For all of these reasons, I have been calling for the United States to absorb the Mexican United States as the 51st to 81st states of our Union.
Now Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit is too:
One difference between the demonstrations in France and the demonstrations in America: The French are demonstrating for the right not to work hard, while the demonstrators in America mostly want to work.
Exactly. America’s immigration situation is nothing like Europe. We attract the best and the brightest, and immediately put them to work (though with civil fines for those who don’t go through the paperwork hoopla).
At least part of our better solution is the fact that our immigrants come from a sister nation, who also spans our continent, with roots in Western European colonialism, and holds to a federal republic as the best form of government.
In fact, they’re leaving Mexico because its corrupt and thuggish political culture stifles economic growth and opportunity. The people there are smart and hardworking, after all, and they tend to do just fine when they get here. They’re leaving because being smart and hardworking is enough to get you ahead in the United States, but not in Mexico. And I suspect that if the Reconquista advocates somehow did get their way, and the Southwest United States became a new Northern Mexico, we’d soon have illegal immigrants crossing over into Kansas and Oklahoma for opportunity, because the Mexican political culture would have ruined things in Arizona and Texas just like it’s already ruined them further south.
In other words, they are running towards our Constitution and political system. While local conditions differ — it would be insane to have a Continental education policy for both Oregon and Oaxaca, for example — our economic system works, too. Our system of property rights, our system of Constitutional rights, and our system of getting things done is what Mexicans want and need.
Oh, we don’t need to turn Mexico into a state, or several. At least not right away. But as part of any immigration deal, the United States needs to demand reform in Mexico. Serious political reform, and serious economic reform.
Here Reynolds is referring to what TM Lutas called an “acquis communitaire” — a European style harmonization of basic laws before the Union. That’s fine. If America offered eventual Constitutional statehood to the “free and sovereign” members of the Mexican United States , we would be able fix any serious problems before they join us as voting members. For example, the much-needed privatization of Pemex (Mexico’s state oil company).
And reciprocity. If we’re going to make it easy for Mexicans to come to the United States to live, work, hold property, and get public benefits without too much paperwork trouble, we need to make it easy for Americans to do the same in Mexico. Right now, as several people have noticed, the environment there is considerably less friendly to foreigners than America’s is.
Exactly. Openness is a two-way street. Interstate disputes handled by federal courts, not NAFTA courts. Property rights ultimately enforced by the American Constitution. Travel and home-ownership rights, for our retirees.
But as the Mexican government has been free to express opinions about how the United States should set immigration, economic, and educational policy, it seems only fair if we do the same for them.
It’s an interdependent world, after all. And that works both ways.