Proposed 700-mile wall on the U.S.-Mexico border & the Berlin Wall

[The_Professor]

10/18/2006
Gorbachev compares proposed U.S. border wall to Berlin Wall 
Bob Campbell
Staff Writer
Midland Reporter-Telegram 

Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev compared the United States' proposed 700-mile wall on the U.S.-Mexico border to the Berlin Wall during a Tuesday visit to Midland.

Addressing a Tuesday news conference at UTPB's Center for Energy and Economic Diversification, the JBS Public Leadership Institute Distinguished Lecture Series speaker was by turns serious and flippant prior to a reception with more than 100 people.

"You remember President Reagan standing in Berlin and saying, 'This wall should be torn down,'" said the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize winner. "Now the United States seems to be building almost the Wall of China between itself and this other nation with which it has been associated for many decades and has had cooperation and interaction with.

"I think what is really needed are ideas and proposals about how to improve that cooperation and work out all of those issues regarding immigration flows. I don't think the U.S. is so weak and so much lacks confidence as not to be able to find a different solution.

"Maybe if global warming results in melting the ice in Greenland, there will be an island where those who would like to separate themselves from the rest of the world could live," he quipped. "But then of course we'll have to work this out with Denmark."

Gorbachev, 75, who lives in Moscow, said the Oct. 7 assassination of journalist Anna Politkovskaya bodes poorly for the advent of democracy in the Russian Federation. Noting she worked for a newspaper in which he is part owner, Novaya Gazeta, he said her unsolved shooting death in the apartment building where she lived was related to her work.

"I have known Anna for a long time," he said. "She was an excellent reporter and a wonderful woman -- very sensitive and responsive to whatever was happening in the country. Her main subjects were Chechnya and corruption.

"We all believe this murder was related to her work as a journalist. Not only did they kill Anna, but by doing so they dealt a heavy blow to democracy in our country. Not only her colleagues but the Russian public generally condemned this very strongly and that's why thousands of people came to her funeral."

Referring to the unsolved slayings of a dozen other Russian journalists in the past six years, Gorvachev said, "We don't know what the results of the investigation will be because in some similar cases, they were not able to find the murderers and those who supported the killings.

"President Putin has charged the prosecutor general to be in control of this investigation and I and the other shareholders have decided our investigative reporters will do their own investigation parallel to the official investigation.

"This tragedy shows our growth to freedom and democracy is a difficult road, but we need to go down that road to establish freedom and democracy as a permanent factor in Russian society."

Gorbachev criticized the U.S. and the current Bush administration for what he said is a lack of support. Comparing current conditions to those before the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, he said, "The political and social situation is difficult and the standard of living is worse for many people.

"As for economic, political and religious freedoms, we can say our country has pulled itself out of the past and is a free country. Unfortunately, there are some in the world who would not want Russia to move rapidly and stand on its feet and be a strong country, including quite a few people in this country and the administration.

"But this is something that is up to us and I'm sure we will move rapidly."

Gorbachev expressed concern with North Korea's Oct. 9 underground nuclear test but said the six-party diplomatic group formed in 2003 by the U.S., China, Japan, Russian Federation and North and South Korea should be able to address the situation. "I think that definitely they are behaving badly," he said.

"Now North Korea is saying it is ready to conduct another nuclear test, but the other five members have condemned those threats and there is some degree of unity."

Before Gorbachev's appearance to 5,000 spectators at the Chaparral Center at Midland College, the news conference and reception were secured by officers of the UTPB and city of Midland police departments and officers of the Texas Comptroller's Criminal Investigation Division.

Gorvachev's translator, Pavel Palazhchenko, asked upon leaving CEED if local newspapers would be available to read early this morning, when Gorbachev and his group would leave Midland after staying with Dr. Tulsi Singh.

http://www.mywesttexas.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=2288&dept_id=475626&newsid=17342695

[Plane]

That is very interesting.

I hope that the Russians can forge a success out of their situation , they have a lot of potential.


The American era that the present Russian situation reminds me of is the 20's.

[BT]

Gorby has it exactly wrong.

When the Soviets and the East Germans built the Berlin Wall it was to keep people in. The Chinese and now the US are building a wall to keep people out.

[Universe Prince]

Gorbachev, 75, who lives in Moscow, said the Oct. 7 assassination of journalist Anna Politkovskaya bodes poorly for the advent of democracy in the Russian Federation. Noting she worked for a newspaper in which he is part owner, Novaya Gazeta, he said her unsolved shooting death in the apartment building where she lived was related to her work.

Cathy Young has an article about Anna Politkovskaya's death at Reason Online.

[Universe Prince]

When the Soviets and the East Germans built the Berlin Wall it was to keep people in. The Chinese and now the US are building a wall to keep people out.

