You first need to look at who picked all the crops and did much work in the United States while our folks were fighting two wars in Europe and the Pacific. THAT was the start of the mass immigration movement into the US. We [the US government] provided tacit approval to their entry. We continued that approval for sixty years, with EVERYBODY gaining benefit from their participation in our economy. It was not until the rise of the NeoCon movement in the 90s that it became an issue. Interestingly about the same time as the reemergence of white supremacist groups in America.
Now if you walk through a yard that is not yours every day for a decade to get to work or school a bit quicker, waving at the owner as you go by sometimes [and he waves back] you are going to be somewhat indignant if, at some point in time a group of squad cars pull up and slam you to the ground and bust you for trespassing.
You tell the judge that you have been doing this for years. He asked if you have written permission. "NO, but the owner knew I was doing it all along and did not stop me until today". You believe you have tacit approval because of past actions.
Oh, and have you actually seen the border fence and all the security? Hint, it does NOT cover the entire southern border of the US.
Yes, I have seen the border fence many times and do realize that it does not cover 100% of the southern border. There is a big desert where illegals die every year.
You do realize that many migrant farmer workers are not here illegally but are here under a work visa right?
Personally I don't care how many immigrants we let in on a yearly basis as long as it is legal. You want 1 million, 5 million, 10 million immigrants per year? Fine change the law. You come here illegally you broke the law and have to pay the consequences.
I like examples like this "Now if you walk through a yard that is not yours every day for a decade to get to work or school a bit quicker". As they try and take a static picture and say well shame on you, you allowed it once and now you want to cry about it.
What if you purchase a property that has been used as a short cut and don't want your property used as such. Are you not allowed to exercise your property rights? How about when the people who use your property change from using it as a right of way to using it as a trash can, toilette, become disruptive, threaten you and your family, use your property to run drugs, etc. Are you not allowed to defend yourself and your property?
There are many factors that impact the equation and the results are not the same as they were 70 years ago or 40 years ago. Times change. If I use your logic we should not allow blacks to vote, eat in restaurants white folks frequent, go to the same schools, play on the same athletic teams, ride at the front of the bus, etc. I mean they did not have these rights until the mid 20th century and we should base everything on past behavior and laws right?
It was not until the rise of the NeoCon movement in the 90s that it became an issue. Interestingly about the same time as the reemergence of white supremacist groups in America.
Typical stance of someone who does not have a good argument throw out a statement on racism or white supremacist. I reject your argument and call is at best a spurious correlation.