As Trump keeps escalating his relentless anti-immigration campaign, it is Americans who’ll end up suffering the consequences. Sure, Trump’s false rhetoric is appealing to his base. The thing is, his words and actions can actually end up harming the U.S. in all kinds of unexpected ways. What’s worse, his latest stunt could ultimately have the exact opposite effect to what Trump supporters believe. Here’s how Trump’s ploy of cutting off aid for Central America can easily backfire.
On a related note: Trump’s Tweet Gets Immigration, Mexico, Central America And The Southern Border Wrong
Some moral qualms about what’s happening right now
The aid policy regarding the Central American countries of El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala was originally meant to improve the living conditions and overall quality of life of their citizens, thus preventing the need for them to migrate to the United States. Trump means to stop this policy as punishment against the countries’ governments, supposedly for their failure to stop people from immigrating to America.
Trump also argues that the countries in question deserve no aid from the U.S., since they’ve done nothing for the nation anyway. It appears that, in Trump’s mind, it’s wrong (or, at least, not desirable) to give to others if you don’t get anything in return. Altruism in itself counts for nothing, according to Trump’s putative mentality—and that’s a serious ethical problem. It’s not that the U.S. has the effective responsibility to help others, but altruism is certainly a good thing to promote. An “America first” mentality goes against every moral and prosocial standard to make the world a better place as a human community.
What do you think of this?: This Child Supports Trump’s Wall. So, Who’s To Blame For Children’s Xenophobia?
A significant root of the issue
But never mind about ethics. Thing is, it’s in the interest of America to keep aiding Central America, regardless of altruism. Selfishness itself also dictates sending aid could be just good, common-sense policy.
You see, Central America has high rates of poverty. In almost every country there, 20% to 60% of the population lives below the poverty line. The estimates are significantly worse for rural areas, where nearly two-thirds of the people are poor. About 75% of them struggle to meet even basic food needs, and things are getting worse as the planet gets warmer.
Though rural poverty is widespread throughout Central America, the specific figures vary by country. According to the Borgen Project, Honduras has it worse: 75% of its citizens lives in poverty and over 60% in extreme poverty. Then, Guatemala, where the figure reaches 54%. Next are Nicaragua and El Salvador, both with 47% of overall poverty.
It’s no coincidence that the three worst-off countries are Trump’s targets. Since their population has it so bad, people consistently seek to migrate away from these regions to a place where their quality of life can improve. The countries that need aid the most are the countries from which most people will emigrate.
And, being the modern-world economic colonizer it is, America is the prime goal to migrate into. Indeed, U.S. globalization strategy basically brought immigration upon itself. This clear link between poverty and migration is exactly what Trump supporters seem to be missing when they believe cutting off aid to Central America is a good idea.
Some further reading: Trump’s 2020 Budget Clings To The Border Wall But Breaks All Of His Other Promises
A sensible policy
The reasoning is simple. The better off a country is, the less people will want to leave it. If America doesn’t want Central American immigrants to come knocking, it’s a good (and morally virtuous) strategy to help them improve their lives where they live now—independently of whether it’s America’s responsibility to do so or not. In short, an effective aid policy will help minimize migration. If done well, the more America gives, the less immigrants it has to deal with. And the U.S. doesn’t even have to give much—remember immigration has remained demonstrably steady throughout the past few decades. There’s no border crisis at all, despite what Trump would have you believe.
Conversely, cutting off aid stands to have the precise opposite effect. If America stops helping Central America, it’s likely more people will be motivated to leave their countries. That’s not what Americans want. And though it feels that even with the policy in place, migration is not stopping, consider that it’s not getting worse either. Putting an end to the aid might make things worse.
Of course, there are many other variables to consider—far more than could possibly be examined in a single article. The actual cost-benefit ratio of international aid policies, for instance, would be one of them. I just want to stress the very purpose of sending aid in the first place, lest Trump supporters forget it. The pro-social nature of aid policies is but another as well—it’s simply not a bad thing to promote international generosity.
Again, I’m not claiming it’s the responsibility of the U.S. to help El Salvador, Honduras, or Guatemala. But it stands to reason that it should do so nonetheless.
Your voice matters:
Are you a concerned citizen? Do you want to be heard? Click on this link for a chance to share your thoughts with the rest of the world.
Take a look at this other article:
This Is Why Radicals Can’t Recognize When They’re Wrong
