4 ms·

From a US perspective, just up until a decade ago, it was a sentiment that left-center perspective that people like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton had. I was ca

by runjake 3mo ago

From a US perspective, just up until a decade ago, it was a sentiment that left-center perspective that people like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton had. I was caught quite off-guard by this new "open borders" perspective. It doesn't seem sustainable at all.

nxm 3mo ago
[flagged]
- Auracle 3mo ago
  That may be, but everyone is afraid to openly criticize it because they're afraid of being accused as racists.
  - ausbah 3mo ago
    what planet are you living on? “border control with pathways for immigration” (and variants) polls consistently high among both US parties
  - jimbokun 3mo ago
    Except for the majority of voters who elected Trump.
  - exiguus 3mo ago
    It's not just talking about it. It's how and also how much you talk about it.
    - Auracle 3mo ago
      Well, some people are far more affected by it than most people. I'm in an area with a huge influx of Somalis in proportion to our population and I've heard many vague hushed conversations about it but our newspapers are filled with stories about how great our diversity is.
      - exiguus 3mo ago
        What are the specific factors that make you, in measurable terms, a person affected by this issue? And from your perspective, what makes this issue so significant compared to others?
- nozzlegear 3mo ago
  > It’s not, it’s only the far-left’s desire Bernie Sanders (since you're presumably talking about the US) doesn't even support open immigration or H-1Bs, let alone open borders.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - loeg 3mo ago
    Bernie isn't the only member of the left and has positions that are a little idiosyncratic among that group; this is one area where he diverges.
    - mondrian 3mo ago
      Structurally speaking, being left and pro-open borders is incoherent. The left is about collective power controlling labor supply and using it to tamp down corporate overreach. Open borders and H1B that allow corporations to side-step local worker bargaining power are squarely antithetical to being Left. I think 'liberal progressives' that are mainly concerned with identity representation, not working class power, are rhetorically bundled as 'far-left'. To people who buy that, Bernie Sanders (a Leftist) and Kamala Harris (a Third Way liberal progressive) are both far-left. It's incoherent but rhetorically potent.
      - saghm 3mo ago
        I'm not sure I've heard anyone claim that Harris is "far left" (other than people arguing against her during an active campaign, which doesn't really say much)
  - fastball 3mo ago
    Perfectly encapsulating how silly it is that so many posters in this thread are trying to make immigration policy a left vs right thing.
    - deleted 3mo ago
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- jimbokun 3mo ago
  The far left as represented by Joe Biden’s administration.
  - jhbadger 3mo ago
    Biden wasn't "far left". The "far left" in US politics is basically Bernie Sanders and AOC's "squad", neither of which have ever come close to running the country.
    - jimbokun 3mo ago
      On immigration there was no daylight between Biden’s views and theirs.
  - SmirkingRevenge 3mo ago
    The Biden admin was not far-left. Biden was basically a mainline Liberal Democrat and much closer to the center than far-left. The far-left basically hates mainline Liberal Democrats like Biden.
- MegagramEnjoyer 3mo ago
  nobody wakes up in syria and thinks "drowning in the mediterranean sounds like a fun way to fulfill the far-left's desire." people leave because the alternative is worse, and the alternative being worse is often something the west had a hand in. quick tour of the "desire" pipeline: iraq 2003, invaded over weapons that didn't exist, army disbanded, vacuum becomes ISIS. syria, proxy-funded civil war, 6+ million refugees, the actual engine of the 2015 europe wave. libya 2011, NATO topples gaddafi with no plan for after, failed state and migration corridor. afghanistan, twenty year occupation then an abrupt exit. the migration is downstream of the bombing. you don't get to set the kitchen on fire and then file a complaint about people leaving the building and that's before the boring stuff that drives migration everywhere and always, wage gaps, no economy, dead farmland, family already abroad, the same reasons europeans showed up in the americas by the tens of millions without anyone filing it under "desire." you can have a real argument about capacity and integration, how many people a system absorbs and how fast, thats legitimate. but "it's the far-left's desire" mistakes the symptom for the cause, the people making that trip have their own reasons that have nothing to do with anyone's domestic politics
  - phatskat 3mo ago
    Ooo ooo don’t forget the US’s hand in the South American drug trade, or toppling numerous South American governments because we didn’t like who was in charge, even if it had been done democratically! To think “the west” could make so many messes and not worry about cleaning up after ourselves - the absolute hubris!
microgpt 3mo ago
Who supports "open borders" and what do they support exactly?
- xdennis 3mo ago
  Biden. His policies led to a huge increase in illegal immigration. Look at the huge jump due to his policies: https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20240127_EPC149.png https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20240127_EPC... The same was not true for Obama, who was actually much better than Bush.
  - triceratops 3mo ago
    What was the policy change though?
    - Auracle 3mo ago
      Biden: "Here's an app where you can make an appointment to illegally cross the border. Our system will be so backed up that you won't need to go to actual immigration court for years, and even then if we tell you to leave and you don't we probably won't go after you. You'll have plenty of time to make an anchor baby. Oh, I can't close the border without a bipartisan bill that essentially enshrines a certain level of illegal immigration. Can't be done." Trump: "Border is closed. We're deporting people, starting with mostly those that have committed serious crimes."
      - triceratops 3mo ago
        > I can't close the border without a bipartisan bill that essentially enshrines a certain level of illegal immigration How did it do that?
        Auracle 3mo ago
        The mandatory trigger at 5,000 encounters/day (or 8,500 single-day) implied acceptance of very high volumes—potentially ~1.8+ million encounters/year—before full expulsion authority kicked in. That expulsion authority only lasted for 3 years. It also codified/expanded release authority for asylum seekers under certain "operational" conditions. The main point is that Biden acted like his hands were tied and Trump showed that they clearly weren't, and that we already had the tools to effectively shut down illegal immigration (through the border, at least).
saghm 3mo ago
From the Wikipedia article: > Markus Allard initiated heavy debate in 2025 by claiming that Sweden is "the land for/belongs to the Swedes" > In a debate hosted by Studio3 with Liberal member of parliament Martin Melin, Allard asked: "why won't the Liberals push for deporting 100 000 social welfare-Somalis?" and in the same debate said that "Sweden belongs to the Swedes. I don't think it's particularly hard to figure out what these are dog whistles for, and equating my vehement disagreement with it as being in favor of "open borders" is absurd.
- tim333 3mo ago
  It doesn't sound much of a dog whistle? More pretty plain spoken. I think Sweden had one of the lowest crime and high trust societies and then admitted a lot of Somali refugees and now has gang warfare and much rape from the guests. Not sure it's that ridiculous to suggest they go home?
- runjake 3mo ago
  I am confused. Are you using multiple HN accounts or something? I was not reply to the saghm account and your saghm account isn't even present up the thread.
  - saghm 3mo ago
    No, this is my only HN account. I'm equally confused why you think that claiming that being in favor of "open borders" being a common perspective wouldn't generate reactions from the type of people holding the views that you mischaracterize as that.
    - runjake 3mo ago
      > I'm equally confused why you think that claiming that being in favor of "open borders" being a common perspective wouldn't generate reactions from the type of people holding the views that you mischaracterize as that. I'm having trouble grokking your statement, but "open borders" is not a pejorative. It's a belief that people, more or less, should be able to freely flow across borders and live where they like. Again, I am speaking from a US perspective. It may carry different connotations in other countries. It's too prescriptive to apply the same immigration policies at a global level. There's too much nuance and geographical differences.

