|
WilliamToddFirstEssay 5 - 18 May 2025 - Main.WilliamTodd
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
Crossing Borders: The Failures of Immigration in the United States and Australia | |
<
< | -- By WilliamTodd - 19 Feb 2025 | >
> | -- By WilliamTodd - 18 May 2025 | | | | |
<
< | The current state of immigration in the United States is a mess. However, this is by no means a recent phenomenon. This is an issue that has been festering for decades with no real effort to wholly address it by any administration or any congress. This is an issue that has been waiting to be exploited by the right people at the right time, to maintain power and to foster hatred. This is an issue that has the potential to drastically alter the way people see the notion of immigration; to fundamentally transform the lens through which the American people view immigrants themselves. | >
> | The regulation of immigration in the United States is broken. Immigration has been a vexed issue dating back to 1790. With each successive wave of immigration of people from Europe to Latin America to Asia, hostility has grown amongst people residing in the US as immigrants represented a threat to job security, working conditions and housing supply. The inability of successive administrations to adequately address legal immigration to the satisfaction of the electorate has resulted in the chaotic, inconsistent and damaging treatment of illegal immigrants. | | | | |
<
< | The rise of a fascist president at a time of increasing national frustration with the government’s disjointed and ineffective approach to immigration is undoubtedly a reflection of growing public dissatisfaction. However, it also has the potential to profoundly shape this dissatisfaction and to project it towards inhumane and draconian policies that seek to preserve racial domination as well as the president’s own power indefinitely. While this rightly raises alarms concerning the decaying fabric of our cultural values and the uncertain future of American democracy, it surely seems somewhat distant and unimportant to many – those who face the very urgent and very real threat of deportation. | >
> | Systemic failures and public sentiment regarding immigration has provided an environment for exploitation by opportunists in positions of power who have been able to influence the narrative of how the American people view the immigrant, either legal or illegal. The current President has been able to reflect with robust rhetoric the increasing national dissatisfaction with ineffective policy and law in dealing with immigration. This rhetoric has led to the conflation of illegal and legal immigration in terms of public discourse. This negative sentiment has driven support for inhumane and draconian immigration policies that seek to preserve racial domination and increase the power of the President. | | | | |
<
< | Having grown up in Australia, I am no stranger to the perils of a broken immigration system. Indeed, there is no shortage of overlap between the two Australia and the US when it comes to the strict and unforgiving nature of their immigration policies. Both countries stand out as attractive destinations for those seeking asylum and hope of a new start, unhampered by the destruction of war and political instability. | >
> | The President claims he has a duty, in violation of cultural and moral values and the principles of democracy, to carry out mass deportations of immigrants, regardless of their legal status, to stop asylum seekers at the borders and delay or deny refugee status for those who have submitted their claim. | | | | |
<
< |
Migration and asylum are not actually directly interconnected subjects, and the conversations we have—both vernacular and professional—are unfortunately cramped because we tend to conflate them.
| >
> | America is not alone with its broken immigration system. As an Australian, I am aware of the effects of Australia’s struggle to manage both illegal and legal immigration. Australia is a country built on immigration, we have relied on immigration to build our workforce and economy. Notwithstanding this, racial tension has always simmered and as immigration has increased in combination with the rise in asylum seekers, successive Australian governments have enacted laws and policies to manage immigration and to respond to community unrest about the security of the country and the security of their way of life. The result has been strict and unforgiving immigration policies. | | | | |
>
> | For migrants seeking refuge in Australia, they face unique problems. As a faraway country with a surrounding ocean border-wall, illegal migration often involves long travel in small, overcrowded and ill-equipped boats in treacherous seas. Vessels that do not sink (resulting in lives lost) are intercepted by border patrol officers whereupon the asylum seekers are transported to offshore immigration detention centres in neighbouring territories such as Papua New Guinea. Individuals and whole families languish in these prison-like facilities for years waiting for their refugee status application to be assessed, and if rejected, they are then returned home. Those who fly to Australia by plane and overstay their visa are searched for and deported. This practice is rooted in our immigration laws and policies and its bipartisan support reduces the possibility of any policy change. | | | | |
<
< | Yet, they both maintain policies that make it extremely hard for those emigrating from around the world to enter and remain within their borders. The only major difference is a geographic one – as an island, Australia has an extremely effective natural border-wall. The combination of surrounding water and immense distance to any other country means that any person seeking refuge or asylum must travel long distances by small, ill-equipped boats in treacherous seas. These vessels are routinely intercepted by border patrol agents and the individuals aboard are shipped off to immigration detention centers, prison-like facilities in neighboring territories such as Christmas Island or Papua New Guinea. This kind of treatment may sound inhumane and shocking, but its practice is so deeply rooted in Australian law and politics that it faces very little resistance and widely enjoys bipartisan support. | >
> | Legislation and policy need to meet the reality of increasing migration throughout the world. The internet and advancements in how people carry out their work and life has theoretically brought down borders and driven movement between nations. Additionally, increasing regional instabilities and warfare has further contributed to the rising numbers of people wanting to migrate to wealthier and safer nations and looking further ahead climate refugees will also increase the volume of immigration. The scope of immigration must be redefined to meet demand. | | | | |
<
< |
Boats are not the primary means by which people arrive in either place, however. The "boat thing" is a special form of anxiety expression for people who live on islands like Oz and the UK. Where the is;ands are really far away, like NZ or Hawaii, all the "stop the boats" stuff disappears, more or less.
