I appreciate anyone’s call to freedom and equal treatment, but I’m going to rank Michael Moore’s “We are all Muslims” protest movement as the least-likely-to-work idea of all time.
Logically, I totally get the point. So on the 2D level of reality it makes perfect sense. But on the 3D level, where all that matters is how people feel, this feels like a non-starter to me. That’s what the Master Persuader argument says.
If the future proves me wrong about this, feel free to ignore 100% of anything else I’ve ever said.
I borrowed this image from his page. I don’t think he’ll mind.
Again, I appreciate Moore’s sentiments, and agree with the principle of equal treatment. So I am happy to link to Moore’s page. But as protest movements go, this looks like a one-legged table to me.
Maybe I can get behind this if Moore puts a body-count estimate on his preference for open immigration. I already said it was worth a thousand dead Americans over ten years (if there is no other option) to preserve the principle of equal treatment for another hundred years. That’s what an opinion looks like – tradeoffs considered. (Yes, I know non-citizens have no rights. But how we treat them defines us.)
I doubt we can get the risk below a thousand dead in ten years, but I’ll let Homeland Security or someone who understands the vetting process tell me the actual risk. I doubt my price can be met.
I haven’t heard Moore’s actual opinion yet because he focuses on the benefits (freedom and equality) without addressing his best guess on how much that might cost in dead Americans. So I agree with the half-an-opinion Moore expresses, as I also value equal treatment as a base standard for calling ourselves good Americans.
But I wouldn’t risk a million American lives to support the principle of 100% equal-treatment (of non-citizens) if I could get 99% at minimal risk while working toward 100% over time.
Does anyone else have a full opinion on this topic, as I do, or are the rest of you at half-an-opinion like Moore?