While a few were indeed Catholic, coming from Punjab, clearly many weren’t

I have lost count at many stories I have seen posted in the news part of this website about illegal immigrants from India that come from the Punjab of all places. I just can't believe at much people from Punjab will do to the west.

I suspect for many, the local, legal immigrant community present an interesting socio-political litmus test. At least in this case, when their loyalty to the Rule of Law in New Zealand was pitted against co-ethnic loyalty to fellow Desis…. Rule of Law won.

If this was Canada, there might be more loyalty to there fellow desi, then to the country that has given them a much better life then there homeland. And the gutless Canadian goverment would do nothing cause they don't want to lose the big voting block that the punjabi community is here.

The oddest part to me is that Muslims and Hindus pretended to be Christians. How did they get the invites? Doesn't some church pastor or whoever have to recommend the people to get a spot on the delegation?

I hope these kids get their money back when they get deported. The level of ignorance reg immig laws is amazing. A relative who oversees a state wide banking division in India asked my mother where he can buy the application form for US visa since his family wanted to vacation! If this is the case with the educated, wealthy it is easy to see how the gullible and desperate can be tricked so easily.

Lucky they did not go missing in Australia. They would be some where in Baxter (middle of South Australian desert) or Christmas Island. If any of them were sportsmen then they would be given visa immediately like the ones from Sierra Leone during Commonwealth Games.

at least they weren't in australia where one could come across an unfriendly alligator wandering around in the bush. is this the same suki dillon above who is known as a caucasian canadian guy who pretends to be of indian origin?

is this the same suki dillon above who is known as a caucasian canadian guy who pretends to be of indian origin?

Once again I get attacked for speaking the truth.

Rule of Law won

is this something you celebrate? it would be an odd position for a libertarian to take, considering the benefits of a truly mobile workforce. And however the movies portray NZ, i've never heard from a naturalized NZ citizen that the process was as long and arduous as it is in the US.

6 · Suki Dillon said

Once again I get attacked for speaking the truth.

you and hmf, both.

Nayagan makes a solid point (#7). Immigration restrictions are, at best, some kind of "second best" solution; most are pretty clearly welfare-reducing (not that welfarism should be conflated with libertarianism).

>>it would be an odd position for a libertarian to take, considering the benefits of a truly mobile workforce

Libertarians are pro-legal-immigration. Mobile workforce does not mean a free-for-all-walk-in-as-you-please.

M. Nam

libertarians have many positions; from anarcho-capitalists who reject the state on either utilitarian or moral grounds (and probably would sympathize with those who forced open borders de facto) to ordoliberal sympathetic types who believe that rule of law is a necessary precondition to a broadly liberal order.

[NZ Indian Association general secretary Veer] Khar says they are trying to stay illegally in the country and the Immigration Service should be doing all it can to catch them. He hopes immigration comes down hard on them and sends them straight back to India, saying they are damaging the reputation of all Indians in New Zealand.

Hmmm...Rich Indian settled in the West turning a blind eye to the plight of a poorer fellow Indian. Unheard of!

10 · Nayagan said

is this something you celebrate? it would be an odd position for a libertarian to take

10 · MoorNam said

Libertarians are pro-legal-immigration.

and in a deftly circular move, protectionism becomes an acceptable tenet of liberalism. with friends like these (and ron paul), libertarianism doesn't need enemies.

11 · razib said

ordoliberal sympathetic types who believe that rule of law is a necessary precondition to a broadly liberal order.

ordoliberals also care very fundamentally about the maintenance of free market conditions. jargon does not mask facts.

it would be difficult to disappear in new zealand as it has more sheep than people. i have relatives there. the locals think they're maoris.

ordoliberals also care very fundamentally about the maintenance of free market conditions. jargon does not mask facts.

free market conditionals are conditional upon rule of law. one fact does not negate another. LOL.

16 · razib said

free market conditionals are conditional upon rule of law. one fact does not negate another. LOL.

when you are done loling, you might consider understanding that ordoliberals want laws that do not interfere with market mechanisms. read the link you yourself posted. or this.

7 · Nayagan: it would be an odd position for a libertarian to take, considering the benefits of a truly mobile workforce.

10 · MoorNam: Libertarians are pro-legal-immigration. Mobile workforce does not mean a free-for-all-walk-in-as-you-please.

11 · razib: libertarians have many positions; from anarcho-capitalists who reject the state on either utilitarian or moral grounds (and probably would sympathize with those who forced open borders de facto) to ordoliberal sympathetic types who believe that rule of law is a necessary precondition to a broadly liberal order.

Libertarian policy is as Moornam indicated and libertarian viewpoint is as Razib illustrated

would have that that "suki" guy would have moved on from his jungle fever desi fixation thing.

when you are done loling, you might consider understanding that ordoliberals want laws that do not interfere with market mechanisms. read the link you yourself posted. or this.

ah, this must be why after world war ii german ordoliberals just declared open borders instead of instead of regulated guest worker programs which interfered with unfettered market processes!

12 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said

Hmmm...Rich Indian settled in the West turning a blind eye to the plight of a poorer fellow Indian. Unheard of!

As much as I sympathize, this is not the appropriate thread to take on the anti-free trade movement.

I for one am happy that there is not unchecked Indian immigration to the US. It's not self loathing, it is fact that whenever you have a large influx of poor immigrants of any race(e.g. Irish, Italian, Russian, Mexican, Chinese, Vietnamese) the sociopaths/extortionists follow to exploit their expatriate countrymen. We have been lucky that Indian racketeers have not settled in the US in significant numbers, it would be Indian-Americans who would suffer the most.

NZ has the right to select which immigrants it allows in. You can have hard working law abiding agriculturists from Punjab dying to get in, but if their skill sets don't match the workforce needs of a "knowledge economy" they are going to end up right on the dole with the native Maori/Anglo working class

I actually work at Auckland International Airport and got involved in this story at a very early stage, as the first few guys to go missing disappeared from the arrivals area (into waiting cars we think)soon after landing. We initially thought they were just lost and I spent almost an hour searching all the toilets and back rooms in the airport for them!
Local media has repeatedly pointed out that since their visa don't expire til August 4th, they have not become overstayers YET. One of the group coordinaters tld me at the time that they had dropped a number of people from the group before they left India because they were suspicious of their motives for the trip.

In other news google is making everyone dumb :)
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/003228.html

I for one am happy that there is not unchecked Indian immigration to the US. It's not self loathing, it is fact that whenever you have a large influx of poor immigrants of any race(e.g. Irish, Italian, Russian, Mexican, Chinese, Vietnamese) the sociopaths/extortionists follow to exploit their expatriate countrymen. We have been lucky that Indian racketeers have not settled in the US in significant numbers, it would be Indian-Americans who would suffer the most.

The proportion of sociopaths and extortionists to non-criminal immigrants must be incredibly high if you actually think this is a real problem.

23 · Kermadecer said

One of the group coordinaters tld me at the time that they had dropped a number of people from the group before they left India because they were suspicious of their motives for the trip.

there is that. what incentives did the program coordinators create by not vigorously pursuing fake xtians (or insincere tourers) at a high enough level?

Lucky they did not go missing in Australia. They would be some where in Baxter (middle of South Australian desert) or Christmas Island.

at least they weren't in australia where one could come across an unfriendly alligator wandering around in the bush.

27 · melbourne desi said

Also, every illegal immigrant tarnishes a legal immigrant.

If you must seek the approval (outside of employers, that's a nother issue) of those who would look down on you because they heard of poor Indians running amok within their visa stay-dates, then they are people you probably don't need as friends.

If you must seek the approval (outside of employers, that's a nother issue) of those who would look down on you because they heard of poor Indians running amok within their visa stay-dates, then they are people you probably don't need as friends.

amen! down with race traitors. all brownz should be able to relocate to any country in the world.

What would Jesus do?

NZ has the right to select which immigrants it allows in.

So does Australia, Canada, The United States and western europe. These countries for some reason are held to much higher standard then anywhere else in the world. Yet almost anywhere else in the world countries treat there immigrants like crap and nobody even cares.

But it does not matter, how many immigrants that these western nations let in, its never enough for some people. And if they even say that these newcomers need to adapt or makes some changes of there cultural pratices to there new homeland and all hell break lose.

Yet almost anywhere else in the world countries treat there immigrants like crap and nobody even cares.

that's because of thousands of years of white oppression! people of color act the way they do because of the brutality of white male hegemony.

30 · razib said

amen! down with race traitors. all brownz should be able to relocate to any country in the world.

yes, that's exactly what i wrote. But if one is sleepless, worrying about what Mr. Doe down the road will think when he reads about illegal immigrants in the newspaper, then one is a tard.