| >
> | The legalities of crossing borders will always be a challenge to lawmakers. Controlling and simultaneously supporting immigration requires a multi-faceted approach which has compassion and respect for the dignity of the individual as the baseline. The current political landscape in both the US and Australia regarding immigration is influenced by the citizenry who instinctively fear migrants of differing status. Lawmakers must address this issue when shaping policy. All people have a human right to live in a free society with a basic standard of living. The sanctity of this needs to be sold and preserved through education of the people. To shift a national conscience, there must be sustained, widespread collective action to transform public opinion while promoting policy agendas that not only support immigration theoretically but which in practice ensure adequate funding and resources, and necessary infrastructure capable of administering a sophisticated immigration network. | | | | |
>
> | The destination nations feel the impacts of immigration economically, socially and culturally. Expansive policy must address these issues to meet the unavoidable fact of immigration. Housing, public transport, schools and universities, hospitals and health care, welfare services and job opportunities need to meet the demand of an increasing population that comes with immigration. Investing in and expanding on these services will not only buffer immigration but will bring improved services to existing citizens. Lawmakers need to pitch the advantages of immigration. By minimizing the impact of immigration on a nation you minimize the impact of immigration on the individual, and with this acceptance will grow. | | | | |
<
< | Reflection upon these injustices prompts necessary questioning about what can be done by lawyers to challenge these primitive policies and promote the rights of immigrants. There is a dire need to fight for legislation and robust policies that better cope with the reality of increasing mass migration in the modern world. The widespread prevalence of war and worsening levels of regional instability are drastically redefining the scope of immigration around the world and expanding the need for wealthier and safer nations to open themselves up to accepting unprecedented numbers of refugees. The reality is that these problems are only going to become more and more exacerbated in the coming years as the number of climate refugees increases in the midst of worsening effects of global warming. The need for help will only deepen.
This will require legal and political approaches grounded in compassion and respect for the dignity of all people. This may sound far-fetched, especially given the current sense of indifference and brutality that seems to plague the political landscapes of both the US and Australia; And it is surely made worse by the fact that both citizenries are accustomed to view immigrants and refugees as inferior and undeserving of access to happiness and a basic standard of quality of life. However, for those that believe in the sanctity of human rights and the importance of upholding preserving each and every person’s dignity, we must not be deterred. We must educate. We must organize. We must fight back. To shift a national conscience, we must do so through widespread collective action. This long-term approach is built and sustained by transforming public opinion and simultaneously pushing policy agendas that not only support immigration in theory, but that also take practical steps to ensure adequate funding and resources that can support a robust infrastructure capable of administering a sophisticated immigration network.
While these strategies are designed to effect meaningful change over the course of many years, they are largely void of any real substance when it comes to combatting immigration at this very moment. The need to fight for those currently or soon-to-be impacted by immigration crises around the world cannot be understated. I ground my assertion of the importance of improving immigration systems in the humanity of the very people at the center of it. This subsequently necessitates action to help people right now. As lawyers and prospective legal practitioners, we must staunchly defend immigrants around the country from the threat of deportation. This crisis is undoubtedly one in which those in the legal industry possess unique abilities to directly stand up and advocate for those in need. The illegality of recent immigration trends cannot be masked by a fascist regime that preaches hate and stokes division on the back of misleading facts and racist attitudes. The constitutionality of deportations and threats to birthright citizenship must be challenged with compassion and a keen awareness of the legal landscape.
