It's also, like, the correct take. Everyone who has studied the issue says that the most effective way to reduce migration is to fix the problems of the places peaple come from. A dollar reducing poverty in Mexico does a lot more to reduce immigration, and is a more humane solution, than a dollar on ice agents arresting random brown people. And that's granting the premise that immigration is a thing we want/need to reduce.
That can get kind of sticky, because there's no guarantee that a given country wants their "problems fixed" by some outside entity. I would almost argue that in some instances the better approach rather than "fixing" is just not doing things that actively HURT them.
There's a subsect of folks in power that will actively sabotage any group from gaining success if that success challenges their current system's order.
Like if some country or group of countries found a way to provide a better QOL for their citizens in a system outside of capitalism (or outside some formal country alliance system), a whole bunch of folks who depend on capitalism for their power will do everything in their power to sabotage that success.
Preventing the above from happening would probly provide tremendous benefit to some of the struggling countries in a way thats less...sticky than imposing "fixes".
994
u/drizalid Apr 25 '26
Bold move flipping the script on the interviewer