Transcription
All right, guys. We're at the University of Washington and today we are debating that birthright citizenship, also known as the just soil legal doctrine for citizenship, should be overturned or rescinded in the United States. This topic obviously coincides with Trump's recent executive order related to birthright citizenship. And I just like to thank everybody for the recent outpouring of support on YouTube. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate your comments, your likes, your shares, and your general support. And if you want more ways to support me, I've added links to my Discord, my Patreon, my Cash App, and my PayPal in the description below. Thanks, guys. Let's get into it.
>> I'm a first-generation born here.
>> My parents are immigrants.
>> Really?
>> Yeah.
>> You came here when you're like a baby or something?
>> I was born here, but in terms of like, you know, banning birthright citizenship, that's basically me.
>> Yeah. Okay. Let's hear Let's hear um Are you So, you're in favor of banning birthright citizenship?
>> I'm uh against it.
>> You're against banning it? You think we should keep it?
>> We should keep it. Yeah.
>> Okay. Okay. Why do you think we should keep it?
>> Because u Yeah. Because um I feel like
>> close.
>> Yeah.
>> I feel like cuz you know I'm a first-generation American. Both my parents were immigrants. They uh they fled the revolution in Iran and so technically that classifies me as a uh birthright citizenship. So I was born with both dual citizenship in US and Iran. And I feel like you know there's people who um from other countries you know like Iran or I don't know, let's say you know the whole Palestinian-Israel conflict, you know, Ukraine, there's places of war where they escape. America in general is built on the fundamental idea of you know, the American dream where people you know back, you know, let's take the 1800s, right? The Irish Potato Famine, that's uh you know, people fled Ireland to come to America in order to have a great, you know, great job opportunity somewhere where they can have food, uh pursue their economic dreams, and you know, build a stable family here in America. You know, we saw the same with the Italians in the late 1800s, a lot of uh, you know, these high Italian Jewish populations to New York. You know, nowadays you see it with Chinese immigrants, Indian immigrants where they're pursuing economic opportunities. That's what America is built on. So taking away birthright citizenship, it's basically jeopardizing the uh future of the workforce, America for future economic opportunities. You know, for me, I'm blessed, honestly, I'm blessed with American citizenship. I could have been in Iran where, you know, 18 up, there's a mandate serving for the military. I could have been in the military right now, not have as good an education, not be here at the University of Washington. And yeah, that's basically the beginnings of my uh, yeah, just the basic foundation for my opinions.
>> Sure.
>> Let's hear your take.
>> Okay. So, were your parents by the time they had you, by the time you were born, were your parents both like naturalized American citizens?
>> Uh, I think yeah, they obtained American citizenship before I was born. My mom, she moved to so she, my mom left, she was like 8 years old, 9 years old when the revolution happened. She moved to Germany for like 8 years, moved to Seattle area her junior year of high school, and then went to University of Washington for undergrad, residency, medical school. And you know, my dad, he moved, so he served in the military there and then he went to college, moved to New York in '94. He was there during 9/11, moved to Boston a couple years, then met my mom, moved out here, got married, had me and my sister.
>> Yeah. So, what I would say is that you should be an American citizen, but not because you were born geographically um at random on American soil. I think that you should be an American citizen because both of your parents were American citizens when you were born. I think if you're born of American citizens, that should make you an American citizen. Even if they immigrated here, if they were naturalized as American citizens, which your parents were, that makes you an American citizen in my view, right? So just being born on the soil, I I don't think does. You said that you think that um America was built on immigration and the American dream and bringing people here and blah blah blah, whatever, and I agree with you. But just because people aren't American citizens because they're born on the soil doesn't mean that you can't continue to to naturalize um American citizens out of foreign populations. So let's say there's like a lot of doctors from Nigeria who want to come here and we need doctors. We we can still naturalize them and make them American citizens. But if you say um if you're just born on this soil, you're an American citizen, you now risk that a lot of people just skip the line, come here. They don't have any good tangible skills that contribute to the workforce. And the government eventually effectively has no um mitigation procedures for preventing that from happening, and they actually have less control over the workforce. And I think that that jeopardizes the American workforce a lot more because you end up with a lot more people who potentially drain the system. And the government has no control over who is able to get that citizenship and who isn't because all it requires is just hop the border and drop anchor and you're good. You know what I'm saying?