30 · razib said

amen! down with race traitors. all brownz should be able to relocate to any country in the world.

or, "Blaargh! Must make Stormfront bona fides in three sentences or less! Can't be bothered to read comment!"

31 · Neale said

What would Jesus do?

I don't know what he'd do, but he may say,"Render unto Caesar..."

It is really bothering me that these guys got scammed out of all that money, thinking they were going to have legit. work permits. Why didn't they use some third party to "hold" the funds until they actually were working in NZ, as portrayed in the movie "In this World"? That's not a terribly complex contractual device. I suspect the scammers have disappeared--would be fascinating if they haven't, as I'd put good money on them getting whacked in that event!

I agree with PAFD (#12) and Nayagan. I've noticed the "We've worked hard for it and deserve to be here" attitude among first generation immigrants (no offence to Melbourne Desi or anyone else), it is ridiculous. If people are so afraid of their "community" (yeah, right!) being tarnished, they are hardly living as equals and trying to perpetuate the model minority myth, aren't they? Immigration laws have been drawn up and changed arbitarily by powers that be. Melbourne Desi's approach of warning them of the dangers is commendable and practical. Please spare them and others any moralistic preaching crap (especially on how the image of the community would suffer).

PS: If some of the missing 'pilgrims' end up getting visas to stay on, that'll be one good thing to come out of the Pope's visit, eh?

It is really bothering me that these guys got scammed out of all that money, thinking they were going to have legit. work permits.

Indeed. I have no idea of the circumstances of the people involved, but I've seen people with decent jobs (in IT of all places) and prospects fall victim to the phoren trap. I just couldn't understand the desperation.

that's because of thousands of years of white oppression! people of color act the way they do because of the brutality of white male hegemony.

clever.

Suki, are you really a white guy pretending to be Indian? Someone made this claim about you on an earlier thread too. It would certainly put your commenting history in a different and very negative light. I guess if you are a masquerading white guy I don't expect you to honestly answer this question. Why have you spelled your handle name as Dillon instead of Dhillon? I always kind of supported you on this blog since even though I disagree with you often, I felt your comments were those of a desi Canadian who really got put through the wringer by his family and culture; therefore you were justified to feel as you did. But if you're a white dude then you're a troll and just sick.

41 · Amitabh said

But if you're a white dude then you're a troll

why so racist? are such comments allowed?

I for one am happy that there is not unchecked Indian immigration to the US. It's not self loathing, it is fact that whenever you have a large influx of poor immigrants of any race(e.g. Irish, Italian, Russian, Mexican, Chinese, Vietnamese) the sociopaths/extortionists follow to exploit their expatriate countrymen. We have been lucky that Indian racketeers have not settled in the US in significant numbers, it would be Indian-Americans who would suffer the most. The proportion of sociopaths and extortionists to non-criminal immigrants must be incredibly high if you actually think this is a real problem.

Yeti: I have heard that around 10% of all people (anywhere) are born without a conscience. If the right incentives for good behavior are in place these sociopaths will become attorneys/reiki healers/montessori teachers instead of loan sharks/hit men. An undereducated sociopath will have no choice but to act according to his/her nature.

Yeti: I have heard that around 10% of all people (anywhere) are born without a conscience. If the right incentives for good behavior are in place these sociopaths will become attorneys/reiki healers/montessori teachers instead of loan sharks/hit men. An undereducated sociopath will have no choice but to act according to his/her nature.

There's no reliable data on "being born without a conscience" and if anyone claims there is, they're lying to you or distorting something.

Of all the arguments for and against immigration, the idea that letting people in creates an explosion in sociopathy is pretty weak.

It is a little difficult to believe that all of the missing pilgrims were genuinely duped by unscrupulous agents (unlike those Indian welders who were recruited from the Arabian Gulf to work in New Orleans on temporary work visas, their story seemed much more plausible). They might have paid the $17,000 etc., but that might have been just for entry. Perhaps they were not fully aware of the risks involved, but they could have been planning to abscond from the very beginning -40 people disappearing, that too some from the airport itself seems more than a little fishy. These 'pilgrims' seem more like the Mexicans who pay agents for safe passage knowing fully well that they are doing something illegal, but still willing to take the risk.

Yeti: I have heard that around 10% of all people (anywhere) are born without a conscience. If the right incentives for good behavior are in place these sociopaths will become attorneys/reiki healers/montessori teachers instead of loan sharks/hit men. An undereducated sociopath will have no choice but to act according to his/her nature. There's no reliable data on "being born without a conscience" and if anyone claims there is, they're lying to you or distorting something.

Of all the arguments for and against immigration, the idea that letting people in creates an explosion in sociopathy is pretty weak.

I said 10% of all people anywhere are sociopaths, I didn't say that immigration will increase that %. I am saying that allowing in people who don't have in demand skills will mean that more of them will opt for criminality instead of living "square". Ask any Vietnamese, Hmong, or Cambodian businessman in California if I am blowing this out of proportion.

Putting this aside, it doesn't make sense for a society to accept immigrants who won't be able to integrate economically or socially. I wouldn't want large numbers of Afrikaner neurosugeons out here and setting back the clock on race relations, nor would I want a decent desi who is barely literate in their own language coming out here for jobs that guarrantee poverty. But then again large numbers of poor Indians means more employment for professional activists in the US

I said 10% of all people anywhere are sociopaths, I didn't say that immigration will increase that %. I am saying that allowing in people who don't have in demand skills will mean that more of them will opt for criminality instead of living "square". Ask any Vietnamese, Hmong, or Cambodian businessman in California if I am blowing this out of proportion.

Your initial statistic is based on absolutely nothing. Who says 10% of all people are sociopaths? Sociopathy actually isn't clearly defined such that it can be properly clinically diagnosed. Even clinical categories such as Antisocial Personality Disorder are controversial.

Obviously, organized crime is something that crops up in immigrant communities. The question is the degree to which this is actually a problem and whether it should drive immigration policy.

Putting this aside, it doesn't make sense for a society to accept immigrants who won't be able to integrate economically or socially. I wouldn't want large numbers of Afrikaner neurosugeons out here and setting back the clock on race relations, nor would I want a decent desi who is barely literate in their own language coming out here for jobs that guarrantee poverty. But then again large numbers of poor Indians means more employment for professional activists in the US

Fail.

Upon what are you basing this weak guesstimate? How are you defining "integration" and what existing examples are you referring to? Are you talking about the Irish and the Italians? The older generations of Chinese Hawaiians and Californians, many of whose ancestors were uneducated immigrants?

Predicted integration - certainly in this case - is as irrelevant is it is illegitimate as a basis for determining immigration policy.

Predicted integration - certainly in this case - is as irrelevant is it is illegitimate as a basis for determining immigration policy.

Because you say so? Are you saying that education level, fluency in English are illegitimate criteria? Hopefully you have no influence beyond your vote

Because you say so? Are you saying that education level, fluency in English are illegitimate criteria? Hopefully you have no influence beyond your vote

I'm actually the head of a powerful think tank that decides these things.

Both education and fluency level in English vary in importance based on the kind of work people are coming over for. Filtering people out by education level and fluency in English might unnecessarily limit the available labor force. Furthermore there are solutions to these "problems" other than simply preventing people who don't speak English well to immigrate to the US.

But keep getting mad and piling on the lame insults. It really helps get your point across, and it also makes sure everyone knows how brilliant you are.

Also, good work on the sociopath thing.

Suki, are you really a white guy pretending to be Indian? Someone made this claim about you on an earlier thread too. It would certainly put your commenting history in a different and very negative light. I guess if you are a masquerading white guy I don't expect you to honestly answer this question. Why have you spelled your handle name as Dillon instead of Dhillon?

The reason I use Dillon instead of Dhillon is cause I reject the caste system as Dhillon is a jatt name. I could care less about being a jatt[sorry no jatt pride for me]. My legal last name is still Dhillon[and way too much of pain to change it], but I like using Dillon here cause it does drive some other people crazy that I do that, which I kind of enjoy.

But this whole people think that I'm white is really funny. It is cause I don't want half of the punjab to move to the west, cause living the past 6 years in the biggest punjabi community outside of India has had an effect on me and shaped my views plus some of the personnal things that I want through my life due to backwardness of punjabi culture.

This might surprise some here, but I think that Japan is country that the west should look for immigrants, plus others like South Korea, Chile and Argentina.

Yeti: Yes, there is tons of empirical proof throughout California that you are correct....facility with English and education have no bearing on success. The second generation American children of undocumented workers don't crowd the prisons. Props to mama/papa Yeti for whelping such brilliant spawn.

Several months ago a Canadian immigration offical named brain hudson was tired of the immigration fraud out of punjab and said that Canada should look to South India for immigrants.

