Sip from the what?

This morning, there was a presentation by Joi Ito who, among a lot of other things, is the chairman of the board of the Creative Commons. His talk was entitled “The Sharing Economy”, which is a term he uses to describe an approach that adds “sharing” as an essential aspect of economic activity (in addition to “production” and “consumption”). His claim was that openness and reusability of other people’s ideas is a fundamental requirement of innovation and that the free culture movement, in which organizations like the Wikimedia Foundation or the Creative Commons are involved, is driven by the love individuals have for what they create. He introduced this idea as a contrast to the non-free world where primary motivation is the benefits and compensation one gets for his work, specifically money.

And it’s this contrast that I find problematic because he clearly assigned value judgments to each side. He described an on-going war between these two worlds and his express intent to proliferate the concept of free content even to at the moment entirely proprietary organizations (he specifically mentioned Microsoft). Disturbing to me was the prominence of black-and-white-thinking inherent in his approach, even more so considering that he was also talking about the need for diversity and variety as a precursor to success. I just have a hard time reconciling the martial and aggressive (“war&gdquo;, “battleground&gdquo;) way he used to describe his mission with the openness and pluralism he identifies as the foundation of the internet. Does the latter not imply that there proprietary and free organizations can co-exist striving individually or working together according to what each situation warrants? Or does pluralism end where ideologies come into play? To me, there’s no question that both free and proprietary approaches have their strengths and their weaknesses, that there is no silver bullet and that the most valuable arrangement is a system where organizations can employ the approaches that are most effective within the respective parameters without getting caught up in ideology and rhetoric.

If you are somewhat paying attention to things happening in the United States, you may know that things aren’t as rosy these days politically as one would wish. It’s difficult for people outside the states without much differentiated news coveraage about the things going on there to find out in what kind of political turmoil the country is in. The President’s support is constantly eroding and people have become increasingly more open about their criticism. Two excellent commentaries were presented by Bill Maher a few days ago. They’re now on YouTube and I recommend everyone to take a look.

• March 16: Bill Maher: Americans Have Made Sacrifices
• March 23: Bill Maher: Don’t question my patriotism

Thanks to Miguel de Icaza for pointing these out.

The following is an e-mail conversation I’ve had recently with another student at TCU. Names have been anonymized to protect the, uh, innocent.

From: Sebastian Moleski
To …
Hi,

I wanted to congratulate you on your thoughtful analysis of the illegal immigration problem in the United States. The library analoy never occurred to me so I’m glad you explained it to me. I do have some concerns though that I wanted to share with you:

1. You say the library is open to the public and can be visited by anyone and that it welcomes all visitors. But doesn’t this library also discriminate on who gets to do what resources? Membership cards come in all kinds of shapes. Some are permanent and are given to anyone who is born within it, like it is custom for libraries to do, right? Others are sort of like the temporary ones but you have to be related to someone born in the library, be adopted by one or bring a lot of money with you. Then there are the temporary ones that only allow you to use certain resources and check out certain books. If you look at the other books, you get fined, membership card taken away and banned for 10 years.

2. You say that some people do not apply for library cards. But you don’t say why they don’t. What if they aren’t allowed to?

3. You say that stealing (taking books without a membership card) is especially prevalent with children. These must not be children born in the library because they would have a permanent and irrevocable membership card, right?

Overall I have to say that I am embarrassed to go to the same school as you. If you are in your junior and sophomore year, I would have hoped you knew better than to write such a naive and clueless article. Not everyone is welcome in the United States, especially not people seeking to work and make a living. That’s not limited to “our friends from the south” either.

If immigration laws weren’t as racist and disciminatory as they are, you wouldn’t have millions of people entering the country illegally. What would be unheard of in so many other situations like employment, housing, public accomodations, etc. — that is not to discriminate against people based on sex, race, age, ethnic origin, national origin etc. — is for some reason perfectly acceptable when it comes to immigration policy. Maybe you should write about that instead of this insincere, hypocritical and insincere piece you submitted to the skiff.

Congrats on making TCU students look like idiots!

sm

From: …
To: Sebastian Moleski
Sebastian~

The editorial piece that we submitted to the Skiff is supposed to be tongue and cheek. We realize that the issue of immigration is much more involved than library membership cards. It was just an analogy that could help clarify some of our immigration concerns.

A lot of what has been publicized on this issue has come from the viewpoint of the illegal immigrants. We were trying to show the other side. For every illegal immigrant that comes to the United States, US citizens have to pay taxes to take care of their expenses, to school their children, etc. Illegal immigrants reap benefits for what they do not sow and, yes, take up government funds that could be used for its own citizens.

There are complicated issues to immigration and we know that it is not a simple walk in the park to gain citizenship. But the fact of the matter is that moving to the United States without the proper procedure is illegal by law. This new bill coming up is meant to crack down on an illegal activity. Would you be protesting a bill that cracked down on illegal firearms? What about a bill that made stronger penalties for car theft? If you have an issue with unfair immigration laws, then protest the procedures used for immigration, not a bill that enforces laws already in place.