Grand general rhetoric has some use, I suppose, but it seems to me that these paragraphs are likely to meet with the approval or those who agreed already, and the disagreement of those who did not, without prompting any new thought either way. Perhaps there is nothing to be gained from trying to understand the bases of disagreement sufficiently to speak persuasively to those who do not agree. But if we are adressing only those who are already of our mind, can we not be more economical in restating what we already agree upon in order to find something new to say to ourselves?
The daunting nature of this task is not lost on me – yet, there is no other choice. Obedience to fascism now breeds obedience in the future. It is time to take a stand. This will require bravery and courage in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles, but I am confident that it can be done. For that little boy in a Panamanian hotel; for that little girl in a detention center on small island in the middle of the Pacific – it must be done. | >
> | To meet the immediate crisis, administrators must set reasonable immigration levels that can be managed by reasonable temporary and permanent visa and citizenship programs that expand as need and demand increase. Crucially, attention must be given to the obvious economic impact of immigration. Increased spending is required on infrastructure so that it can support a growing population – hospitals, schools, tertiary institutions, public transport and housing need to keep pace. Funding for the programs will come from the increased workforce that will allow business and industry to expand providing for supply to meet demand. | | | | |
>
> | When immigration is managed well with effective economic policies then the sentiment of immigration naysayers will become addressed. Lawmakers have a moral responsibility to implement policy that educates the community from a young age on the reasons for migration and the benefits that can flow reciprocally. Importantly lawyers need to advocate for the immigrant threatened with deportation on illegal grounds and preach against misleading facts and racism. Lawyers need to arrest the failure of immigration in the US and Australia. | | |
|
|
|
WilliamToddFirstEssay 4 - 26 Apr 2025 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| | | The rise of a fascist president at a time of increasing national frustration with the government’s disjointed and ineffective approach to immigration is undoubtedly a reflection of growing public dissatisfaction. However, it also has the potential to profoundly shape this dissatisfaction and to project it towards inhumane and draconian policies that seek to preserve racial domination as well as the president’s own power indefinitely. While this rightly raises alarms concerning the decaying fabric of our cultural values and the uncertain future of American democracy, it surely seems somewhat distant and unimportant to many – those who face the very urgent and very real threat of deportation. | |
<
< | Having grown up in Australia, I am no stranger to the perils of a broken immigration system. Indeed, there is no shortage of overlap between the two Australia and the US when it comes to the strict and unforgiving nature of their immigration policies. Both countries stand out as attractive destinations for those seeking asylum and hope of a new start, unhampered by the destruction of war and political instability. Yet, they both maintain policies that make it extremely hard for those emigrating from around the world to enter and remain within their borders. The only major difference is a geographic one – as an island, Australia has an extremely effective natural border-wall. The combination of surrounding water and immense distance to any other country means that any person seeking refuge or asylum must travel long distances by small, ill-equipped boats in treacherous seas. These vessels are routinely intercepted by border patrol agents and the individuals aboard are shipped off to immigration detention centers, prison-like facilities in neighboring territories such as Christmas Island or Papua New Guinea. This kind of treatment may sound inhumane and shocking, but its practice is so deeply rooted in Australian law and politics that it faces very little resistance and widely enjoys bipartisan support. | >
> | Having grown up in Australia, I am no stranger to the perils of a broken immigration system. Indeed, there is no shortage of overlap between the two Australia and the US when it comes to the strict and unforgiving nature of their immigration policies. Both countries stand out as attractive destinations for those seeking asylum and hope of a new start, unhampered by the destruction of war and political instability.
Migration and asylum are not actually directly interconnected subjects, and the conversations we have—both vernacular and professional—are unfortunately cramped because we tend to conflate them.
Yet, they both maintain policies that make it extremely hard for those emigrating from around the world to enter and remain within their borders. The only major difference is a geographic one – as an island, Australia has an extremely effective natural border-wall. The combination of surrounding water and immense distance to any other country means that any person seeking refuge or asylum must travel long distances by small, ill-equipped boats in treacherous seas. These vessels are routinely intercepted by border patrol agents and the individuals aboard are shipped off to immigration detention centers, prison-like facilities in neighboring territories such as Christmas Island or Papua New Guinea. This kind of treatment may sound inhumane and shocking, but its practice is so deeply rooted in Australian law and politics that it faces very little resistance and widely enjoys bipartisan support.
