{"id":13273,"date":"2016-10-07T11:44:29","date_gmt":"2016-10-07T15:44:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=13273"},"modified":"2018-12-28T13:13:08","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T18:13:08","slug":"the-fruitlessness-of-the-fruitless-wall-argument","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2016\/10\/07\/the-fruitlessness-of-the-fruitless-wall-argument\/","title":{"rendered":"The Fruitlessness of the \u201cFruitless Wall\u201d Argument"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Border_fence_below_El_Paso\"The current presidential campaign has sparked significant discussion about border walls. Time<\/i><\/a> Magazine <\/i>ran an article entitled \u201cThis Is Why Border Fences Don\u2019t Work.\u201d Politico<\/i><\/a> <\/i>ran an analogous feature called \u201cThe World Is Full of Walls That Don\u2019t Work.\u201d There are literally hundreds of pieces making similar claims. What is the basis for these assertions?<\/p>\n

The \u201cfruitless wall\u201d argument is usually perched atop a single faulty premise: A false comparison with allegedly failed historical border partitions. These arguments are as conceptually foolish as they are historically erroneous. Almost always, the barriers being referenced weren\u2019t constructed to control immigration. And all served their intended purpose for an extended period. What\u2019s usually classed as \u201cfailure\u201d of the barrier is really an event of epic historical proportions like the collapse of an empire or the fall of communism.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Ming Dynasty\u2019s \u201cGreat Wall\u201d was never intended to serve as a border barrier but as a fallback position for Chinese military forces operating outside the wall. It was only breached when the treasonous Ming general Wu Sangui opened the gates and let in the Manchu. Although the Manchu expanded Chinese borders beyond the wall, they maintained it, rather than tearing it down.<\/span><\/p>\n

Evidence indicates that Hadrian\u2019s Wall was not intended to repel anyone. Rather, it appears to have been part of the Roman customs system. Its gates, like modern toll booths, were used to collect duties. It seems to have worked. History is replete with complaints from Briton and Celtic merchants about Roman taxes.<\/p>\n

Rarely mentioned by commentators are Israel\u2019s border fences. Perhaps their purpose has been too clear and their success too demonstrable: They were constructed specifically to secure and monitor Israel\u2019s <\/span>West Bank<\/a> and Gaza boundaries with the Palestinian Authority. Upon construction of these double-layer security fences, Palestinian terrorist attacks <\/span>dropped<\/a> over ninety percent because the bulk of terrorists were denied access to Israel\u2019s territory.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

While no barrier can be one hundred percent effective, the \u201cFruitless Wall\u201d argument doesn\u2019t stand up to scrutiny. Israel\u2019s fences demonstrate that border barriers are an effective form of immigration control. \u00a0If the U.S. wishes to secure its southern border, it must complete the double-layer security fence mandated by Congress in 1996.<\/span>