So the basic (and most charitable) conservative argument for the immigration ban is:
- It is meant to protect the American people from terrorism, and the protection of the American people is the primary goal of the American people.
- Discrimination based on religion is wrong, and this executive order does not mention religion, but determined the countries to ban by the level of danger they pose, which was determined by Obama.
- We care about the people being denied entry and sympathize with them, but this is only temporary, and it will be lifted when we can be more thorough in finding terrorists, and when we can ensure that, the good people are welcome in.
Along with these arguments are these perspectives of the Liberal movement regarding this executive order.
- Those against this executive order don’t think terrorism is a problem, which demonstrates naiveté.
- Obama did the same thing, and the liberal community didn’t care, which demonstrates hypocrisy.
One thing that needs to be cleared up first and foremost, the general consensus of those against this executive order (liberals, if you will) do not think terrorism is a negligible issue, nor do they think that risking terrorist attacks on American soil is well worth letting people, who allegedly hate Americans, into the country so they can be the ones who are safe, NOR do the vast majority of them think the solution is to just block traffic and break things. If conservatives don’t want to be caricatured as nazis, then don’t caricature liberals as reckless cry babies.
What this comes down to is whether or not this executive order is an effective (enough) way to prevent attacks of terror, and that the repercussions of this order is worth the benefit. Those against it do not believe it is. Here are the reasons why:
- Since 9/11, there have not been any state-side attacks from any radicalized muslims from the countries listed in the executive order. Now to be fair, that some attacks have been committed by people whose parents were refugees or immigrants from listed countries. It is important to consider that the majority of these parents were not radicalized. An important detail surrounding this is that the most deadly attacks in America were Pulse Nightclub attack and San Bernardino, and none of the attackers involved, nor their parents, were from the countries listed in the immigrant ban.
- While numbers vary, the general consensus of terror attacks since 9/11 is around 10, with around 100 terror related deaths since 9/11. Of course, that isn’t good, but it is actually remarkably low considering that there were over 15,000 murders just in 2015. If this executive order was made during 9/11 or San Bernardino, it would not have prevented those events from happening. An interesting anecdote to this is how there is a comparable number of high-profile killings in America committed by American military veterans.
- The necessity of the executive order suggests that there is a significant weakness in our current vetting process for immigrants and refugees. I don’t know that many people would call our current vetting process flawless, but it is very rigorous and takes years. I can’t cite these interviews, but I heard several radio interviews with immigrants, and those who are vetting the immigrants, stating that the process can potentially take more than a year, and interviews often leave the immigrants in tears with how intense they are. There are many accounts of people and families who have been going through this process for the last couple of years and now, at the point of reaching the final point, are now being denied entry in airports. Again, the low number of actual terror attacks by refugees in America does say something positive about our current vetting process. And please, no one is indifferent towards the terror attacks that have occurred, but we need to have a better point of reference.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/29/us/refugee-vetting-process.html
Next issue: is this discrimination based on religion?
- So let’s just all admit that it is true that the executive order does not mention Islam, and is not explicitly against muslims, and that it is true that it makes no mention of countries with the largest population of Muslims.
- Let’s also admit that barring Muslims from America was a pillar of Donald Trump’s rhetoric during the election. He was very flippant, and used the words “complete and total shut down of muslims entering the United States”. So it is very difficult for me to accept any thought that the Trump administration is above discriminating against people based on their religion, as well as any thought that he has no intentions or goals to create a muslim ban.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sz0KY-3PbQ (watch 44 seconds to 1 minute point)
- Also, watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sz0KY-3PbQ (from 3:10 – 3:30)It is pretty suggestive that the conception of this executive order started as a muslim ban and asked for a team to find a way to do it legally, as banning people based on their religion is not legal.
This comments on the temporary nature of the ban as well. It may be temporary, but looking at the statements and intentions of Donald Trump, it’s hard to anticipate that at the end of this ban is where this all will end. Furthermore, I’ve heard that Syrian refugees are banned indefinitely.
Lastly, I want to refute the accusations of those standing against this executive order are hypocritical for not reacting to Obama’s orders on immigration. Obama’s order after 9/11 was significantly more narrow. He banned people coming to America under refugee status only for a much shorter period of time from Iraq only. He then put a temporary ban on people from entering united states from the other several countries under the Visa Waiver Program, which was a program that allowed people to enter without any visa at all. Trump’s ban is much more broad, banning people who actually have obtained visas for all sorts of reasons. Most disturbingly, this order has taken a wishy-washy stance that Green Card holders will still undergo scrutiny on a case-by-case basis (unclear language like that can be easier exploited).
Now, why are people so angry about this? There are two main reasons. First, most (probably all) of these countries that have been banned are countries occupied by extremist groups, and/or are in serious civil war. Banning refugees and immigrants from these countries enables significant suffering for them. As previously mentioned, many people have been going through the very tedious process of immigrating here (many coming with the hope of reuniting with their families) and are now being detained and sent back to the war-torn countries they have been trying to escape. If America is going to do this demands a very good purpose. It does not seem that there is a very good reason to make this order.
The next reason, is probably the most stirring for those who are against this executive order. In history, a common maneuver for dubious politicians to gain favor with the people is to find a scapegoat. Now, for Donald Trump to somewhat needlessly make an executive order like this, and to go on about muslims the way he did during the election, could suggest two things. He’s out of touch with the reality of things, or, he is using fear of terrorism to scapegoat muslims, and to get Americans to rally with him against them. Now, we have to admit that there is some conjecture involved here, but there is moderate reason to believe it is the latter. My hope is that I wouldn’t have to explain why him doing that is totally dangerous and frightening. One thing I can say for sure, which might give you some idea, is that whether Trump is trying scapegoat muslims or not, hate crimes against muslims and their mosques in America are at a record-breaking high. This doesn’t even mention the casual social discrimination, bullying, and harassment muslims face on the streets.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/10/living/mosques-attack-study-2015/
I am a Christian and I have deep issues with the theology of Islam, but discrimination is immoral. Even indirect and unintentional causes for discrimination is immoral. There are 3.3 million Muslims in America, and there is such a small percentage of them that sympathize with extremism. I don’t want the rest of them to feel hated or feared in the country that many of them were even born in.
Furthermore, we aren’t thinking about the impact this sort of thing is making on the extremist propaganda being used to recruit for their groups. The basis of their rhetoric is that the west is at war with Islam and oppressing them, and is stirring up more extremists because the west is more or less proving them to be right.
I encourage anyone who thinks that this executive order, and the other things Trump says and does in response to terrorism, is helpful and necessary, to make your case and I will hear you out.
Jacob Sleezer 