Adverse Possession

[Martin Hash]

U.S. Property Law has always recognized Adverse Possession: you must forcibly remove people you think are on your land illegally or it becomes theirs. If you allow illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. indefinitely then they become owners. People who are on the same land are in the same tribe because the things that happen to that land happen to everyone on it. It doesn't get more fundamental then that.

Immigration, legal or not, is how populations act. You can accept it as fact and look for solutions or you can fight the inevitable with rancor and incivility towards others. Persecution is an unsavory option. Pragmatism suggests that democracy is for all - not just for the ones who got here first. Conservatives point at the law as their justification for denial of citizenship, and Conservatives believe in punishment for breaking the law. But the law is created by fallible people so it is not always correct. In fact, juries will nullify the law when they think it oversteps: Jack Kevorkian, “Dr. Death,” for example, went 4 for 5 on acquittals because the juries wouldn't support the law. Civil rights would never have happened without public disavowal of the law. Immigration needs other solutions than are available in the law.

I agree that many Democrats are acting with self-serving cynicism on illegal immigration because it empowers their Party but they are still on the correct side of the issue, whereas Conservatives are resentful of newcomers who receive the same benefits as them without recognizing their superior status. Conservatives often point out that they were here first which makes them special. Esprit de corps, exceptionalism, and elitism are defining elements of Conservatism. Idolizing military service is an example of the Conservative ethos of elitism. These feelings go hand-in-glove with a Conservative's acceptance of America's nouveau aristocracy. Suffrage for illegal immigrants threatens all that.