by runjake 3mo ago

nxm 3mo ago

[flagged]

Auracle 3mo ago
That may be, but everyone is afraid to openly criticize it because they're afraid of being accused as racists.
- ausbah 3mo ago
  what planet are you living on? “border control with pathways for immigration” (and variants) polls consistently high among both US parties
- jimbokun 3mo ago
  Except for the majority of voters who elected Trump.
- exiguus 3mo ago
  It's not just talking about it. It's how and also how much you talk about it.
  - Auracle 3mo ago
    Well, some people are far more affected by it than most people. I'm in an area with a huge influx of Somalis in proportion to our population and I've heard many vague hushed conversations about it but our newspapers are filled with stories about how great our diversity is.
    - exiguus 3mo ago
      What are the specific factors that make you, in measurable terms, a person affected by this issue? And from your perspective, what makes this issue so significant compared to others?
nozzlegear 3mo ago
> It’s not, it’s only the far-left’s desire Bernie Sanders (since you're presumably talking about the US) doesn't even support open immigration or H-1Bs, let alone open borders.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- loeg 3mo ago
  Bernie isn't the only member of the left and has positions that are a little idiosyncratic among that group; this is one area where he diverges.
  - mondrian 3mo ago
    Structurally speaking, being left and pro-open borders is incoherent. The left is about collective power controlling labor supply and using it to tamp down corporate overreach. Open borders and H1B that allow corporations to side-step local worker bargaining power are squarely antithetical to being Left. I think 'liberal progressives' that are mainly concerned with identity representation, not working class power, are rhetorically bundled as 'far-left'. To people who buy that, Bernie Sanders (a Leftist) and Kamala Harris (a Third Way liberal progressive) are both far-left. It's incoherent but rhetorically potent.
    - saghm 3mo ago
      I'm not sure I've heard anyone claim that Harris is "far left" (other than people arguing against her during an active campaign, which doesn't really say much)
- fastball 3mo ago
  Perfectly encapsulating how silly it is that so many posters in this thread are trying to make immigration policy a left vs right thing.
  - deleted 3mo ago
deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]
jimbokun 3mo ago
The far left as represented by Joe Biden’s administration.
- jhbadger 3mo ago
  Biden wasn't "far left". The "far left" in US politics is basically Bernie Sanders and AOC's "squad", neither of which have ever come close to running the country.
  - jimbokun 3mo ago
    On immigration there was no daylight between Biden’s views and theirs.
- SmirkingRevenge 3mo ago
  The Biden admin was not far-left. Biden was basically a mainline Liberal Democrat and much closer to the center than far-left. The far-left basically hates mainline Liberal Democrats like Biden.
MegagramEnjoyer 3mo ago
nobody wakes up in syria and thinks "drowning in the mediterranean sounds like a fun way to fulfill the far-left's desire." people leave because the alternative is worse, and the alternative being worse is often something the west had a hand in. quick tour of the "desire" pipeline: iraq 2003, invaded over weapons that didn't exist, army disbanded, vacuum becomes ISIS. syria, proxy-funded civil war, 6+ million refugees, the actual engine of the 2015 europe wave. libya 2011, NATO topples gaddafi with no plan for after, failed state and migration corridor. afghanistan, twenty year occupation then an abrupt exit. the migration is downstream of the bombing. you don't get to set the kitchen on fire and then file a complaint about people leaving the building and that's before the boring stuff that drives migration everywhere and always, wage gaps, no economy, dead farmland, family already abroad, the same reasons europeans showed up in the americas by the tens of millions without anyone filing it under "desire." you can have a real argument about capacity and integration, how many people a system absorbs and how fast, thats legitimate. but "it's the far-left's desire" mistakes the symptom for the cause, the people making that trip have their own reasons that have nothing to do with anyone's domestic politics
- phatskat 3mo ago
  Ooo ooo don’t forget the US’s hand in the South American drug trade, or toppling numerous South American governments because we didn’t like who was in charge, even if it had been done democratically! To think “the west” could make so many messes and not worry about cleaning up after ourselves - the absolute hubris!