The Great Wall of China didn't work. And the Berlin Wall didn't work all that well either. Both were built due to fear. The American wall will be the same. If it is built, it will be built due to fear, and it won't stop people from coming in. And we will end up hurting ourselves. We don't need a wall or a fence of hundreds of miles of armed guards. We need less fear, less childishly fearful reactions. We need our leaders and talking heads to stop blaming other people for the problems we have made within our own society, to put on their big girl panties, and to act like adults.

[BT]

The Great Wall of China didn't work. And the Berlin Wall didn't work all that well either. Both were built due to fear. The American wall will be the same. If it is built, it will be built due to fear, and it won't stop people from coming in. And we will end up hurting ourselves. We don't need a wall or a fence of hundreds of miles of armed guards. We need less fear, less childishly fearful reactions. We need our leaders and talking heads to stop blaming other people for the problems we have made within our own society, to put on their big girl panties, and to act like adults.

That may be as it is. But it had little to do with my point.

[Universe Prince]

But it had little to do with my point.

So?

[BT]

And the Berlin Wall didn't work all that well either. Both were built due to fear.

If the Berlin Wall was built to keep people in, what fear drove them to do that?

And how does that relate to the US Wall, which as previously stated,  is purposed with keeping people out, or at the minimum making it more difficult to get in?

[Plane]

The Great Wall of China didn't work. And the Berlin Wall didn't work all that well either.

[][][][][][][][][][][]


Those walls did indeed work, for centurys the Great wall of China made getting into China without paying your tarriff difficult , not impossible of course , but difficult is worth doing.

Hadrians wall was built to keep some ancestors of mine out of the Romans hair it worked pretty well.

There is no absolute solution of any discription but a partial solution can pay for its trouble.

[Universe Prince]

If the Berlin Wall was built to keep people in, what fear drove them to do that?

Before the Berlin Wall went up, thousands of people were immigrating from East Berlin to West Berlin. It was a massive hemorrhaging of workers that was was not only an embarrassment for the socialists, but was going to ruin East Berlin and even East Germany economically. The fear that prompted the building of the Berlin Wall was a fear of societal collapse and a fear that the immigration would become symbolic of the relationship between the socialist East and the capitalist West. Of course, the Berlin Wall then became the symbol of the relationship between the socialist East and the capitalist West.

And how does that relate to the US Wall, which as previously stated,  is purposed with keeping people out, or at the minimum making it more difficult to get in?

I should think that would be obvious, what with all the hoopla about the horrors of Mexican immigrants. Excuse me, illegal Mexican immigrants. We supposedly have people coming here and taking jobs away from Americans, taking advantage of the "social safety net" and—GASP—speaking Spanish without learning much English. (Cue "Dun dun DUN!" sound effect here.) And then, of course, there are the terrorists who are sneaking across our "porous" borders with such ease that the next "nine-eleven" is surely soon to come. The reasons for building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border are nothing but fear. Fear of societal collapse at the very least. And I doubt I need to tell you that some people view the border situation as symbolic of America's attitude toward the "war on terror", the threat of immanent danger stares us in the face, and we are unwilling to do what it takes to stop it. I haven't heard politicians saying that directly, but the ones who want a wall or a fence or whatever to close our borders are bringing up the threat of terrorists sneaking in to the country.

The problem with socialist East Germany (and a problem with socialism in general) is that it required a rigid social structure to sustain itself. With people leaving in droves, they could not maintain their rigid social structure. Here in America, we have instituted socialist programs that are now threatened, so we are told, by people coming here in droves and altering our social structure by their very presence. So one wall was intended to keep people in, and one wall would be intended to keep people out, but the actual goal is really the same. The goal is to protect structure of society by severely restricting immigration. This seems glaringly obvious to me, and I am surprised that you wouldn't see it.

[Universe Prince]

Those walls did indeed work, for centurys the Great wall of China made getting into China without paying your tarriff difficult , not impossible of course , but difficult is worth doing.

If the Great Wall of China had been built to enforce tariffs, you might have a point. But it was built to keep out invading armies. It failed.

Hadrians wall was built to keep some ancestors of mine out of the Romans hair it worked pretty well.

Hadrian's Wall worked as a massive military garrison along the border of the Roman Empire on the island of Great Britain. Do you think we need a military garrison of 10,000 troops or more along our southern border?

[BT]

The goal is to protect structure of society by severely restricting immigration. This seems glaringly obvious to me, and I am surprised that you wouldn't see it.

What in the world is wrong with setting limitations on legal immigiration?  And what is wrong with target hardening against illegal immigration. You seem to dismiss it as a fear reaction, but it seems to me that if you have laws they should be enforced. Else why have them.  A wall is no more than low tech automation, replacing human labor with a cost saving device. Certainly as a libertarian, you aren't demanding job protection for border guards. 

[Universe Prince]

What in the world is wrong with setting limitations on legal immigiration?

