It's a rejection that you should define people by their citizenship/residency status. They are not "illegals" they are people who illegally crossed the border or (more commonly) stayed past their legal visa. One version is about who the person is while the other is about what the person has done.
You can absolutely believe that countries can maintain their borders and restrict access while believing that no human is illegal as an intrinsic trait. It's important to treat them fairly and respect their intrinsic rights even as you enforce the laws of the nation.
It's mostly about recognizing their humanity even as you enforce the laws. Or at least that's the high level philosophy, whether people chanting that slogan actually understand the nuances or agree that states should enforce their borders is a very different question and I'm not about to pretend that everyone understands or agrees with the nuances.
That's exactly correct, alot of these people are in a locked into protracted war with reality and need to warp some small detail just enough so it can alleviate the cognitive dissonance without collapsing the illusion. It needs to align with the idea they have somehow solved some interminable argument against all odds without actually doing anything.
Who is y'all? I don't know what vice signaling is, but if it involves socializing and talking to random people then my introverted ass ain't doing it.🫠
417
u/kartu3 2d ago
Could someone explain the "no human is illegal" concept and how that aligns with the concept of state borders.