microgpt 3mo ago

Who supports "open borders" and what do they support exactly?

xdennis 3mo ago
Biden. His policies led to a huge increase in illegal immigration. Look at the huge jump due to his policies: https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20240127_EPC149.png https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20240127_EPC... The same was not true for Obama, who was actually much better than Bush.
- triceratops 3mo ago
  What was the policy change though?
  - Auracle 3mo ago
    Biden: "Here's an app where you can make an appointment to illegally cross the border. Our system will be so backed up that you won't need to go to actual immigration court for years, and even then if we tell you to leave and you don't we probably won't go after you. You'll have plenty of time to make an anchor baby. Oh, I can't close the border without a bipartisan bill that essentially enshrines a certain level of illegal immigration. Can't be done." Trump: "Border is closed. We're deporting people, starting with mostly those that have committed serious crimes."
    - triceratops 3mo ago
      > I can't close the border without a bipartisan bill that essentially enshrines a certain level of illegal immigration How did it do that?
      - Auracle 3mo ago
        The mandatory trigger at 5,000 encounters/day (or 8,500 single-day) implied acceptance of very high volumes—potentially ~1.8+ million encounters/year—before full expulsion authority kicked in. That expulsion authority only lasted for 3 years. It also codified/expanded release authority for asylum seekers under certain "operational" conditions. The main point is that Biden acted like his hands were tied and Trump showed that they clearly weren't, and that we already had the tools to effectively shut down illegal immigration (through the border, at least).

saghm 3mo ago

From the Wikipedia article: > Markus Allard initiated heavy debate in 2025 by claiming that Sweden is "the land for/belongs to the Swedes" > In a debate hosted by Studio3 with Liberal member of parliament Martin Melin, Allard asked: "why won't the Liberals push for deporting 100 000 social welfare-Somalis?" and in the same debate said that "Sweden belongs to the Swedes. I don't think it's particularly hard to figure out what these are dog whistles for, and equating my vehement disagreement with it as being in favor of "open borders" is absurd.

tim333 3mo ago
It doesn't sound much of a dog whistle? More pretty plain spoken. I think Sweden had one of the lowest crime and high trust societies and then admitted a lot of Somali refugees and now has gang warfare and much rape from the guests. Not sure it's that ridiculous to suggest they go home?
runjake 3mo ago
I am confused. Are you using multiple HN accounts or something? I was not reply to the saghm account and your saghm account isn't even present up the thread.
- saghm 3mo ago
  No, this is my only HN account. I'm equally confused why you think that claiming that being in favor of "open borders" being a common perspective wouldn't generate reactions from the type of people holding the views that you mischaracterize as that.
  - runjake 3mo ago
    > I'm equally confused why you think that claiming that being in favor of "open borders" being a common perspective wouldn't generate reactions from the type of people holding the views that you mischaracterize as that. I'm having trouble grokking your statement, but "open borders" is not a pejorative. It's a belief that people, more or less, should be able to freely flow across borders and live where they like. Again, I am speaking from a US perspective. It may carry different connotations in other countries. It's too prescriptive to apply the same immigration policies at a global level. There's too much nuance and geographical differences.