Boats are not the primary means by which people arrive in either place, however. The "boat thing" is a special form of anxiety expression for people who live on islands like Oz and the UK. Where the is;ands are really far away, like NZ or Hawaii, all the "stop the boats" stuff disappears, more or less.
| | | Reflection upon these injustices prompts necessary questioning about what can be done by lawyers to challenge these primitive policies and promote the rights of immigrants. There is a dire need to fight for legislation and robust policies that better cope with the reality of increasing mass migration in the modern world. The widespread prevalence of war and worsening levels of regional instability are drastically redefining the scope of immigration around the world and expanding the need for wealthier and safer nations to open themselves up to accepting unprecedented numbers of refugees. The reality is that these problems are only going to become more and more exacerbated in the coming years as the number of climate refugees increases in the midst of worsening effects of global warming. The need for help will only deepen. | | | While these strategies are designed to effect meaningful change over the course of many years, they are largely void of any real substance when it comes to combatting immigration at this very moment. The need to fight for those currently or soon-to-be impacted by immigration crises around the world cannot be understated. I ground my assertion of the importance of improving immigration systems in the humanity of the very people at the center of it. This subsequently necessitates action to help people right now. As lawyers and prospective legal practitioners, we must staunchly defend immigrants around the country from the threat of deportation. This crisis is undoubtedly one in which those in the legal industry possess unique abilities to directly stand up and advocate for those in need. The illegality of recent immigration trends cannot be masked by a fascist regime that preaches hate and stokes division on the back of misleading facts and racist attitudes. The constitutionality of deportations and threats to birthright citizenship must be challenged with compassion and a keen awareness of the legal landscape. | |
>
> |
Grand general rhetoric has some use, I suppose, but it seems to me that these paragraphs are likely to meet with the approval or those who agreed already, and the disagreement of those who did not, without prompting any new thought either way. Perhaps there is nothing to be gained from trying to understand the bases of disagreement sufficiently to speak persuasively to those who do not agree. But if we are adressing only those who are already of our mind, can we not be more economical in restating what we already agree upon in order to find something new to say to ourselves?
| | | The daunting nature of this task is not lost on me – yet, there is no other choice. Obedience to fascism now breeds obedience in the future. It is time to take a stand. This will require bravery and courage in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles, but I am confident that it can be done. For that little boy in a Panamanian hotel; for that little girl in a detention center on small island in the middle of the Pacific – it must be done. |
|
|
WilliamToddFirstEssay 3 - 20 Feb 2025 - Main.WilliamTodd
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| | | -- By WilliamTodd - 19 Feb 2025 | |
<
< | The current state of immigration in the United States is a mess. However, this is by no means a recent phenomenon, one that suddenly emerged to the surprise of lawmakers and the public. This is an issue that has been festering for decades with no real effort to wholly address it by any administration or any congress. This is an issue that has been waiting to be exploited by the right people at the right time, to maintain power and to foster hatred. This is an issue that has the potential to drastically alter the way people see the notion of immigration; to fundamentally transform the lens through which the American people view immigrants themselves. | >
> | The current state of immigration in the United States is a mess. However, this is by no means a recent phenomenon. This is an issue that has been festering for decades with no real effort to wholly address it by any administration or any congress. This is an issue that has been waiting to be exploited by the right people at the right time, to maintain power and to foster hatred. This is an issue that has the potential to drastically alter the way people see the notion of immigration; to fundamentally transform the lens through which the American people view immigrants themselves. | | | The rise of a fascist president at a time of increasing national frustration with the government’s disjointed and ineffective approach to immigration is undoubtedly a reflection of growing public dissatisfaction. However, it also has the potential to profoundly shape this dissatisfaction and to project it towards inhumane and draconian policies that seek to preserve racial domination as well as the president’s own power indefinitely. While this rightly raises alarms concerning the decaying fabric of our cultural values and the uncertain future of American democracy, it surely seems somewhat distant and unimportant to many – those who face the very urgent and very real threat of deportation. |
|
|
WilliamToddFirstEssay 2 - 20 Feb 2025 - Main.WilliamTodd
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| |
<
< | | | | | |
<
< | It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. | | | | |
<
< | Paper Title | >
> | Crossing Borders: The Failures of Immigration in the United States and Australia | | | -- By WilliamTodd - 19 Feb 2025 | |
<
< | Section I
Subsection A
Subsub 1
Subsection B
Subsub 1 | >
> | The current state of immigration in the United States is a mess. However, this is by no means a recent phenomenon, one that suddenly emerged to the surprise of lawmakers and the public. This is an issue that has been festering for decades with no real effort to wholly address it by any administration or any congress. This is an issue that has been waiting to be exploited by the right people at the right time, to maintain power and to foster hatred. This is an issue that has the potential to drastically alter the way people see the notion of immigration; to fundamentally transform the lens through which the American people view immigrants themselves. | | | | |
