I’ve been reading my own blog post on Nationalistic Threat.
So what walls and integration scheme seem reasonable?
At some level one would like the following to be satisfied to grant residency beyond one year of time.
- Basic mastery of a language of this country.
- Demonstrate comprehension of our political system and our laws.
- Explicitly express support for our political system and laws.
- Rigorous training and certification in basic skills of our society: safe driving and internet usage, voting and protesting, consumer rights, how American capitalism works, basic numeracy and scientific knowledge to understand statistics and methodology used by our legal system, some history on evolution of government to America, basics of healthy and sanitary life style.
- Demonstrate an employable skill or highly probably addition to the country.
- Minors need to be under supervision of a Citizen.
(It is acceptable that new residents are required to achieve or exceed a standard more stringent than citizens and previously admitted residents)
The one year of time is a grace period for integration. If they do not integrate, then they will he asked to leave. New immigration should be regulated by
- The country’s social economic needs sets the rate to admit expressed as immigrants per day.
- Selection should be at random among all applicants in the system at the time of selection irrespective of any characteristics or history of selection.
- Asylum and talent admissions can be made but are not exception to residency requirements.
I will declare that I don’t know if this is the way to create a better America in line with its great founding and history so far. And some of it sound like authoritarian state indoctrination. But it solves some problems. At least, I will feel some sense of safety while driving on the road knowing that all drivers has gone through a fairly rigorous training in safe driving. At least I will know that efforts have been taken to help new immigrants to try to change the country in civil ways that they do not resort to weapons and violence. Every resident knowing how our capitalism works will help to promote the efficiency of our markets and fungibility of laborers.
Lastly, foremost feature amongst all, the process to admit new immigrants should not discriminate! For or against any reason or race or place of origin or in-born characteristics, the chance of admission should be complete unbiased!!
P.s. the proposal looks like the rejection sampling algorithm. While it is inefficient, it is guaranteed to select an absolutely unbiased sample from all people that satisfies residency rules. I challenge the reader to propose the use of another more efficient algorithm that can sample from entire humanity in a fair way and still satisfy a list of criterions to require for residency. In the sampling framework one is reminded of sampling unit. In this case we can actually sample on families. This is the case because there are the infirm that our great country cares for. They should come as a part of a caring family.
P.p.s. Sigh, it would appear my original entry have been deleted from this blog. It seems I had watched an episode of Madam Secretary in which several formal American Secretaries of State Cameoed and all stated into the camera that there is a nationalistic threat in the world, that nationalism was a big problem today. Obviously, in retrospect, when the high suit nationalist is now out of the office, and that the white nationalists have been explained to the public, these sentiments about that particular flavor of nationalism do seem completely reasonable. But at the time, I had questioned why they were using the specific words (quite bare without additional modification) “nationalism is a danger to the world”. My concern was that nationalism was a cause for which social order can be enforced and protected. Nationalism is a source of pride that promotes very health competition. Nationalism has even essential in the advancement of our civilization. Why would any one challenge the existence of nationalism, like why don’t we just question money while we’re at it?
Ah, okay, but we are with cryptocurrency. But still, give me a replacement for nationalism, it’s not like they simply declare that fiat currency is bad, instead a new alternative is proposed. What was the replacement for nationalism in these segments?
Anyways, a lot of good-meaninged people, just whirling around the maelstrom of 21st century politics, I suppose.
Additionally in retrospect, these proposals may need further explanation. It isn’t that we don’t care about all humans and al creatures alive or dead big or small. It’s just that I do not believe in an omnibenevolence is a goal of our government. It is no more appropriate to demand the federal government to take care of the worlds infirm than for me to ask my iphone to predict tomorrow’s weather. It is just physically not efficient, based on our current understanding of the world, for them to do these things. Sure the iphone can call out to a cloud and ask for the weather, but we do bot think the White House has a direct line to the almighty in the clouds… I don’t think so, maybe he and the founding fathers thought so., but I do not believe this. The government is a man made machine that works. We may aspire to attain insane heights as we reach for the clouds with the machine, but better we keep our heads at ground level and be effective in our daily lives. It doesn’t make sense to take everyone who wants to come. We have never done that, despite our declarations and poetries, and immigration can’t be a goal, it is only a means to some end–that end not presently omnibenevolence imho.
Does that put things into perspective?