American Renaissance recently linked to a dispatch.com article which related how deported illegal aliens return again and again. Looking through the comments, it was correctly pointed out that the welfare system is largely to blame for this; it is what attracts many of them to begin with. It was stated that the only way to address the situation is to go after those who hire illegal immigrants. Some recommended jail time prior to deportation.
Some comments recommended forms of corporal punishment, such as long and uncomfortable sea voyages, tattoos on their hands or even amputation. My own suggestion was that the first offense would have the culprit be flogged. Each time after that, the culprit would lose a finger. My comment was not published – and I completely understand why; this is not the type of image Amren wishes to convey to the world. There is supposed to be a difference between civilized white-nationalists and Muslim fanatics.
Yes, our image is important but, when it comes right down to it, the only solution that would yield immediate and lasting results is corporal punishment. Going after companies that hire illegal immigrants would do a lot of good – but many of those criminals work in the underground economy; they work for cash. The companies they work for might not even be registered with any government agency. Furthermore, increased supervision of employment practices would necessarily further bloat the leviathan we call “government”. There are already far too many hurdles, and risks, involved with hiring as it is. Add to this the fear that one’s company may inadvertently hire an illegal immigrant (which would inflict tremendous loses upon it) – and finding a job will be even more difficult than it already is. Doing away with the government welfare system would be a great step in the right direction and it would certainly curb illegal immigration – but do not most of those welfare beneficiaries also work under the table? Whatever income they get from welfare is a bonus to them; it allows them to send more money back home.
In the final analysis, the only real deterrent is actual physical pain. This is the only thing the criminal mind understands. If the U.S. were to implement such a policy, the “international community” would be in an uproar. We would be accused of trampling on “migrant rights” and violating numerous treaties and international laws. But the U.S. is still powerful enough to thumb its nose at them. A real leader would respond by saying, “this is what we must do to defend our nation. If you do not like it, advise your migrants to stay home!” At the same time, the U.S. would have to live up to its moral responsibilities; it would be required to cease all activities that undermine the economies of third-world countries. It would also be required to cease all bribes, threats and diplomatic leveraging when it comes to the internal affairs of other countries. It must no longer force the rest of the world to participate in its insane, and immoral, War on Some Drugs. If the U.S. were to do all these things, then not only might we save our nation, but we would also maintain the moral high ground. In the end, the rest of the world would respect us for it.
Jewamongyou's Blog 
yeah, the same guy trying to get across the boarder 5 times, getting sent back 4 times, succeeding the 5th. Looks like a Tom and Jerry cartoon, a cat and mouse game.
No punishment. Your suggestion is politically very incorrect. I wrote about corporal punishment, in a different context. I was just saying that it is more humane then using prison rape as punishment
http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/human-rights/stop-prison-rape-legalize-corporal-punishment
Maybe you can use the illegal immigrants as forced labor before sending them back? All other punishment solutions are expensive.
Well, I am just brainstorming. I am not endorsing any of these methods. But I see your point …..
I completely agree with your take on prison rape. Good article, as usual!
I agree completely. Rape is several orders of magnitude worse than flogging, no matter the victim’s nature. I would go so far as to say that rape is never acceptable, even if the victim is a hardened criminal, a mass murderer, a serial rapist, et cetera.
My only question is, what would you do about masochists? :P
Singapore: Judicial and prison caning
Table of offences for which caning is available
Entering or remaining in Singapore without a valid pass
Minimum strokes = 3
Maximum strokes = 24
http://www.corpun.com/sgjur2.htm
I must respectfully but strongly disagree.
One of my primary reasons for opposing illegal immigration (and other multiculturalist fads) is that our traditional culture is better than the ones being imported. Allowing illegal immigration to drive us to pre-modern correctional methods is not consistent with the values of the kind of America I’d like to see.
Have you read “Camp of the Saints”? What is happening today is practically the same thing. In essence, it is an invasion. If actual armies were crossing the border, would you oppose shooting at them or bombing them on the grounds that this would reduce us to their level?
The fact that the Mexican government encourages the flow of their citizens across the border should eliminate any doubts as to their intentions.
I agree we need a new relationship with the Mexican government.
Wasn’t one of the arguments for NAFTA supposed to be that creating jobs for them would stem illegal immigration? We should use our import buying power to demand that they create a more equitable economic distribution, so that the US border no longer functions as their safety net.
Frank-
I haven’t substantiated this claim. But I’ve read that NAFTA opened up Mexico to American agriculture exports. And that US farm subsidies allowed American farmers to undercut Mexican farmers. Particularly in regards to corn. The result was the unemployment of Mexican farm workers. And that many of those farm workers then migrated to the US in search of jobs.
JAY-
I was the one advocating penalties for hiring illegals. Far be it from me to place extra regulatory burden on employers. As you correctly point out, they are already overburdened with regulations. And I suspect many of those regulations are “crap”. But I’d still like to make a case for states criminalizing the hiring of illegals.
In a perfect world, the feds would enforce immigration laws. But GOP and Dems have both demonstrated their refusal to do so at the federal level. Therefore, its up to local government to do what it can. Local government doesn’t have the authority to go after illegals. But they do have the authority to go after those who hire them.
As you point out, regulation would increase the size of state government and raise the costs of hiring workers. But the reduction in the number of illegals would decrease the size of the federal government because there would be fewer illegals using public services. Moreover, higher employer costs would be offest by lower taxes needed to provide those services. And native employees would benefit from increased wages and employment.
Like you, I want to see a lower regulatory burden for employers. And there are plenty of areas in which it can and should be lowered. But I don’t think this is one of them. I don’t think its unreasonable to hold employers responsible for knowingly hiring illegal workers.
Good points.
I’m a little taken aback that you would use “cruel and unusual” punishments to try and deter people from coming here in hopes of a better life, albeit attaining it outside current laws. Show them that the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are ones that we as Americans are willing to share with those not just in want but in need of them.
I believe that the freedoms enjoyed by us should be extended to those who seek it. Immigration policies need a lot of work but flogging people isn’t going solve anything.
I might be biased though, my great grandfather was an “illegal” immigrant. He however crossed the Canadian border. And since I don’t ever remember the Native Americans inviting us here our legal status on this continent is a little iffy.
my 2 cents
Well… I’ll admit that I would not want to be the one doing the flogging; it’s not in my nature. But what would you suggest instead? If the U.S. is allowed to devolve into a third world country, the suffering, death and mayhem would make occasional flogging seem like child’s play.
As for the Native Americans, they were not one single nation. Rather, they were many nations and they would sometimes war with each other, one tribe displacing (or even exterminating) others. How is the European tribe any different?
I hope we can meet again some time and I’ll play you the video “A Conversation about Race”. It will give you a new perspective on some things and it is very thought-provoking.
I’m less worried about devolving due to an Immigrant threat” than I am that China will try to cash the checks we’ve written and quite literally own us. The majority of this country is immigrant or descended from immigrants.
We will never stop any and all migration to the USA. We can however change our foreign policies that constantly and to great harm mettle in the livelihoods of the average Central/South American, not allowing them to govern themselves but be govern by the carrot and stick.
Lets legalize and take Marijuana and coca thereby taking away the impetus for countries and cartels to use the black market as a means to rule and terrorize.
The Native Americans did create Federations of tribes to deal with the settlers. The Iroquois Federation being the first. The European Tribe was different in that it has broken, and in some cases continues to break, every treaty that it has made with the Native tribes, Federations, and Nations.
Should have read; Lets legalize Marijuana, etc.
Not; Legalize and take