<
< | Subsub 2 | >
> | The rise of a fascist president at a time of increasing national frustration with the government’s disjointed and ineffective approach to immigration is undoubtedly a reflection of growing public dissatisfaction. However, it also has the potential to profoundly shape this dissatisfaction and to project it towards inhumane and draconian policies that seek to preserve racial domination as well as the president’s own power indefinitely. While this rightly raises alarms concerning the decaying fabric of our cultural values and the uncertain future of American democracy, it surely seems somewhat distant and unimportant to many – those who face the very urgent and very real threat of deportation. | | | | |
>
> | Having grown up in Australia, I am no stranger to the perils of a broken immigration system. Indeed, there is no shortage of overlap between the two Australia and the US when it comes to the strict and unforgiving nature of their immigration policies. Both countries stand out as attractive destinations for those seeking asylum and hope of a new start, unhampered by the destruction of war and political instability. Yet, they both maintain policies that make it extremely hard for those emigrating from around the world to enter and remain within their borders. The only major difference is a geographic one – as an island, Australia has an extremely effective natural border-wall. The combination of surrounding water and immense distance to any other country means that any person seeking refuge or asylum must travel long distances by small, ill-equipped boats in treacherous seas. These vessels are routinely intercepted by border patrol agents and the individuals aboard are shipped off to immigration detention centers, prison-like facilities in neighboring territories such as Christmas Island or Papua New Guinea. This kind of treatment may sound inhumane and shocking, but its practice is so deeply rooted in Australian law and politics that it faces very little resistance and widely enjoys bipartisan support. | | | | |
>
> | Reflection upon these injustices prompts necessary questioning about what can be done by lawyers to challenge these primitive policies and promote the rights of immigrants. There is a dire need to fight for legislation and robust policies that better cope with the reality of increasing mass migration in the modern world. The widespread prevalence of war and worsening levels of regional instability are drastically redefining the scope of immigration around the world and expanding the need for wealthier and safer nations to open themselves up to accepting unprecedented numbers of refugees. The reality is that these problems are only going to become more and more exacerbated in the coming years as the number of climate refugees increases in the midst of worsening effects of global warming. The need for help will only deepen. | | | | |
<
< | Section II | >
> | This will require legal and political approaches grounded in compassion and respect for the dignity of all people. This may sound far-fetched, especially given the current sense of indifference and brutality that seems to plague the political landscapes of both the US and Australia; And it is surely made worse by the fact that both citizenries are accustomed to view immigrants and refugees as inferior and undeserving of access to happiness and a basic standard of quality of life. However, for those that believe in the sanctity of human rights and the importance of upholding preserving each and every person’s dignity, we must not be deterred. We must educate. We must organize. We must fight back. To shift a national conscience, we must do so through widespread collective action. This long-term approach is built and sustained by transforming public opinion and simultaneously pushing policy agendas that not only support immigration in theory, but that also take practical steps to ensure adequate funding and resources that can support a robust infrastructure capable of administering a sophisticated immigration network. | | | | |
<
< | Subsection A | >
> | While these strategies are designed to effect meaningful change over the course of many years, they are largely void of any real substance when it comes to combatting immigration at this very moment. The need to fight for those currently or soon-to-be impacted by immigration crises around the world cannot be understated. I ground my assertion of the importance of improving immigration systems in the humanity of the very people at the center of it. This subsequently necessitates action to help people right now. As lawyers and prospective legal practitioners, we must staunchly defend immigrants around the country from the threat of deportation. This crisis is undoubtedly one in which those in the legal industry possess unique abilities to directly stand up and advocate for those in need. The illegality of recent immigration trends cannot be masked by a fascist regime that preaches hate and stokes division on the back of misleading facts and racist attitudes. The constitutionality of deportations and threats to birthright citizenship must be challenged with compassion and a keen awareness of the legal landscape. | | | | |
<
< | Subsection B | >
> | The daunting nature of this task is not lost on me – yet, there is no other choice. Obedience to fascism now breeds obedience in the future. It is time to take a stand. This will require bravery and courage in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles, but I am confident that it can be done. For that little boy in a Panamanian hotel; for that little girl in a detention center on small island in the middle of the Pacific – it must be done. | | |
|
|
|
WilliamToddFirstEssay 1 - 19 Feb 2025 - Main.WilliamTodd
|
|
>
> |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted.
Paper Title
-- By WilliamTodd - 19 Feb 2025
Section I
Subsection A
Subsub 1
Subsection B
Subsub 1
Subsub 2
Section II
Subsection A
Subsection B
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list. |
|
|