Ah the trolley problem or “Childs first exposure to moral dilemmas”. The trolley problem in the most classic form is to present a scenario where a runaway train (trolley) is going to hit and kill five people. You stand by a switch and can push the switch to divert the train to kill a single innocent person. Do you do it?
That is the question that has seemingly perplexed people for generations. I say seemingly because it appears to me an obvious answer. In this hypothetical world if we value life then saving five people for the cost of one seems the sensible and obvious choice. Now of course once we leave the basic premise we can build more interesting dilemmas that really push us. How many innocents would you kill to save your child/mother/father for example?
These are morbid but interesting thought experiments but you are in fact living through a time in which society is unable to make the obvious trolley problem decisions as it comes to protecting its people and borders. The enemy will forever state that ‘borders’ are just an abstract notion, lines on a map! People however are real and tangible. For every illegal that kills an innocent American there is the trolley scenario playing out in real time.
The ‘border crisis’ could easily be solved. Indeed around the world we could easily solve it. It just comes down to will, and judicious use of force. If we enforced our borders once in a while with deadly force this would act as a strong deterrent against the masses who continue to pour across. It may take more than a single dead body and a single bullet but the equation is in fact even more morally favorable than the hypothetical trolley problem.
After all in the trolley problem we are sacrificing an innocent person. Yet illegal immigrants are by their very act not innocent. They have committed a crime, and crime wrongs us collectively. There is no real moral quandary about punishment then, there is a case to be made that killing them might be excessive but this brings us back to sacrifice. Sacrifice was once the cornerstone of civilization in both literal and figurative terms. Go far enough back and there is evidence some of our ancestors likely executed criminals in ritual sacrifice to their Gods. The disappearance of the death penalty is heralded by many as a sign of ‘progress’ and compassion. On a surface level it might be. There are great numbers of people you might think of as ‘our guys’ who are wholly opposed to the state taking life, most of course are TradCath types (though not exclusively) but all display that strain of moral cowardice that has rotted our society.
America is unique amongst its Western peers in allowing and using the death penalty. It is used far too sparingly and infrequently to retain the desired effect of reducing crime as a deterrent but at the very least the State reserves the absolute moral right to enact justice. It reserves this right to act as arbiter because life and death are important. To allow thousands, nay millions, of illegals into this country is tantamount to willfully killing innocents. This is the truth that we must never stop speaking. Every woman murdered by a rapist or young child killed by an illegal driver has been sacrificed by our current elite because they view the trolley problem differently to us. They value their lives more than their own citizens.
A truly moral country would not shirk from its responsibility. To defend those within and punish those outside. For that to happen it must mean something. In essence the State must make sacrifices but the better sacrifices to make will always be of the outsider who attempts to infringe upon us. The solution to any form of mass migration is force, but not just the abstract of it. We have to be honest with ourselves. It necessitates death and killing - it is the moral duty required by the State to preserve itself.
For all my forceful language there is an edge of compassion here as well. The deaths of a few illegals will help to stem the tide. The ripple effects of a few brass casings will be profound. A return to brutality where necessary reduces suffering further afield. People do respond to incentives after all and avoidance of death is one. How many boats would the Italian or British Navy have to actually deliberately sink, film and then broadcast to the world before people got the message? In truth we are cowards because we allow boats to sink and people die for no reason - if we had acted deliberately in these instances then we would in fact be on better ground.
The death of the West is largely self-inflicted. We’ve been blood letting for too long, the leeches applied by both ourselves and our enemies have pushed us onto life support. To me there is something more to discuss here, I feel a line that threads through civilization around the willingness of the State (or indeed Church) to sanction and carry our capital punishment. The firmness required, the maturity, the technical competence and the iron stomach were all necessity. When we exected men, and women, we looked unflinchingly at the world for what it was and understood the cycle of life and death. Today we shirk from violence even as we invite the violent hordes inside the walls.