If the roles were reversed and US citizens were going over the border into Mexico, eating their food, using their forms of education, taking jobs, and getting hand-outs from the Mexican government, the the US citizens would be attacked as selfish, greedy, and lazy. And yet, how is this different from Mexican immigrants? Perhaps you are being a bit hypocritical yourself.

As for making TCU students look like idiots, we beg to differ. True idiocy would be to all agree on a complicated issue just because there is a loud, but perhaps not majority, voice in one direction. We posed valid questions and concerns that everyone needs to consider in regards to this issue. We don’t see how that make us idiots.

Thanks for sharing your opinion (at least someone at TCU reads the paper….) and have a fabulous day!

From: Sebastian Moleski
To: …

Thank you for your response. Please do understand however that despite your claims illegal immigrants do pay taxes. It may seem surprising at first but many of them use (fake) social security numbers so they can get jobs where they may get paid less than minimum wage but still have some of that taken for fedeail incom and socieal security taxes. They also have to pay sales and property taxes like everyone else. I’m speculating here but my intuition (and the fact that I’m a foreign non-immigrating student) tells me that if paying taxes meant a legalization of their situation, may of them would gladly do so.

You also keep repeating the mantra that illegal immigration is illegal and there’s nothing wrong with enforcing the law. What you seem to miss though is that there are a lot of people who believe these laws are wrong, unjust, immoral and inhumane. When Rosa Parks refused to change her seat, she was also violating the law, and was convicted of that in a subsequent trial. When millions of African-Americans engaged in civil disobedience because they refused to be treated as second-class citizens any longer, they also broke the law. These people believed that there are sometimes more significant values to care about then whether an action is right according to the law.

Giving foreign people the opportunity to life, liberty and the pursuit of their own happiness like every American has by birthright can’t be answered with “that’s against the law”. And no, I wouldn’t call Americans doing the same “selfish, greedy and lazy”. I firmly believe that anybody should have the right and opportunity to live and be a constructive member of society wherever they choose.

sm

From: …
To: Sebastian Moleski
Sebastian~

While some immigrants may choose to use fake social security cards and thus pay taxes, many of them do not. What’s more some states don’t have certain taxes, like property tax, which immigrants would have to pay. The point is, on the whole, immigrants are paying fewer taxes and in much smaller amounts than citizens. Taxes are just one aspect of the immigration concern.

You will have to explain to me how immigration laws are wrong, injust, immoral, and inhumane. The United States does not discriminate against immigrants. All immigrants, regardless of race, creed, sex, and country of origin, have to go through the same steps to gain citizenship. This is not discrimination.

I agree with you that everyone should have the opportunity to live and be a constructive members of society wherever they choose. However, citizenship is a privilege, not a right. It must be earned one way or another. If a person chooses to take the opportunity to become a constructive member of the US’s society, then they must go through the steps that the United States has laid out to earn such a privilege. If they want to pursue happiness in the US, then they need to pursue it through the avenues that our government has set up. After all, if this is the society that immigrants have chosen to join, then they should be willing to follow its laws.

From: Sebastian Moleski
To: …

You’re making the assumption that immigration law treats all immigrants the same. That is not the case. There are at least a dozen different ways to gain permanent residency depending on your background, economic status, family ties, etc. It is also the case that for a very large percentage of people, permanent residency is not available. If you are a native of Mexico and want to move to the United States to work, there is no legal way to get a visa to stay in the country on those facts alone. If you are a student coming to study here and you want to stay in the country, you have to apply for a visa with a quota of 65,000. If there were such a way, your argument would have much more validity.

Immigration policy is applied very unevenly and if you’ve ever spent any time researching that or maybe talked to someone trying to migrate to the United States you would know that. Arbitrary enforcement of laws is the very essence of an unjust legal situation.

About citizenship being a privilege to be earned: when did you earn your citizenship? I’m making an assumption here that you are an American and probably by birth. You didn’t have to do anything to gain that privilege. Somebody in your family tree might have or they might have just come into the country when immigration policy wasn’t as strict as it is today. Asking yourself what you have done to earn your privilege of citizenship might be very unfair but think about it nevertheless. I’m a citizen of Germany. I never did anything to deserve my citizenship, it’s just the way the law works (and just for the record, compared to Germany, immigration in the United States is a piece of cake). How can I ask foreigners to prove that they deserve the opportunity to pursue their own happiness and be a constructive member of society if I never had to prove that myself?

Please also understand that there is a difference between permanent residency and citizenship. Many of the 11 million or so illegal aliens in the country are not looking to become citizens but permanent resident. As a permanent resident, you get all the benefits and privileges of American citizens including paying taxes without the opportunity to run for federal office, vote in federal elections and a few other privileges related to national security.