"Alleged comments by a Canadian visa officer, Brian Hudson in New Delhi has sparked outrage among a B.C. panel of college and university leaders who were on a visit to India in December. Mr. Hudson had said he did not understand why the heck we were recruiting in the Punjab; the state of the Punjab has the highest crime and forgery rate anywhere; the highest human-trafficking statistics in the world, and that we should be recruiting in South India;"

51 · Suki Dillon said

The reason I use Dillon instead of Dhillon is cause I reject the caste system as Dhillon is a jatt name.

LOL say what? by removing a "H", it makes it okay? why not just go for Singh? you is one crazy mofo!

i don't think its a white guy, it is probably some Gujju guy who got shot down by a Punju girl

amitabh,

i would lay off this line of questioning--i literally never agree with Suki but i'm pretty darn sure that he is who he says he is (and i'll not be as crass at KT and post it on the thread).

the west doesn't actually look for immigrants anywhere. people from different countries take it upon themselves to try and move to western countries. and consequently, friends and relatives of people already settled here decide to move on too.

56 · priya said

the west doesn't actually look for immigrants anywhere

like Germany? They certainly didn't 'look for' labor. The US during the bracero years didn't either. they just made it known that it was easy to get in.

why should we care about what some unimportant canadian office worker called brian says. what person in their right mind would want to move to a country where it's minus 30 celsius for half the year. and whose people have so little self esteem that the government praise a book called "why i hate canadians" as being the quintessential guide to canada. the book was written by a canadian, btw.

sorry to go on on the same subject but i spent a few months in toronto for work once and i just remembered that a canadian friend of mine called canada "negative space". it's healthy to be a little self deprecating but this is just too much. in fact the caucasian canadians i met all had a huge inferiority complex about being canadian even though there are positive things about canada. the people from immigrant backgrounds were much more sorted out, together and down to earth. it was unbearable for me to spend time with the caucasian canadians, even though some of them were very nice people, because i hate listening to constant complaining and whining.

Europeans migrated to the Americas and Australia and inhabited 4 continents illegally. They plundered Africa and Asia and their future generations are still reaping those benefits. Illegal immigration happens from poor Bangladesh and Nepal to India and people cry in a similar tune about the passive support of Muslims for those immigrants and vote banks etc. Follow the law but don't be anti illegal immigrant. They are the poorest of people who are looking for a better future for themselves and they have a right to do so. If we talk of a really just world, let these so called corners of prosperity demolish the artificial walls around them.

Yes, there is tons of empirical proof throughout California that you are correct....facility with English and education have no bearing on success. The second generation American children of undocumented workers don't crowd the prisons. Props to mama/papa Yeti for whelping such brilliant spawn.

Again, you haven't actually provided this proof, and you're also clearly unable to read sentences longer than three words. You do a sloppy job of mixing parts of different arguments with one another to make your point, troll. I didn't say facility with English and education have no bearing on success, I said they have less bearing on the value of a given immigrant group as a labor force depending on the circumstances (and this is self-selecting; thus you're not going to see a bunch of MD's come over who have no ability to speak English or at least learn quickly).

I also said that predicted "integration" is overrated as a metric for whether or not immigrants should be allowed in. Also, regarding your "point" about the prisons: second generation kids would have been raised and educated in the US, which means that your incoherent argument about immigrant education and English fluency is once again irrelevant.

Oh, and what happened to the whole sociopath point? Dropped that one pretty quick, didn't you?

Keep it coming with the witty one-liners. I wonder if you're like this in person.

Vinod,
I see what you're getting at with being pro-"Rule of Law," but I think the argument is a bit too conclusory. Say I was in India during the License Raj. Would I have been wrong to, say, smuggle in VCR's? It seems pretty clear to me that, from either a libertarian or welfarist perspective, I would be quite justified in doing so. If you accept that, then you accept that sometimes breaking the law is OK. And, if smuggling goods is sometimes OK, then in principle disobeying laws inhibiting the free movement of persons is sometimes justified as well. So, again, the invocation of "Rule of Law" really can't do the heavy lifting you're assigning it. Now, I suppose you could go meta and say that my smuggling of VCR's is contributing to an environment where other, bad things are more likely to happen (theft, bribery, etc.). But, (1) that argument would need to be made out in detail, and, more importantly, (2) any such argument seems to me to fall victim to David Lyon's (widely accepted in the mainstream) demolition of rule utilitarianism (See "Forms and LImits of Utilitarianism"). (I.e., roughly speaking, act utilitarianism is the only plausible form, so I should still perform acts (in my example, smuggling the VCR's) that are welfare-increasing even if a "rule" (or, law) prohibits it).

Say I was in India during the License Raj. Would I have been wrong to, say, smuggle in VCR's? It seems pretty clear to me that, from either a libertarian or welfarist perspective, I would be quite justified in doing so. If you accept that, then you accept that sometimes breaking the law is OK.

Not OK even though I lived in India during the pseudo-communist phase. Replace VCRs with AK47s. Now, there is no free market that allows aam junta (citizens) to buy these for protection. However, only a special set of folks get these instruments of motivation. The Rule of Law is important since aam junta abides by it.

63 · amaun said

Replace VCRs with AK47s.

You answered a question that wasn't asked. Fail.

Rob@62 -- solid considerations as always.

louie at #46

I wouldn't want large numbers of Afrikaner neurosugeons out here and setting back the clock on race relations,

My experience is that pretty much any kind of immigrant would set us(as in USians) back on race relations. I've travelled a fair deal and am currently living in Europe. The kinds of incivilities I've seen, here and elsewhere, would be shocking back in America. Living in France and listening to them, for instance, is like a page out of Mungo Park. That said, some nationalities are better and some are worse.

I make a strong distinction between LEGAL and ILLEGAL immigratio

I appreciate your clarifications, Vinod. However, who should be allowed to immigrate legally? Everybody? Restrict people on the basis of geographical and/or professional quotas? Allow everyone to come in as long as infrastructural and environmental capacity standards on not compromised? This is somewhat tangential to this post -- as there are consequences for violating current immigration policy (unless some exceptions have already been written into the law). But it seems to me like a libertarian, in good conscience, must support free movement of all people (as long as the capacity of the host country allows it) as an ideal theory, whether or not positive rights exist (most libertarians don't consider positive rights to be a good thing, btw).

62 · rob said

Would I have been wrong to, say, smuggle in VCR's? It seems pretty clear to me that, from either a libertarian or welfarist perspective, I would be quite justified in doing so.

You'd be right in smuggling in the VCR, ie breaking an unjust law, but you'd still have to recognize the rule of law as socrates, thoreau, gandhi, and king did. Meaning break the law but wilfully accept punishment for doing so until the law is changed. Civil disobedience.

63 · amaun said

Replace VCRs with AK47s.

Rob's argument still stands, because proliferation of AK47s among various factions of the public is not likely to be welfare enhancing. So it's not permissible under a welfare-enhancing framework. In contrast, smuggling VCRs/babyfood is most likely welfare-enhancing, and therefore, permissible (even though it entails violating a law).

But it seems to me like a libertarian, in good conscience, must support free movement of all people (as long as the capacity of the host country allows it) as an ideal theory, whether or not positive rights exist (most libertarians don't consider positive rights to be a good thing, btw).

the problem is this would allow for non-libertarian nations like mexico to send their poor people to more libertarian nations thus delaying their libertarian revolution, as the poverty their system created gets exported.

libertarians believe freedom is indivisible, you cannot pick and choose, so yes ideally they would demand freedom of movement for all people, but that presupposes that all nation-states guarantee all liberal freedoms for their citizens.

70 · Manju
the problem is this would allow for non-libertarian nations like mexico to send their poor people to more libertarian nations thus delaying their libertarian revolution, as the poverty their system created gets exported.

libertarians believe freedom is indivisible, you cannot pick and choose, so yes ideally they would demand freedom of movement for all people, but that presupposes that all nation-states guarantee all liberal freedoms for their citizens.
_________________________________

Wait, so you're saying that if 99 countries are libertarian, and one isn't, it's precisely that non-libertarian society's citizens who should have restrictions placed on their movement? That seems counter-intuitive.

there is room in civil disobedience theory for revolution though. if you believe that the system is fundamentally wrong you don't have to accept punishment for breaking the law. MLK, however, believed the American system fundamentally good, but contradictory, thus he was not a revolutionary and therefore followed thoureau's advice vis a vis taxes and slavery...displaying his fundamental respect for the system.

Gandhi, interestingly, was a revolutionary but still choose civil disobedience. socrates was even more radical, accepting the punishment of death rather than violate the principle of rule of law. Rand would clearly disapprove of that.

71 · rob said

Wait, so you're saying that if 99 countries are libertarian, and one isn't, it's precisely that non-libertarian society's citizens who should have restrictions placed on their movement? That seems counter-intuitive.