>> Yeah.
>> Not just being an American citizen. Um, so that's what I would say is like
>> um I don't I don't think that um it really matters what that person gets out of it because I think that you need a situation where both the person, the immigrant gets a lot out of it and the people in the country get a get a lot out of it too.
>> Yeah, of course. One question for you is uh, what if uh, they don't have American citizen? What they have like green cards or they have a work visa where they're trying to apply for American citizenship by the time they have their kid, like they're really like putting all their effort into becoming American citizens. They're trying to follow the American dream. It's not like just like, oh, a three-month pit stop, have the baby and then go back to the country of origin, give the baby the uh US citizenship. What if you know that that scenario comes into play?
>> Yeah, I would say you could probably maybe give that kid some kind of visa or something after it's born. But I think probably if you want to be an American citizen at the time of your birth, I think probably at least both of your parents are going to need to be permanent residents or at least one of them is going to need to be an American citizen. You can combine it too. Um, where it's like it's a combination of soil and permanent residency of your parents or citizenship of your parents, but I don't think it can be just the geographical location just happening to be here at the time you're born. Um, and this is something that a lot of countries have had to come to terms with. Currently, there are only other four other countries in the world that um have just soil legal doctrine where if you're born on the soil, you become a citizen of that country. A lot of countries used to have it. Czech Republic overturned it in 2013, Dominican Republic in 2010, um Australia in 2007, New Zealand 2006, Ireland 2005, Germany, Denmark, France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal all used to have this doctrine. And because of birth tourism, they call it, where people just immigrate to the country to have a baby so that they can drop anchor and stay there forever. um, they had to overturn this because it was becoming a real problem.
>> What you're trying to tell me is that, you know, um, you're basically going to ban citizenship for everybody in America who's born on American soil, but their parents were immigrants in the way where their parents were not American citizens to begin. They're not naturally born on US soil.
>> Yeah. Only only for people who were just born on the soil. That's their only qualifier. So, if your parents are citizens, you can get citizenship. I think you should automatically be a citizen when you're born. um, if you're born on the soil and perhaps your parents are permanent residents, then maybe that could qualify you as well, which by which by the way coincides with Trump's recent executive order. So like I think that could work, but it can't just be the soil and you would qualify for American citizenship regardless because your parents were citizens. You're totally protected.
>> Um, and but this just gives the American government the control to um um decide who comes here and who doesn't because otherwise it's unmitigated and unfettered entry into the country. Like what if the what if like the Taliban came here or not the Taliban, what if what if al-Qaeda came here and they just had a bunch of babies here and built like a standing army in America? Or what if Russia invaded America and they brought their spouses or they had female soldiers and they had a bunch of babies in America? Are the are the Russian soldiers American citizens? It doesn't the geographical location doesn't seem to really be important. It seems that it would mostly have to be, do you have some kind of cultural or familial tie to the country that would qualify you as an American citizen? I don't think geographical location makes sense.
>> So
>> yeah, I feel like uh, one of the main things in recent, you know, like recently one thing that America does not want to become is what's going on in Canada right now where there's like almost like a too much of an influx of immigration to the point where, you know, Trudeau is under fire. Like it's chaos and corruption going on there. And obviously like Trump himself like, you know, he obviously toyed around with the idea of annexing Canada, making it the 51st state.
>> Governor Trudeau, you're talking about Governor Trudeau.
>> Governor Trudeau. Governor Trudeau. Yeah. I don't know. But uh, it's in a way where it's got me thinking. It's also similar with Canada and how like the UK, you know, money laundering as well there too. It's in a way where it's like you're having foreign, you know, influences interfere with uh domestic activities going on. So that's that's the way I see it too. But I can see your take too, especially when you factor in like booming economies, especially in the EU where they banned this and then like Germany, for example, right? Like they're the fourth largest, maybe even close to third now that Japan's on the downfall. like third largest economy in the world. Look, they banned this uh, you know, birthright citizenship and look where they're at.
