We do fundamentally disagree, respectfully, but I'm very invested in this as of the past few or so years, when I put the views you have to the test. Views I had as a college student and a little after.

It's what I refer to as numbing, and it doesn't answer any real questions. Like you said, it's lofty, but that's antithetical to the nitty gritty. It's why I think of a book about how politics don't really affect local areas, because local areas have to deal with real, material issues. Republicans and Democrats might disagree on how to handle some things, but they have to keep the trash trucks moving. They have to keep the water flowing.

The idea that we're all equally worthy of aid and help is separate from compassion, which is immaterial, and autonomy, which is another topic. The insinuation that these people need something other than aid or help was never there. I never implied we shouldn't have compassion. I have tons of it. I'm insulted by the insinuation that I'm suggesting something else. Of course I treat people I physically meet respectfully.

I just no longer recognize this bland, post-WW2, grand view that doesn't work. It didn't work then, it doesn't work now. It's a continuation of imperialism since you rarely see the West or developed nations changing. It's always "the other". It just sounds a lot nicer now that it's been workshopped and forced to work - especially when our country started selling off its industry and labor. That's why pro-labor people eventually get met with claims of xenophobia.

In this case, why shouldn't our borders matter? They keep us in just as much as they keep others out, and we would be able to help in the abstract more if we had a functioning society. We'd help more people if we helped them where they were. We help fewer people by being lazy and waiting till they get here, telling them good job, and convincing ourselves we did something.