Yes. the non-libertarian rulers don't get to pick the one freedom that happens to benefit their oligarchy. Its up to the free nation. we may treat them like cubans (let them come here!) but if they pull a Mariel Boatlift the libertarian nation reseves the right to restrict their movement.

71 · rob said

Wait, so you're saying that if 99 countries are libertarian, and one isn't, it's precisely that non-libertarian society's citizens who should have restrictions placed on their movement? That seems counter-intuitive.

Which comes down to my belief that most of today's libertarians just want to make excuses to build a system that will allow them to retain and enjoy the fruits of their social position and wealth, without actually contributing back.

70 · Manju said

libertarians believe freedom is indivisible, you cannot pick and choose, so yes ideally they would demand freedom of movement for all people, but that presupposes that all nation-states guarantee all liberal freedoms for their citizens.

i love how the top priority for all libertarians is free movement of capital, even though capital regimes aren't uniformly liberalized the world over nor do we see a uniformly free-trade promoting policies. when we talk of people, the rule of law is invoked as real persons fester in a machete controlled banana republics. perhaps, if libertarians loved people as much as money, they might win over some converts.
[end rant]
manju, in response to #70, I did say that as an 'ideal theory' must endorse free movement of people; just like in an ideal world, communists would want a stateless society.

and meanwhile, here is a working paper from philosopher Nicole Hassoun, 'Why Libertarians Should Be Welfare Liberals?' She is asking for comments, and her brief description of her argument is nice.

74 · glibertarians said

Which comes down to my belief that most of today's libertarians just want to make excuses to build a system that will allow them to retain and enjoy the fruits of their social position and wealth, without actually contributing back.

well, when you argue politics via motives you're always going to assign bad faith to your ideological enemies, allowing you to disregard their argument s in favor of attacking their motives.

this is one of the reasons marxism failed.

72 · Manju said

there is room in civil disobedience theory for revolution though.

Manju, is there any excuse that you'll find not to pay taxes? :) Chanelling Thoreau, Gandhi, and MLK to the capitalistic dark side is a new low. You may keep Ms. Rand, however.

75 · MFA said

i love how the top priority for all libertarians is free movement of capital, even though capital regimes aren't uniformly liberalized the world over nor do we see a uniformly free-trade promoting policies

well, wasn't that my argument. you're justified in withhold otherwise libertarian principle (freedom of movement, free trade) if regimes aren't uniformly liberalized.

That doesn't mean you necessarily withhold, as you may want a gradual revolution...but you can justify it within the libertarian framework.

76 · Manju said

well, when you argue politics via motives you're always going to assign bad faith to your ideological enemies, allowing you to disregard their argument s in favor of attacking their motives.

i don't need to attribute motives. the rampant inconsistencies damn them.

74 · glibertarians said

Which comes down to my belief that most of today's libertarians just want to make excuses to build a system that will allow them to retain and enjoy the fruits of their social position and wealth, without actually contributing back.

Also, within the context we are speaking this criticism is really misplaced. Big business and the ruling elite in america clearly benefit from illegal immigration, as a larger labor supply obviously leads to lower wages not to mention what would we all do without maria taking care of the household duties.

so, assuming the libertarian is wealthy, they are really acting on principle if they are opposed to illegal immigration. but if the libertarian is a laborer, you then may have a point.

77 · MFA said

Manju, is there any excuse that you'll find not to pay taxes? :) Chanelling Thoreau, Gandhi, and MLK to the capitalistic dark side is a new low.

Hey...didn't thoreau refuse to pay taxes (b/c he didn't want to supposrt slavery0?

78 · Manju said

well, wasn't that my argument.

true, i'm only chiming in with glibertarians at #74, that most of today's libertarians are not consistent within domains, and thus, appear/are merely opportunistic. why not support a gradualist policy over many domains? why only emphasize markets and capital regimes? and leave out people and third world trade policy?
i'm actually very interested in any genuine arguments made by libertarian scholars in the immigration debates (should you have any recommendations). most of the work i've seen is only done by either applied ethicists. and yes, lou dobbs.

79 · glibertarians said

i don't need to attribute motives. the rampant inconsistencies damn them

Well, if you read the original libertarians, classic liberals, they where less concerned with philosophical consistency. modern libertarianism has been reduced to debates regarding whether or not nude dancing is a form of free speech, and should thus enjoy first ammedment protection. but the enlightenment guys really wanted a system that would work. that's probably why their revolution has lasted for so long while other sit in the dustbin of history.

81 · Manju said

Hey...didn't thoreau refuse to pay taxes (b/c he didn't want to supposrt slavery0?

Yes, if you didn't pay taxes until the government opened its borders and abandoned trade protectionism, I'd support you. However, Manju, you strike me as a man who would have more in common with Thoreau's grandfather than Thoreau himself :)

82 · MFA said

and leave out people and third world trade policy?

Hey, what world ore you living in? we have de facto open borders. big biz, poor mexicans, the mexican oligarchy, libertarians, bush, the WSJ, and the american elite are all in cahoots to let as many poor people in as possible. we may curtail it a bit as one must be careful to not upset the natives too much, but otherwise, open borders it is.

84 · MFA said

Yes, if you didn't pay taxes until the government opened its borders and abandoned trade protectionism, I'd support you.

Hey, I haven't expresssed any opinion on illegal immigration, other than to point out that controlling borders is not necessarily contradictory to classic liberalism,as it is to anarcho-liberetarianism. but i am pro nude dancing.

84 · MFA said

Manju, you strike me as a man who would have more in common with Thoreau's grandfather than Thoreau himself :)

But, I can't argue with that.

I've noticed the "We've worked hard for it and deserve to be here" attitude among first generation immigrants (no offence to Melbourne Desi or anyone else), it is ridiculous.

For many immigrants a big reason to move to countries like Oz / Usa is overcome 'jungle law' of a semi-failed state like India.

Word. Many Indians in the US had someone they can reach out to if they get hassled: IAS/IPS officer relatives, MLA uncleji, judge . So India "works" for them. I think it takes having the govt steal your land, the police bribed to harass you and having no recourse to understand why you don't want certain elements of the desh following you here.

88 · melbourne desi said

If you dont to play by the rules dont come here

In the state of Virginia, it is illegal to make jam and sell it to your friends. It is also illegal to sell unpasteurized dairy products. Why even the mixing of spirits, wine and beer is prohibited (hello misdemeanor sangria consumption!) Should I worry about 'rule of law' when it comes to these utterly ridiculous examples?

Say MB, you were traveling to Bali for a spot of vacation. They 'randomly' open your bag at the airport and discover 8 kilos of ganja, cocaine, heroin etc. The law of the land in Indonesia is heavy penalties (including death) for simple possession. Will you take your 20 years in Kerobokan singing the praises of the 'rule of law'?

Nayagan, you're conflating silly laws with unjust ones. Either way, MLK would say, sell the jam, drink the sangia, then take your punishment:

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.

90 Nayagan said

Say MB, you were traveling to Bali for a spot of vacation. They 'randomly' open your bag at the airport and discover 8 kilos of ganja, cocaine, heroin etc. The law of the land in Indonesia is heavy penalties (including death) for simple possession. Will you take your 20 years in Kerobokan singing the praises of the 'rule of law'?

Schapelle Corby case. However, in that case it was 4kg not 8. Either way, if you knowingly take drugs into any south-east asian nation, you're a bit of a tool, and I would say live with the consequences. We (those living in Australia) get told repeatedly, by our travel agents, by DFAT, by the airlines and even before we land (although that's a bit of a pointless exercise) that many ASEAN member countries have a tough policy on drugs. So if you disregard all that advice and still walk in with drugs on you, then sorry mate, you're a bit of a dill. What I always do is take photographs the night before travelling of all my bags, just in case. Does that sound a bit paranoid?

OMFG! the FIRST time i see the nz flag on sm and it turns into this...

could we cover that whole 'our governor general is indo-fijian' again please? or the cute new movie apron springs which was created by a samoan-indian cultural collaboration?

grrrr

Should I worry about 'rule of law' when it comes to these utterly ridiculous examples?

Say MB, you were traveling to Bali for a spot of vacation. They 'randomly' open your bag at the airport and discover 8 kilos of ganja, cocaine, heroin etc.

Will you take your 20 years in Kerobokan singing the praises of the 'rule of law'?

Btw bad example - Indonesia is not a bastion of rule of law - on the contrary.

could we cover that whole 'our governor general is indo-fijian' again please?

90 · Nayagan said

88 · melbourne desi said

If you dont to play by the rules dont come here

In the state of Virginia, it is illegal to make jam and sell it to your friends. It is also illegal to sell unpasteurized dairy products. Why even the mixing of spirits, wine and beer is prohibited (hello misdemeanor sangria consumption!) Should I worry about 'rule of law' when it comes to these utterly ridiculous examples?

