It has been a perennial dream of liberal politicians to get rid of borders and the nation-state's confinements, thus eradicating any differences between citizens and foreigners, be they illegal or legal immigrants. However, any society attempting to obliterate these differences is bound to perish in the long run. I have given a comprehensive account of what I termed the neo-cosmopolitan idea in my blog-essay of August 9, 2010, in the wake of the Arizona Immigration Law's rejection by a federal judge.
I have warned about this particular utopian phantasm that claims the individual human being, and not the (nation-) state, to be the protagonist in interstate and international relations. As I made clear, while the traditional position sees the (nation-) state as the moral actor in political affairs through which individual rights can be brought to bear alone, the neo-cosmopolitan position stipulates a radical reduction of state-sovereignty. It promotes the idea of a global social contract. Hence, the attempt to put any immigrant on level par with a citizen, a person holding legal citizenship, granting them equal rights in employment, voting, social support, etc.
So, yes, Mr. Obama's (most likely unconstitutional) executive orders are highly unreasonable and will severely damage this nation's social fabric. It would be preposterous to confirm a person into the highest office of law enforcement of the land after claiming in a congressional hearing that illegal immigrants have the same right to employment as US citizens. It doesn't play any role whether the job aspirant is a man or a woman, black or white, Republican or Democrat. By whatever bizarre ideological confusion, a person negates one of the most profound statecraft criteria, she deserves exclusion from holding such office.
While the federal prosecutor from Brooklyn, N.Y., Loretta Lynch might be, as Mr. Obama claimed, a "tough, fair, and independent attorney," she seems to be unfit for the office of Attorney General due to her unsound political philosophy.
I have warned about this particular utopian phantasm that claims the individual human being, and not the (nation-) state, to be the protagonist in interstate and international relations. As I made clear, while the traditional position sees the (nation-) state as the moral actor in political affairs through which individual rights can be brought to bear alone, the neo-cosmopolitan position stipulates a radical reduction of state-sovereignty. It promotes the idea of a global social contract. Hence, the attempt to put any immigrant on level par with a citizen, a person holding legal citizenship, granting them equal rights in employment, voting, social support, etc.
So, yes, Mr. Obama's (most likely unconstitutional) executive orders are highly unreasonable and will severely damage this nation's social fabric. It would be preposterous to confirm a person into the highest office of law enforcement of the land after claiming in a congressional hearing that illegal immigrants have the same right to employment as US citizens. It doesn't play any role whether the job aspirant is a man or a woman, black or white, Republican or Democrat. By whatever bizarre ideological confusion, a person negates one of the most profound statecraft criteria, she deserves exclusion from holding such office.
While the federal prosecutor from Brooklyn, N.Y., Loretta Lynch might be, as Mr. Obama claimed, a "tough, fair, and independent attorney," she seems to be unfit for the office of Attorney General due to her unsound political philosophy.