>> And basically how it works in a lot of these countries is like I said, um, one at least one parent is a citizen of the country or both are permanent residents. And usually if it's related to both being permanent residents, if the child's born on the soil of that country, then the child can like go apply later for citizenship, but they get to stay there for however long. um, and it just basically makes it easier for them, the child, to get um citizenship if the parents are permanent residents.
>> I think what the general case of what we're talking about is when I think that you and I think are having some disagreement on is the case of illegal immigration and uh having children and what you call anchor babies. I think that's a generally accepted term, anchor babies, to hold the family in place. That child is born in America, will be raised in America, will be raised on American soil. Why, why should it be raised in American soil? Like, just because it happened to have been born here, why does that mean it should be allowed to be here forever? Its parents aren't citizens. It has no ties culturally or familiarly to the country. Why does it? But why? Why does it have to be raised here? Like, just because it was born here, it's got citizenship and that's why it'll be raised here. But why? Like, why would we give it citizenship? Because if you don't give it citizenship just because it was born here, then it's not raised here. It's going to go back to wherever it where its parents came from, right? And that's the only reason it's allowed to be raised here is because it was born here. So why, like, why is that important?
>> I think the reason why people, the word tolerate comes to mind, which may be a bit harsh, but I think the reason why people tolerate uh anchor babies being raised and educated in America is because I think my my philosophical position on humans, for one, is most pe people are generally the same. Most people, I think, given the opportunity, given the training, and provided, of course, that they take the training and they do something with it, I think can achieve great things. And I think the hope is, and I don't think that the hope is misplaced, that an anchor baby born in America, raised in America will go on to do great things for America.
>> Well, I but like, how do we know this though? Like, I don't, I just don't, I just don't see, I just don't see why that geographical location matters, is what I'm saying. It's like, I don't understand why that geographical location means that even if you came here and were born of parents that came here for no reason other than to just have you here so they could stay forever, and they blatantly disregarded, disrespected, and broke American laws when they came here, that they should just be allowed to like drop anchor and stay here because they had you here, and that means you should be allowed to be raised on American soil. It seems like you're going to need some kind of tie to the country other than geographical location because you could go anywhere at any time, and that doesn't grant you citizenship or access to anything else. If I break into a a social club, I don't have to be a member of that club just because I broke into it and happened to be there one time, right? You you have to gain membership. Usually, you have to pay for it or apply for it or do whatever in every other situation except for this one. It's like if you just happen to be here at the time you were born because your parents did an illegal deed, suddenly you are now a citizen and you
>> I think this circles back to better enforcement of, or actual enforcement rather. I think uh enforcement is rather lackluster on this regard. Uh, the enforcement of laws that say who can or cannot under what circumstances enter the country legally. I think that that's what I I think that's what's wanted here is more enforcement of that.
>> But it's very difficult to enforce that law.
>> Hard.
>> I mean, we have we have um hundreds of miles of border wall. I mean, that's a pro, sorry, of border stretching between um the United States and Mexico, and then hundreds of miles in the north between Canada and the United States. And it's like, it's not difficult to enforce in terms of like, yeah, we can have the laws, but now you have to like send people out to make sure people are following the laws because you have the the laws and people are going to follow them. They disrespect those laws every day. Even when there is strong enforcement mechanisms, there were still 11 million illegal immigrants living in this country. So like, people are still going to do it anyway. Um, and if you allow them to drop anchor and have anchor babies, now they're incentivized to do it even more than they may have been otherwise. So like, if you don't have anchor babies, now it's like, oh yeah, I might have a better life. But if you have, if you allow anchor babies and you have birthright citizenship or just soil, it's called this illegal doctrine. Um, now you have another layer of incentive that that gives people a reason to come here illegally, I think. And if you have that incentive, people are going to break the law about deincentivizing the law from being broken. And the other thing too is like, when you have more laxed border laws, like when Biden was president, for example, more people illegally immigrate or sorry, more people illegally immigrate because there's that incentive there. They have an incentive structure. I'm going to be less likely to be get caught, or if I do get caught, I'm going to be released. And now that Trump is president, you're probably going to see a lot less people immigrate because they know that it was one of his main policy platforms that he's going to crack down on the border.