Say MB, you were traveling to Bali for a spot of vacation. They 'randomly' open your bag at the airport and discover 8 kilos of ganja, cocaine, heroin etc. The law of the land in Indonesia is heavy penalties (including death) for simple possession. Will you take your 20 years in Kerobokan singing the praises of the 'rule of law'?

So, do away with all laws? I don't get your argument.

90

· Nayagan said

88 · melbourne desi said

If you dont to play by the rules dont come here

In the state of Virginia, it is illegal to make jam and sell it to your friends. It is also illegal to sell unpasteurized dairy products. Why even the mixing of spirits, wine and beer is prohibited (hello misdemeanor sangria consumption!) Should I worry about 'rule of law' when it comes to these utterly ridiculous examples?

Say MB, you were traveling to Bali for a spot of vacation. They 'randomly' open your bag at the airport and discover 8 kilos of ganja, cocaine, heroin etc. The law of the land in Indonesia is heavy penalties (including death) for simple possession. Will you take your 20 years in Kerobokan singing the praises of the 'rule of law'?

So, do away with all laws? I don't get your argument.

Anarcho-MFAs would do well to consider the fate of Piggy in Lord of the Flies

Anarcho-MFAs would do well to consider the fate of Piggy in Lord of the Flies

ANARCHO-MFAs?!?!?!?

That is just awesome. I love it. I'm not even being sarcastic. LOL!

97 · louiecypher said

Anarcho-MFAs would do well to consider the fate of Piggy in Lord of the Flies

just so we clear, the MFA on this board is (clearly) supporting liberal democracy and real free trade. Anarchism is usually associated with a brand of libertarianism. But of course your MFAphobia comes in the way of reading.
And while anarcho-MFAs might be undoubtedly awesome, I'm sadly not cool enough to be one.

88 · melbourne desi said

If someone is an illegal immigrant that person clearly cant understand the concept of "Rule of Law".

Uh, illegal immigrants are sometimes forced to move because of the lawlessness, rampant crime, and severe economic dysfunction prevailing in their own societies. The fact that are forced to migrate illegally does not reflect a contempt of law, but lousy luck.

Uh, illegal immigrants are sometimes forced to move because of the lawlessness, rampant crime, and severe economic dysfunction prevailing in their own societies.

just so we clear, the MFA on this board is (clearly) supporting liberal democracy and real free trade. Anarchism is usually associated with a brand of libertarianism. But of course your MFAphobia comes in the way of reading. And while anarcho-MFAs might be undoubtedly awesome, I'm sadly not cool enough to be one.

You've got your chronology mixed up...I've been alerting SM to the MFA/Pomona menace for months and you decided a few days ago to present yourself as "MFA" to play my nemesis. But in my mind's eye I am thinking about some hybrid of Gore Vidal & Praful Bidwai(though I would definitely count you among my adversary's henchwomen). I haven't bothered to read your posts in this thread and my comment was directed to the ur-MFA in occultation that was speaking through Nayagan(i.e. not you) so my phobia can't be blamed in this case.

Melbourne Desi, if you are saying "Don't do illegal stuff because you don't want to get in trouble with the law", I totally agree with the approach. People break laws such as immigration laws either because they are desperate (which I don't think is the case here) or because they expect to get away with it. There is no saying whether a particular legal or illegal immigrant will actually be a law abiding, honest citizen (whatever that means) given an opportunity (there is NO level playing field anywhere). Most people also have an intuitive understanding of laws that are based on moral grounds or commonsense and others like taxation and immigration, which may have nothing to do with morality. People even in semi-failed states are more likely to break taxation laws rather than murder or rape. I know I only pay taxes because I have no choice.

Australia's example is actually ridiculous because of the history of the society and immigration here. Your position seems to be that you have actually worked hard to escape an unjust, chaotic society and you don't want this country to turn into one. But there are other people who also want that, some of them can do it the 'right' way and some of them would take the easy route if they could. Some of them just want to go where they think life is easy. They are the one taking the risk, so warn them of practical problems by all means, but don't tell them they shouldn't because - they should respect the rule of law. They can see and observe how the world actually works, like the rest of us.

Rule of law? Please enlighten me how you can live in a country created by convicts and lecture people about the rule of law?

Please enlighten me how you can live in a country created by convicts and lecture people about the rule of law?

I know I only pay taxes because I have no choice.

that's because of thousands of years of white oppression!

In 1700 India and China were 52% of global GDP, that's some 300 years ago.

Rule of law? Please enlighten me how you can live in a country created by convicts and lecture people about the rule of law?

The convict population was a minority of the population then, most were free settlers who were paid to move and those who came to seek a fortune. Most were sent for crimes like vagrancy or petty crime. In present day Oz 25% of Australians are born overseas, you thus have a large percentage of the population consisting of immigrants and their children or grandchildren.

The British sent 60,000 convicts to the American colonies. Over half the whites immigrants to America between 1600-1700 were indentured servants or slaves, mostly Irish.

12 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said

[NZ Indian Association general secretary Veer] Khar says they are trying to stay illegally in the country and the Immigration Service should be doing all it can to catch them. He hopes immigration comes down hard on them and sends them straight back to India, saying they are damaging the reputation of all Indians in New Zealand.

Hmmm...Rich Indian settled in the West turning a blind eye to the plight of a poorer fellow Indian. Unheard of!

ABDs without sympathy and respect for all those backward, embarrassing 1st-generation immigrants? Even more unheard of!

I love how it's the ABD commenters who are criticizing DBD immigrants for not wanting poorly-educated people to immigrate. Right, because you all are SO friendly and welcoming toward 'fobs.' You haven't made countless movies mocking them and portraying how much they embarrass you, nope, certainly not!

107 · Samir said

Rule of law? Please enlighten me how you can live in a country created by convicts and lecture people about the rule of law?

South Australia where I reside, unlike say Victoria or NSW was founded by free settles, and has the distinction of being the only colony in Australia to have been founded thus. Does that mean I can lecture you on the rule of law?

ABDs without sympathy and respect for all those backward, embarrassing 1st-generation immigrants? Even more unheard of!
I love how it's the ABD commenters who are criticizing DBD immigrants for not wanting poorly-educated people to immigrate. Right, because you all are SO friendly and welcoming toward 'fobs.' You haven't made countless movies mocking them and portraying how much they embarrass you, nope, certainly not!

Do you know me? Do you know where I was born? You are not disagreeing with the subtance of my criticism but only suggesting that 'they' do it too which is apparently supposed to make it all better. I have noticed an attitude in a lot of professional Indians in the US, where there is a very high level of apathy towards co-nationalists who work at 7-11 or are illegal or do menial jobs. Some of it is a reflection of the strong class hierarchy which exists in India and follows Indians outside India.

To prevent further confusion:

1. no, i am not an MFA (or anarcho-capitalist).

2. no, I do not think that standing immigration laws should be routinely flouted--provided that they are not leveling punitive punishment on the law breaker (unless you equate this kind of unlawful behavior with homicide)

3. yes, 'rule of law' is important to discuss but can only be realized (i.e. a state of 'rule of law' as opposed to the contextual 'rule of law' where you get sent to Kerobokan for 20 years) when everyone is obeying all laws--which requires that all laws not conflict with others, not constrain the mobility of labor or capital, not limit civil liberties, etc etc.

4. Naturally a state of 'rule of law' can't exist and a contextual 'rule of law' is extremely undesirable. An approximation, however, can exist and is highly desirable. In those approximations, the pressing need is to identify all the laws that are most important to preserving the 'rule of law' culture. IMO, these are not the welfare-reducing (thanks, rob) half measures we institute in a hasty attempt to sew up the fistulated womb of the welfare state.

107 · Samir said

Rule of law? Please enlighten me how you can live in a country created by convicts and lecture people about the rule of law?

ok, mel d was strongly going for the prize with his arguments, but you've swept him in the idiocy race with just one priceless comment. congrats!

I love how it's the ABD commenters who are criticizing DBD immigrants for not wanting poorly-educated people to immigrate. Right, because you all are SO friendly and welcoming toward 'fobs.' You haven't made countless movies mocking them and portraying how much they embarrass you, nope, certainly not!

I'm not familiar with too many DBD-made movies that mocks ABDs. I'm not familiar with too many DBD-made movies, period, let alone "countless" ones that mock ABDs.

102 · louiecypher said

though I would definitely count you among my adversary's henchwomen

I operate alone, sweetheart. I'm that good.

I've been alerting SM to the MFA/Pomona menace for months

you decided a few days ago to present yourself as "MFA" to play my nemesis.

