“The truth is, immigrants tend to be more American than people born here.” Chuck Palahniuk.

“I can’t in good conscience allow the U.S. government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they’re secretly building.” Edward Snowden

The U.S. Government loves many things, two in particular which tell us something about him. What they mostly show is that he does not care about his own citizens or respect their rights. His loves are as follows: 1. Spying and 2. Open Borders.

The Surveillance State

The CIA has been outed by a whistleblower just as the NSA was. Snowden’s leak revealed that the NSA was intent on (and okay with) spying on Americans. “Vault 7” reveals that the CIA has been developing hacking capabilities so that they hack any phone, computer, TV, or car and listen, manipulate, or control through them. Also of interest is that the CIA hid these vulnerabilities from the tech companies to keep buyers of those products (you and me) vulnerable to exposure and manipulation.

Think about this. Your government is spending your money, to keep you weak. To ensure that your privacy can be compromised at a moment’s notice and to make sure that you don’t know about it. General Michael Hayden assured us that the government would never spy on a U.S. citizen without a court order but, then again, General Michael Hayden wouldn’t be saying anything about any of this except for the fact that his organization had been outed by a whistleblower. It’s like a husband claiming he would never beat you: after you discover him beating the maid.

Imagine, in this metaphor, you are not taxed at 25% and you can afford a maid. The point is, he is using the comfort of your marriage to do terrible things and he is hiding his true nature from you. Which brings us to his next love.

Open Borders

This might come across as slackened immigration standards, or a lack of desire to enforce immigration law, or the reception of unlimited refugees without precondition. The end result is the same. Our government wants to bring in as many people as it feels like bringing in, and calling them American and conferring upon them all of the rights and benefits of citizenship.

Doesn’t this show how kind our government is? Perhaps. I think it shows that there are no rights or benefits to being an American citizen. Perhaps, the benefits of new citizens are all FOR the government and not for the new citizens themselves. It means more taxes for the government, more grateful votes, and more people for him to control.

Back to our bad husband. He has married a woman. They’ve entered a legal, moral, religious contract. They are expected to love and take care of each other, to make decisions together etc., One day, the man comes home with a new wife. Now, some of his paycheck will feed this extra mouth and she will occupy some of his time and attention.

Wife #1 is incensed. She screams, slaps her husband, demands he turn this new woman out. “Have you no love in your heart?” he answers her. “I am a great man with a lot of love to give and I can provide for both of you. You are being heartless.”

Even if wife #1 were okay with polygamy (as most Americans embrace immigration and refugees as part of American ideals) the issue is not her heartlessness. The issue is that her husband has done something without her permission and has shown no fundamental interest in pleasing her. When was the last time you heard the U.S. Government asking its current citizens: “What can we do for you?” (sorry JFK.)

You might point out that, in this situation, the wife can leave. Well of course she can! This makes it all the more terrible for Americans. This is supposedly our country. We can’t so easily leave and the country exists and thrives on our money, our labor, and the sacrifices of our collective fathers.

Even if we alter the metaphor slightly (the husband takes in an orphan) the outcome is still the same. His wife is right to be angry. She has had no control over this decision. She doesn’t want the orphan gone because she is heartless (read: racist and xenophobic) she wants the orphan gone because her husband is taking no interest in her needs and is making decisions without her consent. Yet he is simultaneously forcing her to support the consequences of his decisions. What it points out, again, is that he does not respect her rights within the marriage yet expects her to continue supporting his decisions within her (now powerless) place in the marriage.

What his Lovers Reveal

The U.S. government does not respect the rights of its citizens. When citizens must accept any amount of outsiders without consultation and cannot disagree (without being called heartless xenophobes) they have no rights or power within the arrangement. When citizens are told not to look into what measures are taken by the USG on their behalf and that such measures would never be used against them (just trust us!) they have no rights or power within the arrangement. They’ve been given the same ‘amnesty’ as their new neighbors: provisional rights to continue working and paying taxes, but not any say in what their government is. Wife #1 can stay in the house if her cooking is good and she doesn’t complain too much.

“AMNESTY, n. The state’s magnanimity to those offenders whom it would be too expensive to punish.” Ambrose Bierce