>I don't think this logic stands up. Does the presence of widespread illegal activity automatically imply that said illegal activity has the moral high ground?

>I don't think this logic stands up. Does the presence of widespread illegal activity automatically imply that said illegal activity has the moral high ground? No. This only applies when it is an legal outcome which has a legal means to achieve, but which large numbers are going with the illegal means. And it isn't about a moral high ground, because morals are tricky business and can differ extremely based on what moral system you choose to use. Instead, it is pointing out that the official system is broken (at least in regards to the issue) when so many decide to work around it. I think the truth of the matter isn't one of the system being broken, but of a harder to publicly state mention that the official system is keeping out the people that are not wanted. But it means dropping the 'everyone can get in legally' shield.