So, do away with all laws? I don't get your argument.

It is quite obvious that Nayagan was not advocating with doing away all laws (as he clarifies at 111). You are either dumb or deliberately obtuse. Take your pick.

Dumb! I must be since I didn't write that bit about doing away with all laws, I just haven't been able to figure out the quotes feature.

It's adorable that you are getting all bent out of shape by my MFA & Pomona schtick. Didn't even know that Pomona offered an MFA. Don't get bent out of shape, you helped flip me

116 · louiecypher said

adorable

I would return the compliment too; but, then again, this doesn't sound like something that would pour forth from Mr. Adorable's mouth.

117 · MFA said

116 · louiecypher said

adorable

I would return the compliment too; but, then again, this doesn't sound like something that would pour forth from Mr. Adorable's mouth.

That's sad, I thought we had a "moment". I was flipped and acknowledged my mistake but you still hold that over me. Must all my love be unreciprocated? Waaaah...

99 · MFA said

And while anarcho-MFAs might be undoubtedly awesome, I'm sadly not cool enough to be one.

I am that cool and it's true that I am awesome. Thanks. (I'm more opposed to coercive hierarchy than I am to "laws" I have agreed to honor--neither master nor slave like.)

96 · Neale said

So, do away with all laws?

Yes. Starting with in-laws.

96 · Neale said

So, do away with all laws?

Some on this board might agree with doing away with Allah, whereas opponents of Sharia would be happy just doing away with Allah's laws. Takes all types...

Where's Lou Dobbs and Tom Tancredo when you need them.

121 · Suki Dillon said

Where's Lou Dobbs and Tom Tancredo when you need them.

I give up, where?

@109 & 112

I was quoting Eurodesi at 104 and responding to his comments did not include quotes, my bad

118 · louiecypher said

That's sad, I thought we had a "moment".

What's a "moment" going to do when you have insurmountable competition in the room?

Louiecypher, the above is intended as a rhetorical question. I am letting you know just in case your humanities aversion has adversely affected your literary interpretation skillz.

the most amount of migration has happened within developing countries itself. such as the millions of afghans in iran and pakistan. 100 000 tibetans in india, people moving countries in africa.

94 · melbourne desi said

If it bothers you so much, you should change the law or lobby to get it changed.

I've said it before and I'll say it again--it's high time to repeal the law of supply and demand because it is in conflict with US immigration policy. Who does Adam Smith think he is, anyway?

Thanks for the compliment MFA, and though I may be picky, I'm hardly insurmountable. ;-)

So, do away with all laws?

When will you liberal fascists realize that the campaign to ban alar was based on phony science perpetrated by enviormental wackos in cahoots with the liberal media?

126 · Harbeer said

it's high time to repeal the law of supply and demand

I think it was already repealed by those who claim there is no way poor americans will do the jobs illegal immigrants take.

So, do away with all laws?

Fine with me. But what do we do with all the Bjorns and Egors?

See? I really am a glibertarian.

So, do away with all laws?

Maybe we should have the choice to obey 'em or not obey 'em. We'll call 'em bi-laws.

104 · Eurodesi said

Rule of law? Please enlighten me how you can live in a country created by convicts and lecture people about the rule of law?

Well the Australians have apologised for the mistakes of their convict forefathers - Australia apology to Aborigines

129 · Manju said

So, do away with all laws?

Fine with me. But what do we do with all the Bjorns and Egors?

I knew you were going to ask that. We lock 'em up with Jude, of course.

#132: Well the Australians have apologised for the mistakes of their convict forefathers...

Well, it's all good then, innit? Political stunt by a man who may increasingly look like Howard the longer he stays in office, is what I think. Rudd is a smooth operator though, I have to agree.

Btw, the whole convict shtick is really silly and tiresome.

133 · Harbeer said

We lock 'em up with Jude, of course.

Now you're talking. Its Miller time.

135 · Manju said

Its Miller time.

Not if you like them with Frost.

114 · Krish**** said

First, if you ever meet an Indian from New Zealand, you will find them to be the most pathetic people around.

You are an idiot.

How many of these 'Indians from New Zealand' have you met? What age group where they?

Well the Australians have apologised for the mistakes of their convict forefathers - Australia apology to Aborigines

Actually the apology was for the stolen generation. So it was only for one genration of aborigines who were forcibly taken away from their families and placed with whites families. It was not an apology about conquest of Australia or any other mistreatment.

135 · molson twin said

Not if you like them with Frost.

that's lawless

138 · Manju said

that's lawless

(getting back on topic) that's only a problem if you are xenaphobic.

I'm not familiar with too many DBD-made movies that mocks ABDs. I'm not familiar with too many DBD-made movies, period, let alone "countless" ones that mock ABDs.

You got it mixed up. I'm referring to ABD-written/produced/directed/'acted' movies such as Where's the Party, Yaar?, American Desi, Ludakrishna, etc. They usually don't reflect that ABDs have much respect for 'fobs.'

Do you know me? Do you know where I was born? You are not disagreeing with the subtance of my criticism but only suggesting that 'they' do it too which is apparently supposed to make it all better. I have noticed an attitude in a lot of professional Indians in the US, where there is a very high level of apathy towards co-nationalists who work at 7-11 or are illegal or do menial jobs. Some of it is a reflection of the strong class hierarchy which exists in India and follows Indians outside India.

I honestly haven't seen this, but I don't doubt that it exists to some extent. But you're doing the same thing-- saying that since some desis who immigrated previously treat fobs like crap, it's okay if ABDs do it too. And I will bet anything that if one were to conduct a study of this (though I don't know who'd waste money on this), the average former FOB is more likely to be friendly to a new FOB than an average ABD, who is too busy trying to avoid embarrassment and trying to prove how cool, hip, progressive, etc. by claiming to speak for the 'underserved desis' everywhere while actually just being pretentious jerks.

P.S. I love how this class hierarchy attitude apparently only carries over with Indians, but not with people from other countries on the subcontinent.

P.S. I love how this class hierarchy attitude apparently only carries over with Indians, but not with people from other countries on the subcontinent.

I cant speak for all groups but Pakistanis are pretty bad as well.

But you're doing the same thing-- saying that since some desis who immigrated previously treat fobs like crap, it's okay if ABDs do it too.

No, I am not saying that. Nobody should treat recent immigrants badly, period.

140 · apth said

average former FOB is more likely to be friendly to a new FOB than an average ABD, who is too busy trying to avoid embarrassment and trying to prove how cool, hip, progressive, etc. by claiming to speak for the 'underserved desis' everywhere while actually just being pretentious jerks.

I actually just conspicuously start bowling at a single stump, brown people magically show up and join in an impromptu game. I didn't know that was a pretentious dick-move.

140 · apth said

You got it mixed up. I'm referring to ABD-written/produced/directed/'acted' movies such as Where's the Party, Yaar?, American Desi, Ludakrishna, etc. They usually don't reflect that ABDs have much respect for 'fobs

I think most FOBS are attracted to most ABDs since the former consider the latter the living epitome of MTV and Hollywood stars - cool, hip and allrounders both in academics and sports. The only DBDs that prob give the ABDs some decent competition are probably the rich folks from Dilli or Mumbai.

I think most FOBS are attracted to most ABDs since the former consider the latter the living epitome of MTV and Hollywood stars - cool, hip and allrounders both in academics and sports.

Good point. The ABDs are well know for their athletic prowess. Case in point, the 600% over representation of ABDs in sports like NCAA Football/Basketball or Professional Sports like NBA/NFL.

Nicole Kidman, the desi enamor of all things and people phoren is fast wearing off. These days, this, is the standard ABD caricature.

The eighties called and they want their stereotypes back.

143 · Nicole Kidman said

ool, hip and allrounders both in academics and sports.

Back in the desh, I still remember those innocent days when my prepubescent friends and I used to get all worked up at thought of our favorite teen-sensation Scripps National Spelling Bee Contest desi-American winners. But in the final reckoning, the mathletes turned out to have more integrity. Respeck.

143 · Nicole Kidman said

I think most FOBS are attracted to most ABDs since the former consider the latter the living epitome of MTV and Hollywood stars - cool, hip and allrounders both in academics and sports. The only DBDs that prob give the ABDs some decent competition are probably the rich folks from Dilli or Mumbai.

ABD speaking here. I can't stand most ABDs. To generalize, I find most of them to be vapid, materialistic, sheltered, and not very curious about the world. In other words, boring mama's boys/daddy's girls. (There are, of course, exceptions, and I've got some great ABD friends.)

The DBDs I meet, on the other hand, tend to be pretty intelligent, engaged in the world, adventurous, self-reliant, and don't have as much "macho" type bs to prove--and I mean DBDs who might be working as truck drivers, movers, convenience store clerks, grad students, and even professors.