Immigration laws of this kind discriminate against something that on a very basic level nobody has any control over: the place of our birth. One’s nationality is out of one’s control as much as many other factors including race, gender, age, or disability. It doesn’t make any sense to prohibit discrimination on some of these but not on others.

sm

P.S. If taxation would be a concern, the government could just grant legal immigration benefits to the aliens here while at the same time collect back taxes from them over some period of time so they don’t become destitude. There have been plenty of proposals already on the table where illegal immigrants would have to pay a fine to become legal. I’m not in favor of that but I understand that that would help a lot of people’s sense of justice and fairness.

From: …
To: Sebastian Moleski
Sebastian~

My parents, grandparents, etc. earned my citizenship for me. I continue to keep that privlege by being a good citizen. In your eyes, that might not be fair, but that is the way that it is in almost every country, as you yourself pointed out. If there were not immigration laws and anyone could come into the United States, then the US would be flooded by people from other countries. There have to be policies. These policies have been voted on by representatives that US citizens have chosen. Like it or not, these are current policies. If someone wants to change these policies, then they should go about it legislatively.

As for those immigrants that come to the United States just to work, that is like putting a bandaid on a gaping wound. The trouble with Mexico is the organization of their economy. They have the resources to prosper, but need to reorganize. Sending their citizens to the US to earn money will not promote this national re-organization. And yes, I think that if people are working in the United States, then they need to become contributing citizens in its community. If a person is going to benefit from the US’s economy, then they need to be a member of it.

But all this is beside my point. … and I have contention with illegal immigrants because they are breaking the United States’ laws in order to enter our borders. I may not like the fact one of my neighbors has a fence, but that does not give me a right to jump over it.

From: Sebastian Moleski
To: …

Fair enough. But then, whenever you write a story in the Skiff or talk to people about your problem with illegal immigration be honest about it and let them know that your position is based on that and not rational arguments. And stay away from contrived analogies that don’t represent what you really think either.

sm

From: …
To: Sebastian Moleski
Sebastian~

As contrived as the analogy may have been, Randi and I still feel like it brought up some valid points. And it obviously isn’t completely unfounded if it sparked your attention.

Have a great night,

This is in response to the “Illegal immigration like stealing” article in the college student newspaper from Friday. In it, the authors create the analogy of the United States being a library. I can go along with that but want to give you some details on just what kind of library that would be. So here are the ten rules of the library United States and its membership policy:

1. If you are born in the library, you automatically get a permanent and irrevocable membership card. Even if you take all the books, burn down the library, or do anything else against our rules, you won’t lose your membership. On the other hand, depending on badly you break the rules, you will be restricted to a special area or terminated.
2. If you are not educated, we don’t want you, unless you come here to learn, bring your own money to pay for everything you need and do leave after you are done learning.
3. If you are educated, we welcome you. Unfortunately, we only give out 65,000 membership cards a year. If you are very educated, there’s another 20,000 cards. Please take a number and sit over there, outside of course.
4. If you are related to one of the children born inside the library, you may apply for a permanent membership card as well. We’re awfully sorry, but there’s also a very long line so please do take a number and sit over there, outside of course.
5. If you want to marry one of our inhabitants, you may apply for a permanent membership card. Please do understand that you will have to have a different gender from the person you are marrying, that we will watch you to make sure you are a happy couple and, if you do happen to ge divorced within the first few years, you will have to leave.
6. From time to time, we will allow individuals who are not eligible for a membership card to stay inside the country without a card. There is no system to this and it just an expression of our mercy and benevolence. Please do understand that even in this case you will not be able to take a job or return should you choose to leave.
7. If you do not qualify so far, you may also come into the country permanently because you are a famous actor or actress and/or filthy rich. In that case, we will let you in and use the library’s resources at no additional cost because you’re very special to us.
8. If you are retired and filty rich, we have an entire state for you. Please follow the red carpet.
9. If you do not qualify and do succeed in entering the library against our wishes, we may or may not ask you to leave. Whether we do will depend on many factors too difficult to list here. Either way, you will live in fear and outside of the general society. If you have children, they will receive a permanent membership card. However, please do understand that you will not be able to receive one in that case until your child has reached 18 years of age.
10. In even-numbered years, you may find that there are proposals to adjust our membership rules. We are terribly sorry but please understand that these incidents are related to a very important national event in November. They have no bearing on you and will certainly not result in any significant changes to our policies.

I found this a long time ago but recent events have brought it back to my mind:

Once the unsafe has become safe,
Once data has been collected everywhere, from the genetic finger print to the probability of cervical cancer,
Once video cameras watch every roaming insect,
Once the most inconspicuous is as open as the most conspicuous,
Once then the near east comes to rest,
Once car traffic is under full control, and bank transfers, and air traffic and intercourse,
Once all phones are tapped and all conversations recorded,
All correspondence archived, all places observed,
Once the danger and also the fear of danger therefore disappears,
Once finally everything is under control, the terrorist in operation with explosives in his trunk and the terrorist on vacation hiking in the Rockies,
Once everything has been done for security and nothing can happen anymore—
Who will then to us, the people, explain the bomb that goes off someday, tomorrow or next year, illegally and uncontrollably, at a railroad station, mall or government building?
– Anonymous