stands out as running counter to Jedi doctrine is
" ...In the sanctity of the human person. We oppose the use of torture and cruel or unusual punishment, including the death penalty....
In a society that does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and national origin...
In the importance of freedom of conscience and self-determination within religious, political and other structures..."
It seems uncontroversial to state that the point of building a physical barrier to prevent travelers from Mexico, Central and South America from entering North America is, by definition, preventing them from the freedom of self determination on the basis of national origin and ethnicity.
Another point which is perhaps not know to many who casually consider this subject from the callus detached technical perspective which attempts to view the wall purely as a piece of technology which either does or does not succeed in its intended purpose of preventing unlawful immigration, is the morality rate of those who attempt to cross.
here is an excerpt from the infallible all knowing Wikipedia
" The group Border Angels estimates that since 1994, about 10,000 people have died in their attempt to cross border. According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 7,216 people have died crossing the U.S–Mexico border between 1998 and 2017. In 2005, more than 500 died across the entire U.S.–Mexico border. The number of yearly border crossing deaths doubled from 1995 to 2005, before declining. The statistics reflect only known deaths and do not include those who have never been found. "
People are dying in the desert from this wall and policy. It is a form of cruel and unusual punishment causing death as a result of national origin.
Whatever the real numbers are, one thing remains true; these deaths were an avoidable and direct consequence of boarder policy. To construct technology which causes death from dehydration, hypothermia and drowning seems to be, again, directly in conflict with aspects of the doctrine.
Adder wrote: You have a duty if care as its owner.... but the US or any nation does not have the capacity nor assigned duty of care over all humans on the planet! It quite literally what a nation is, the boundary between citizens and non citizens. A nation has responsibilities to its citizens far far in excess of those to non-citizens. Your beef might better be with the Mexican government (if I read your meaning correctly).
An astute point indeed Adder. The unstated premise here is that the U.S has little or no responsibilities to ensure the well-being of non-citizens while they remain outside its boarders. However, does it then follow that once detected or caught those who attempt to exist within the boarders of the nation illegally are to be subject to any form of abuse and cruelty which the "host" nation would not subject its own citizens to?
In other words, is a nation which claims to have values similar to the Jedi doctrine of nondiscrimination and protection from cruel and unusual punishment suddenly removed from their moral obligations when interacting with non citizens? If a Jedi claims to live according to the doctrines values still in line with those values if they only express them only towards fellow members but not towards people of other religious practices? Of course not.
Once crossing the border of course they have a duty of care... but its proportional to the circumstance and not equivilant to a citizen, in that the duty is to citizens first and as such the broader immigration policy serves the national interests.
One of the more successful campaigns to deter people from crossing the border was an awareness Campaign launched by a previous administration (I can’t remember if it was under Bush or Obama) that explained the dangers of traveling with Coyotes and through Cartel territory. It went on further to explain that getting into the US didn’t guarantee citizenship. Ever since that campaign took off, we’ve seen a decrease in people trying to jump the border (barring unusual situations like the huge march of refugees from below the Mexican border).
You can’t blame the wall for things that occur long before the persons get to it.
As for their self-determination:
If we’re talking about international law, then perhaps it’s pertinent to give a working understanding of what that means:
“The UN Charter clarifies two meanings of the term self-determination. First, a state is said to have the right of self-determination in the sense of having the right to choose freely its political, economic, social, and cultural systems. Second, the right to self-determination is defined as the right of a people to constitute itself in a state or otherwise freely determine the form of its association with an existing state.” (Britannica)
^ “The People” isn’t doesn’t account for a singular individual, it’s a collective. In this instance, the citizens of the US collectively elect officials that they want to run the country. If the collective chooses a candidate that is pro-wall then the collective has self-determined they want a wall. Thus, a Jedi can absolutely be pro-borders and pro-self-determination.
If we’re talking about an individual level of self-determination, they can freely choose to support or not support what they want- it doesn’t mean that they can impose those things upon others whom equally have individual self-determination.
Whether we want to admit it or not, humans are historically a territorial species. We got together in tribes and do not like it when people encroach upon our territory without permission. Wars got started over it. To make a sweeping statement that someone is stripping away a person’s self-determination because a country denies them entry is ignoring the equal right of that country’s people to their own self-determination.
You can argue that there is a distinct lack of compassion written into immigration laws, but the self-determination argument falls flat on its face.
CaesarEJW wrote: Americans who are racist almost always try to disguise their bigotry as practicality, because it is something to be ashamed of.
Racism has a clear negative connotation, most people will not admit to being racist, even if they really are (unless they are some kind of edgelord).
I'm from the Midwest, and I live in the Midwest (from Kansas, currently reside in Missouri), so I have seen this all firsthand.
The Midwest in America is one of the most conservative parts of the country.
(for some reason, racial prejudice seems to coincide with political conservatism).
And yes, while your perspective on this subject may be limited, this subject can still be broken down to its base principles.
Which would be that of an action motivated by bigotry, disguised as practicality, and used purely to gain political momentum.
At the core of this whole issue is the simple fact that Trump's supporters like the Wall idea, so he will use that to get more votes.
That is all this comes down to really.
Love this post! It's so true. Sadly, not only do they not want to admit it (I live in the midwest too) but they keep pretending that nobody can tell it's going on and so whenever someone gets exposed they act shocked in public but then go back to making racist jokes when attention dies down. Sadly, children are absorbing it and making assumptions based on race only because of things they hear their parents saying.
EVEN THOUGH you are right and this is true... the reason the disguise works is because there is a real fear of America not being "white" anymore, BECAUSE they actually DO see an advantage to being white that they don't want to lose, and because they understand that many of them aren't educated and will have to compete for blue collar jobs. How much depends on how much legal status is given but the reality is that a lot of white people sub contract to Mexicans to do construction jobs rather than hiring other, more expensive, whites. Even though there is an advantage its definitely a golden ticket and people will choose profits first. So in a sense they are afraid of capitalism forcing them into socio-economic extinction.
These fears do need to be addressed as they give oxygen to the racist agenda. We even have people among us who support the agenda, attempting to distance themselves from the racist motives of those who also (clearly) support the same agenda for racist reasons. So for those who support Trump but honestly can say they're not at all racist, I'd like to reason how we can advocate for your interests in a way that doesn't hurt minority groups who are just fighting for survival.
I have met a number of Caucasians recently, who I believe have been truly honest about the subject of race and ethnicity. I've met a number of white women who have brown and black children and I do feel like society is on the right track. We're not there yet, but there's hope.
When you look into the innocent eyes of a child, especially one who is in your circle of family or close friends... its hard to argue against the race of that child. And racists are now having to look into the eyes of black and brown grand children. And once they get over themselves they realize that they can fall in love with that baby.
And with that love comes care and concern. Suddenly, the obstacles in that baby's way need to either be removed or we need to help that baby get over them. Eventually, every family will have diversity in it and every family will have beautiful big-eyed wee baby yoda like children of different colors and at that moment we'll all look back and think how stupid it was that we ever thought people with different skin colors were any different from us.
That being said political views a side and what I stated . The people is at fault for injuring or worse case killing themselves not the government , not the wall , and certainly not you or I . So is the wall antithetical to the Jedi doctrine no , nor is anyone who supports/ hates it .
I like this quote .
" In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
- Theodore Roosevelt
=_= Malicious (+_+)