You are comparing a segment of the population that had everything spoon-fed to them as they were sheltered from any hardship (most ABDs) to a segment of the population that left everything familiar behind to establish a new life in a sometimes inhospitable country so they could help out folks back home (most DBDs.) ABDs might have the latest Banana Republic gear and the latest pop dance moves, but if that's the advantage you're claiming, you are a bigger joke than you think.

These are, of course, nothing but my own unsubstantiated prejudices. Does this make me a self-hating ABD?

Nicole Kidman, in Tamil Movies they have a separate comic category - America Maapillais (Grooms)

143 · Nicole Kidman said

I think most FOBS are attracted to most ABDs since the former consider the latter the living epitome of MTV and Hollywood stars - cool, hip and allrounders both in academics and sports.

Nicole, you forgot another important observation. DBDs smell of Chicken Tikka Masala, while ABDs smell of Chanel No. 5.

(For the record, Nicole Kidman is so over the top, I have to think it was joking.)

136 · NZer said

114 · Krish**** said

First, if you ever meet an Indian from New Zealand, you will find them to be the most pathetic people around.

You are an idiot.

How many of these 'Indians from New Zealand' have you met? What age group where they?

I second this response - Indians in New Zealand are a extremely heterogenous goup - from IndoFijians (Muslim, Hindu and Christian blue AND white-collar workers), expat Indo South Africans (such as my brother's girlfriend) also of various religions, 3rd or 4th gen Sikh and Hindu farmers and DBD Sikh farmers in the produce growing districts, white-collar professionals arrived within the last 20 years from India in the big cities, etc.
Yes we have a Desi Governor-General. We also have a prime-time desi new-reader (out lesbian) Rebecca Singh, news reporters such as Arrun Soma (and others). Sukhi Turner (a Sikh born and raised in India) was for six years the mayor of Dunedin - our 4th largest city. Araahdna Patel (Indian/Samoan) is a popular singer/hip-hop artist... the list goes on.'
A lot of people don't know that among some of the first Pakeha (non-Maori) to live amongst the Maori here were various 'Lascar' seamen (ships often had mixed crews in the 1800's) who had jumped ship and some of whom left descendants here.

149 · persecution said

Nicole, you forgot another important observation. DBDs smell of Chicken Tikka Masala, while ABDs smell of Chanel No. 5

persecution, both DBDs and ABDs smell too much beedi smoke ?
(sick joke)

149 · persecution said

ABDs smell of Chanel No. 5

Then why am I overwhelmed by Drakkar every time I go to a desi club night?

Interesting discussion:

Which comes down to my belief that most of today's libertarians just want to make excuses to build a system that will allow them to retain and enjoy the fruits of their social position and wealth, without actually contributing back.

I broadly agree with this in an American context. I think whatever merit that libertarianism might have as a set of political ideals has been hijacked by American capitalism and political repression. Many of the people who have libertarian inclinations in the United States would likely be further along the line to either anarchism (in one direction) or populism (in another) or openly pro-capital policies (in another). But the lack of ideological diversity in the United States, the emphasis on the constitution as the textual basis of "right and wrong" and the domination of the market lead to conclusions among people who would ideally know better that a) the "free trade" system is free and can be juxtaposed against "protectionism" (clearly not true - there are many many specifics and they are weighted against labour); b) that the supporting the rule of law is somehow beneficial to ordinary people; c) that past precedent matters as much as principle; d) that somehow "citizenship" status and laws are not wholly offensive to basic principles of liberty; etc. etc. etc.

It would be great if American libertarians would actually be libertarian, as many radical socialists around the world are. It's not like they invented the concept of "state oppression" ;) I wish they would more frequently apply it in their thinking or just admit that they're pro-rich or pro-market or really just haven't thought things through. Interestingly, they have this in common with a lot of other Americans and their ideologies (e.g. many progressives who deny that imperialism exists and might, in other contexts, have turned towards stronger social democracy aims or communism or statism or more strongly pro-poor populism).

(some gross generalizations here, but the overall assessment, I think, is at least a good critique-as-starting point).

Gandhi, interestingly, was a revolutionary but still choose civil disobedience.

Characterizing Gandhi as a "revolutionary" is extremely problematic when there were actually revolutionaries that existed at the time with a variety of perspectives.

1) Gandhi was a mass mobilizer and ideological leader in an effort to build a cross class alliance in an anti-colonial political independence movement (see Francine Frankel's political economy book or many many other works). He was by NO means a social revolutionary except to the extent that he ideologically opposed the vision of an industrialized India (and on that count, he mostly lost, except for the planning period's poor agricultural/small-scale "industry") policy; 2) He opposed (and in fact attempted to stop) labor activism (as well as greater dalit rights) as part of his policy of conciliation as opposed to the Congress left or other left parties in India that actually believed in social revolution 3) He was something of a tyrant within the Congress party - though in passive aggressive style - if they were alive, you could ask more radical politicians like Ambedkar (Poona Pact) or Subhash Chandra Bose (who was deposed from the Congress presidency because of Gandhi), etc. 4) He enjoyed good relationships and had funding from big industrialists, though the exact nature of the relationships is a contentious topic from what I understand granting that ideologically, Gandhi was opposed to industry and "modernism" per se; 5) His calls were not sectarian, but his style frequently depended on "Hindu" tropes; 6) He supported and in many ways led an organization led by high caste, upper class (what are misleadingly called "middle class") Hindus -- which helped lay the groundwork for the paternalism (as opposed to socialism, which it was not) of the Indian state.

Whether you think this is good or bad is up to you in the context of your readings of other history, but this is closer to the reality.

153 · Dr AmNonymous said

It would be great if American libertarians would actually be libertarian, as many radical socialists around the world are.

what, like Lula?

153 · Dr AmNonymous said

I think whatever merit that libertarianism might have as a set of political ideals has been hijacked by American capitalism

you must, my dear, identify the goose before bringing down the world gander. (or, how does one pay the bills? In the pockets of those eeeeevil capitalist pigs?)

153 · Dr AmNonymous said

Which comes down to my belief that most of today's libertarians just want to make excuses to build a system that will allow them to retain and enjoy the fruits of their social position and wealth, without actually contributing back.

I know you did not originally write this, but, it should be addressed. Y'see, the tricky thing about this discussion, is that the greatest anti-poverty force in the world right now is freer trade and this 'system' envisioned by wild-eyed detractors as enriching selfish wealth generators has been in place for as long as humans have had to deal with mundane realities like eating, sleeping without fear of animal attack, etc. There is no magical global kitty into which some must pay so that others may be preserved in poverty (and ripe for intrepid Anthros!) and this is a good thing.

I thought libertarianism was a word that evolved out of necessity, as "liberlism" evolved to include more statist philosophies within the liberal paradigm, ie social-welfarism and even democratic socialism.

But the original liberals where thankfully not purists, but rather men deeply concerned with their revolution succeeding. The US constitution is a great libertarian document, and you see this conflict in the text. Property rights are implied, but not specifically enumerated despite considerable debate to include the "right to property." Property takings are allowed, within reason, and while religious establishment is banned, they stopped short of offering a wall of separation. And so it goes...

My family's connection to New Zealand goes back more than 70 years.

I have many family members living there. Aussies and Kiwis generally suffer from insecurities when the come up against Americans, and this is heightened in the brown population.

What I detest about Kiwi Indians is their bougie mentality. They person who responded with the multicultural history of NZ won't tell you that Indians there strive VERY HARD to make sure the white population does not lump them in with other brownies like the Pacific Islanders (who have a very difficult time integrating into society).

It's the rising at the expense of another desi bullshyt which annoys me and makes me avoid my Kiwi cousins whenever they come to visit us in the US.

147 · Harbeer said

ABD speaking here. I can't stand most ABDs. To generalize, I find most of them to be vapid, materialistic, sheltered, and not very curious about the world. In other words, boring mama's boys/daddy's girls.

Word.

(There are, of course, exceptions, and I've got some great ABD friends.)

I know I'm awesome Herb, but what's it going to take to get you to give a Poonjabi a call?

155 · Nayagan said

153 · Dr AmNonymous said

It would be great if American libertarians would actually be libertarian, as many radical socialists around the world are.

what, like Lula?

Like some of these people: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism

157 · Nayagan said

153 · Dr AmNonymous said

Which comes down to my belief that most of today's libertarians just want to make excuses to build a system that will allow them to retain and enjoy the fruits of their social position and wealth, without actually contributing back.

I know you did not originally write this, but, it should be addressed. Y'see, the tricky thing about this discussion, is that the greatest anti-poverty force in the world right now is freer trade and this 'system' envisioned by wild-eyed detractors as enriching selfish wealth generators has been in place for as long as humans have had to deal with mundane realities like eating, sleeping without fear of animal attack, etc. There is no magical global kitty into which some must pay so that others may be preserved in poverty (and ripe for intrepid Anthros!) and this is a good thing.