Maybe nothing at all, but first I want to know why we need limitations on legal immigration. Why do we need to stand in the way of people who happen to come from another country buying houses or finding work here? What do we gain by standing in the way of people trying to create a better life for their families? Nothing that I can see. Maybe you want to worry about criminals. Okay, we have laws and law enforcement to deal with people who commit crimes like theft and murder. And I have nothing against extraditing wanted criminals from another country. But why do we need to make criminals of people coming here to make a living and otherwise be law-abiding citizens? What do we gain from this? Nothing. Not a damn thing. But we do have a mess of bureaucracy and tax-dollar spending to try to deal with something that should not even be an issue. And it would not be an issue, except for fear, fear of change, fear of people who are not like us. So please, tell me why we need limitation on legal immigration.

And what is wrong with target hardening against illegal immigration. You seem to dismiss it as a fear reaction, but it seems to me that if you have laws they should be enforced. Else why have them.

Laws should be enforced, why else have them? I was not aware laws existed for the sake of having laws enforced. But that probably isn't what you meant. My problem with cracking down on illegal immigration is we shouldn't have immigration laws so difficult to navigate that people find risking death to get here a preferable option. To me, that right there, people preferring to risk death by making their way through desert to get here rather than to make their way through our laws, that says to me there is something seriously wrong with our immigration laws. You want immigration laws to control the flow of people into this country? Fine, but would it be so wrong to make them less difficult? People are dying, dying, for a chance to come here and make some money so they and their children can live better lives, and I know of no reason why we should be trying to stop them. We should not be trying to make getting here more difficult. We should be trying to make it easier for people to come here legally so that they can benefit from opportunities here.

Entering America from Mexico to work shouldn't be any harder than living in one town or state and commuting to work in another town or state. Coming here from Mexico to live shouldn't be any harder than moving from one state to another. Or do you perhaps think that every state in the Union should have walls around their borders so they can control who comes and goes? Perhaps every city should have check points to check the identification of everyone who enters and leaves? I mean, we wouldn't want those crazy Free Staters from New Hampshire ruining the culture of Vermont, right? And we wouldn't want those folks from San Diego taking jobs away from natives of Los Angeles, now would we? And God forbid them damn yankees come down and start ruining New Orleans.

A wall is no more than low tech automation, replacing human labor with a cost saving device. Certainly as a libertarian, you aren't demanding job protection for border guards. 

Heh. You made me laugh with that one.

Putting up a wall on the border is hardly going to eliminate or even reduce the need for man power. The wall will only be successful insofar as it is monitored to make sure people are not climbing over or digging under or otherwise finding a way to get past it. And do you really think that people who are already willing to risk jail or death to get here are going to give up because America built a wall?

And no, as a libertarian, I am not demanding job protection for border guards. As a libertarian, I am suggesting that what we need in this situation (as in pretty nearly all situations where the government sticks its fat nose) is for the government to stop getting in the way of life and of humans who are not actually doing anything wrong. The only reason some immigrants being here is wrong is because we have immigration laws that they violated to get here, not because the immigrants being here is by itself any sort of violation of anyone else's rights. Say what you will about enforcing the law or else why have the law, but the law isn't always right. And when the law is wrong, it should be repealed not enforced.

[_JS]

What in the world is wrong with setting limitations on legal immigiration?  And what is wrong with target hardening against illegal immigration. You seem to dismiss it as a fear reaction, but it seems to me that if you have laws they should be enforced. Else why have them.

That is not the reason given by your party. The political advertisements paid and produced by the Republican party here in Tennessee mention security against threats and Congresswoman Blackburn has specifically linked it to 9/11 and the "war on terrorism." I'd say UP's point about fear is very much accurate.

Moreover there is a strong element of racial fear in many of the discussions on illegal immigration. Just the word "illegals" is used to conjure images of threatening dark-skinned Mexicans who are often linked to criminal activity. Not many politicians (from either party) use the term for the 40% of illegal immigrants who are students that have overstayed their visas, do they?

Hadrians wall was built to keep some ancestors of mine out of the Romans hair it worked pretty well.

Hadrians wall became a huge joke because the Romans had to hire Celt farmers to defend the wall from...well, Celt farmers. In fact, I could see the very same thing happening in the United States. We already use the military as an incentive. We'll probably man our nasty wall with poor Mexicans and offer them citizenship in return!

[BT]

I don't see where a GOP Congressman from TN speaks for me. I don't even see where GWBush speaks for me. The question was simple. If the laws against illegal immigration are on the books they should be enforced. One way to enforce them is by making it harder to enter the country.

Changing the requirements for legal immigration is a completely different matter. And there is a process to do that. Its called legislation or in some cases judicial review.

Personally i am ambivalent about the wall. I am certainly open to other enforcement/ target hardening methods. I think Gorby's representation of the wall was ass backwards, and i certainly think representing the wall as a fear response is wrong too. If we were so afraid of immigrants we wouldn't have the legal kind either.