Emmanuel Macron. Photo John Thys, Pool Photo by AP, File.
He must have breathed a sigh of relief when he heard that Emmanuel Macron defeated Marine LePen by a 17-point margin in the French presidential election on Sunday.
Success for Le Pen was a blessing for Vladimir Putin, Victor Orbán Y Steve Bannon and a disaster for NATO, Europe and France.
The center was held, thank God, because Macron headed from the center.
Mexican authorities are observing the migrants, who were discovered at a checkpoint. by REUTERS
He is hated by the left and far right and is not entirely satisfied with those closest to the middle.
But he was too first president re -elected in France for 20 years.
There is a lesson there for the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress, especially when it comes to immigration.
It has become an article of progressive faith in recent years that efforts to control immigration are allegedly racist.
The border wall is “a monument to white supremacy,” according to an article published in Bloomberg.
The “stay in Mexico” policy is “racist, cruel, and inhumane,” according to the Justice Action Center.
An essay published by the Brookings Institution calls U.S. immigration policy “a classic and underappreciated example of structural racism”.
More recently, Bernie Sanders has been an outspoken restrictor of the view that immigration lowers working class wages.
Did he become racist in that position?
The editorial board of TheWall Street Journal, where I once worked, I used to advocate open borders with Mexico.
Are we left behind as progressives?
People of good will should have different views on immigration, and change their mind about it, without being labeled as immoral.
But that’s no longer how it works in progressive circles.
The results were political decisions that were bad for the country and worse for the Democrats and an unexpected gift to the far right.
The issue is now serious, as the Biden administration simultaneously seeks to end the Trump administration’s “stay in Mexico” policy in a Supreme Court case and is receiving a recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. to accept the use of Title 42, which authorizes border authorities to deport illegal immigrants as a public health measure, which will expire on May 23.
There is little doubt about what will happen if the administration gets in the way:
will explode a tense southern border.
In fiscal year 2020 there were 646,822 “enforcement actions” on the border.
By 2021, the number will be less than 2 million.
Without the authority of Title 42, where 62% of deportations occurred in 2021, the number of migrants released to the United States would increase dramatically.
It is not necessary to oppose immigration as a general issue in order to have serious doubt about the direction of the administration.
Is there a practical and available legal alternative to regulate immigration through the application of Title 42?
Where is the logic in ending Title 42 even if the administration seeks to extend mask mandates because the pandemic is far from over?
Due to the lack of housing,
How much capacity is there to capture the next wave of immigrants?
Although most immigrants are just looking for a better life,
what system exists to find those with less than noble intentions?
More concrete:
What does the administration’s total failure to effectively control the border say about its commitment to enforcing the rule of law?
Raising such questions should be an invitation to suggest a balanced immigration law and practice and try to win over moderate Republicans.
Instead, it tends to invite cheap accusations of racism, along with the gridlock of White House policy.
as reported Politician last week, some thought the administration’s secret policy called for an end to Title 42 to satisfy progressives while keeping their fingers crossed that the courts would pursue it, a federal judge made Monday , even temporarily.
Running behind Trump -appointed judges is unlikely for Americans -elected Joe Biden.
Which brings us back to the example of France.
When Jean-Marie LePen made his first presidential candidacy on an anti -immigration platform in 1974, winning the 0.75% of votes in the first round, less than 200,000 votes.
When his son Marine applied to a similar platform this year, he got the 41.5% in the second round, or more than 13 million.
Le Pens are absolute fanatics.
But decades of pretending that only bigots have concerns about immigration have only strengthened his political brand.
As president, Macron reversed immigration, not to undermine France’s historic position as an open, newly arrived society, but to save it.
He broke up some asylum seekers, demanded that immigrants learn French and get jobs and draw a strict line against Islamic separatism.
But he also tried to make France a place more enticing for legal immigration.
The left thinks of him as Le Pen lite, the right as an irresponsible cheat.
Maybe he’s the same.
On the other hand, he also saved France for the free world.
Democrats can tolerate their French.
c.2022 The New York Times Company
Source: Clarin