This, again, is a gross oversimplification. The global system that exists today has a certain type of trade, which is called "free." Is migration freer than it was 2000 or even 200 years ago? Hard for me to believe. Is state control stronger through surveillance technologies? Indubitably. Moreover, the global system that exists today is relatively recent - as opposed to trade. Read some Wallerstein--capitalism has very little to do with fearing animal attack and most honest theorists of capitalism (like Adam Smith or Marx) will acknowledge the tremendous social and political violence that was and is inflicted for the establishment of a market. Where they go from there is a different question.

The fundamental problem with the broad mass of American libertarianism, aside from its excessive economic conservatism and unwillingness to engage in escaping the blindness that comes with American politics, is that it doesn't question social power - why is it better to be oppressed by social power than it is to be a state--and more relevantly, what do you do when the two work together, as in India, where big corporations and the state have worked hand in hand.

Or were we under the illusion that Nehruvian planning benefited the poor more than Tata ;)

158 · Manju said

The US constitution is a great libertarian document, and you see this conflict in the text.

Yeah, as long as you weren't a Black person. Or is that 3/5 of a Black person? ;)
This is exactly what I'm talking about. It's just a piece of paper whose interpretation has radically evolved, and there is no reason to turn back to it rather than look forward. Why not develop our own ideas with their own philosophical foundations instead of looking to the ideas of people from 200+ years ago who happened to have some power? It's like relying on Stalin instead of Bakhunin for how to understand Marxism. What is the point of believing in a philosophy of indidiviualism if it doesn't actually empower you to THINK as an individual to the extent possible (insert Spivak here)?

Y'see, the tricky thing about this discussion, is that the greatest anti-poverty force in the world right now is freer trade and this 'system' envisioned by wild-eyed detractors as enriching selfish wealth generators has been in place for as long as humans have had to deal with mundane realities like eating, sleeping without fear of animal attack, etc. There is no magical global kitty into which some must pay so that others may be preserved in poverty (and ripe for intrepid Anthros!) and this is a good thing.

Also, this is simply false. The most recent examples of successful economic development by individual countries involve state coordination of private sector activities (e.g. South Korea), high levels of corruption directed in particular ways that enhance productivity, and a number of other features that fly in the face of neoclassical assumptions and models. At the same time, there is relevance to the argument that the policy prescriptions need to be socially appropriate - what will work in South Korea did not work in Pakistan. Free trade policies have tended to be adopted by imperial powers AFTER they have developed and achieved hegemony, not before.

As for the magic global kitty - well that's what I call capitalism. Take a look at the portions of profit that each level of the supply chain in the apparel industry gets--you'll find that Nike and Federated Stores are getting a hell of a lot more than a factory owner, let alone a worker, in Bangladesh or China ;) If you replicate those social relations a million billion times and throw in imperialist policymaking and warfare - well, there's your magic global kitty ;) Also ripe for Anthro study ;)

It's the rising at the expense of another desi bullshyt which annoys me and makes me avoid my Kiwi cousins whenever they come to visit us in the US.

How noble you are, avoiding your relatives when they come to visit you in a foreign country! How dare they want to succeed! You're definitely standing for the rights of oppressed people everywhere by doing so! Seriously, do you even have solid proof of how your cousins are personally responsible for every other 'brownie' group's problem in New Zealand?

This is a perfect example of what I mean.

159 · Krish**** said

My family's connection to New Zealand goes back more than 70 years.

I have many family members living there. Aussies and Kiwis generally suffer from insecurities when the come up against Americans, and this is heightened in the brown population.

What I detest about Kiwi Indians is their bougie mentality. They person who responded with the multicultural history of NZ won't tell you that Indians there strive VERY HARD to make sure the white population does not lump them in with other brownies like the Pacific Islanders (who have a very difficult time integrating into society).

It's the rising at the expense of another desi bullshyt which annoys me and makes me avoid my Kiwi cousins whenever they come to visit us in the US.

As an Indian new Zealander, that accusation is true to some extent. But Pacific islanders on the whole, are generally far more accepted as "kiwi' than say Indians are.They're socially and economically worse off, certainly.

162 · Dr AmNonymous said

The fundamental problem with the broad mass of American libertarianism, aside from its excessive economic conservatism and unwillingness to engage in escaping the blindness that comes with American politics

I would like to engage with you, but if I began my argument by saying, "You are blinded by the shadows of heterodox economists who feel much put upon in the academy" there would be no room for engagement and I see that you do wish to take this approach. Look if the people at Spiked aren't comfortable with their current standard of living, they are perfectly justified in disregarding the violence accompanying the formation of their state and taking full advantage of the state's dole. If you can confuse oligarchy or regulatory regimes created for the largest players in particular market, with the best approximations of free markets that most american libs hope for, i'm afraid you know little of american libertarians (or have ever read an issue of Reason or know that the best civil liberties reporting these days is done by 'blind' american libertarians)

I'll close with Wainaina:

"No one can empower you except us. And if you don't listen to us, our bad people, those RepublicanToryChineseOilConcessioningIanSmithing racists will come to get you: your choice is our compassionate breast or their market forces.

In our loving breast you will be a vegan. We will eliminate your carbon footprint, your testosterone, your addiction to religions. You will be kept away from bad bad people, like ALL MEN.

We don't live in harmony with nature and we are farting greenhouse gases all over the place. We will teach you how to live without farting greenhouse gases.

We will shut all your industries and build our organic Jeffery Sachs-designed school inside your national parks, where you can commune with nature, grow ecologically friendly crops, trade fairly with eco-tourists and receive visitors from the United Nations every month who will clap when you dance."

167 · Nayagan said

162 · Dr AmNonymous said

The fundamental problem with the broad mass of American libertarianism, aside from its excessive economic conservatism and unwillingness to engage in escaping the blindness that comes with American politics

I would like to engage with you, but if I began my argument by saying, "You are blinded by the shadows of heterodox economists who feel much put upon in the academy" there would be no room for engagement and I see that you do wish to take this approach...I'll close with Wainaina:

"No one can empower you except us. And if you don't listen to us, our bad people, those RepublicanToryChineseOilConcessioningIanSmithing racists will come to get you: your choice is our compassionate breast or their market forces.

In our loving breast you will be a vegan. We will eliminate your carbon footprint, your testosterone, your addiction to religions. You will be kept away from bad bad people, like ALL MEN.

We don't live in harmony with nature and we are farting greenhouse gases all over the place. We will teach you how to live without farting greenhouse gases.

We will shut all your industries and build our organic Jeffery Sachs-designed school inside your national parks, where you can commune with nature, grow ecologically friendly crops, trade fairly with eco-tourists and receive visitors from the United Nations every month who will clap when you dance."

Look, you're perfectly free to insult me and construct straw-man arguments premised on global imperialism (of the left or right)- I don't care. If a critique of "the broad mass of American libertarians" (which I assume a reader of the phrase can understand as my own understanding of said group based on my own exposure to) is cause for not engaging with me, that's fine, though it might help if you quote the whole sentence ;) Let's not pretend, though, that discourse in this forum is civil or that it's my responsibility that it's not, particularly when claims about what solves poverty are being made in a blase fashion. It seems fairer to say, rather than blaming it entirely on me and my writing style, that we have different perspectives which don't make engagement possible here.

#147, Harbeer: Interesting perspective from an ABD......that is the sort of picture that *I* had (DBD here)- "spoon fed, sheltered" (to describe ABDs) and "new life in a sometime inhospitable country" (to describe DBDs).

However, after living in the US for about a decade now, my notions are changing. It all depends on what sort of inputs a person had and how they evolved. IMHO, if an ABD is raised without much knowledge of India (except for exposure to Bollywood), they are the ones who are condescending. But I have also met several ABDs who have more than a glimpse of the classical arts, philosophy, etc and show a deep interest in learning/pursuing those art forms. (www.mythiliprakash.com) is a good example. (though not a common one!).
And there are several DBDs I have met, who are full of the money their parents send along with them, who are completely fascinated with the US, put on an American accent the moment their flight takes off from India(well, even back in India that is how they try to speak, I think) and adopt as much of an American lifestyle that they possibly can in the shortest time possible. They are far too snobbish to be seen around with other desis!

From what I have seen, a person who has travelled around the world a bit, who has had to fend for himself/herself for some time at least, has faced some big challenge in life - these are the level headed ones, ABD or DBD or whatever. :)
The rest of us are stuck with our notions, our superiority complexes and all the other crap that we find hard to let go. :D
(Ok, enough philosophy for the day!).