There's an old saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Those who want Fayetteville to be a sanctuary city may have good intentions, but I don't think they show much wisdom, which must accompany good intentions if any good is to result.
The worldview the "sanctuary city" advocates hold must run something like this: The United States has endless wealth and endless territory and therefore it is fine for countless millions from all over the world to pour in to claim their portion of this wealth and territory. Foreign governments and foreign peoples are necessarily incompetent to handle their own affairs and therefore the people of the U.S., who alone in the world are competent and have endless resources, are obligated to take in any and every person from elsewhere in the world who is dissatisfied with life in his own country, and give them the good life here that cannot possibly be achieved in their home country.
Is this worldview true? Because we used to have freedom, opportunity, property rights and protectionist economic policies, the people of the United States were able to create great wealth for themselves. But now as our freedoms and opportunities have been hugely diminished, our property rights relentlessly assaulted and reduced, and our protectionist economic policies abolished by the NAFTA and GATT trade agreements, our economy is now ruined, we buy most of our goods from foreign countries, and a semblance of prosperity is tenuously maintained by an ever-mushrooming debt now running into the tens of trillions. Economically, the USA is going down and likely will soon be as poor as the countries from which the young illegal border-crossers are coming.
Why is there not a great outcry from Americans against the governments of Honduras, Guatemala, and whatever other countries these sanctuary-seekers are coming from? Why are Americans not calling on these governments to manage their affairs competently so that their young people have ample opportunity for good lives in their own country? If these young people are to contribute to the American economy as the sanctuary advocates claim, wouldn't it be much better for them to stay home and contribute to the economic development of their own nations? These Central American countries are potentially wealthy and well-off, they have ample resources and intelligent, energetic people; they could certainly prosper if their governments managed their affairs well.
The United States used to at least furnish a good example to the world, of how government of the people, by the people and for the people, with free-enterprise economics, allowed the common people to create prosperity for themselves, which others might seek to emulate if they likewise wanted the good life in their countries. Now the United States seems to furnish an example to the world of nothing but foolishness, self-destruction and monstrous abuse of declining power.
Joe Alexander
Fayetteville
Commentary on 08/14/2014