>> Oh, cool. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
>> So how would you propose
>> supposing
>> there must be a system of naturalization.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Even even if
>> so if how's it going
>> would it be a stretch to suggest that an illegal immigration family could still have a child and that child would go on to be naturalized
>> or
>> the child, the child shouldn't be disqualified from being naturalized. But I I do think my personal view, if you illegally immigrate here, you should be disqualified from naturalizing. So like, if you've broken, violated 8 US Code 1325, improper by improper entry by alien, you've now shown in blatant disregard and disrespect for the laws of the United States, disqualified. You cannot be naturalized. This the child hasn't committed that crime, and the sins of the father are not passing on to the child. That's not what I'm advocating for. The reason I want to revoke the birthright citizenship isn't to punish the child. It's just because I don't see a a genuine pragmatic or useful purpose for granting citizenship based on geographical location. Um, but like, of course, there should be a a legitimate system for naturalization.
>> You want a red bullet?
>> So if there's a system for legitimate naturalization, then what prevents a family from entering the border, crossing the border illegally, having a child, raising the child, and then it has it then the child naturalizes?
>> Nothing. Nothing.
>> I mean, the the thing would be like, does does the child have like a useful skill that we need?
>> I suppose, but I mean, technically, like it depends on the situation, cuz like also 8 US Code 1324 is harboring an illegal alien, and if this kid's harbored his parents, and that's probably also minor.
>> Yeah. Well, depends on how old he is, right? If he's taken care of his parents or whatever, now you're looking at 8 US Code 1324. So it just depends. Um, it just depends on the situations. I mean, has he broken the laws? He violated the laws. You have a skill that's useful to us? Could potentially happen. I wouldn't encourage that happening because I think that also creates an incentive um if it happens at a high rate. So I wouldn't encourage it. Um, I again, I would be focused mostly on skills and how productive can this person be in our society. Do we need their skills at the time, etc., etc.
>> Support the children.
>> So like, you know, we need a lot of doctors. Bring doctors. If we have too many doctors, don't bring any doctors. You know what I'm saying? What about the heavy reliance on immigrant labor in the United States as a core of our economic power in being the country that we are? To a substantial degree, uh, fortify ourselves, at least economically, with the labor of all of these different immigrants. So wouldn't you naturally think that you would want this influx of individuals who have historically provided a lot for America, or is it just that they are always not always, but going to be people that just trash the country, just make it worse?
>> According to the House Committee on Budget, um, illegal immigrants are a uh net negative to the US economy. They take more than they put in. Um, so regardless of that, even if they were contributing more than they take and they were these this backbone of America and they were working so hard and um, we really needed them to stay afloat. People say that we're talking about illegal immigrants. The only jobs illegal immigrants are getting are jobs that don't pay as much as American citizens. Actually, illegal wages. Like you might as like slave wages, right? So them being the backbone of America, even if that were true, which I don't think it is, because we have millions of Americans that um become 18 years old each year, both ones that have high school diplomas and ones that don't, that can go into high-skilled or low-skilled or mid-skilled labor. Even if that were the case, I don't think that justifies slave labor. It it really seems like first you had white southerners saying, well, you know, if we free the slaves, who's going to pick all our crops? And now you have a lot of white liberals saying, well, if we deport all the illegal immigrants, who's going to pick all our crops? And it's like, don't we see a problem with that? We're talking about people that are getting paid effectively slave wages. What a lot of people don't realize either is when I was at the border, I talked to law enforcement, and what they told me is effectively all illegal immigration runs through the cartels. So you to get into the United States, you need a guide. You need to know somebody who's going to both help you evade law enforcement and somebody who's going to help you traverse the desert, especially during the summer. Cuz if you don't have somebody who can help you with that, you're just going to die of exposure or you're going to get caught. So they need somebody to guide them, and that costs money. And a lot of times they don't have money. And so what the cartel says is, "All right, look, we we understand you don't have money. It's fine. Whatever you we'll get you in, but you're going to owe us." So then they go work jobs in America for slave wages. And what they make um goes to the cartel. They get just enough to keep themselves alive, and then everything else goes straight to the cartel, and it just keeps feeding that machine, and and they're slaves. And if they don't pay the cartel, they kill their families in Mexico or they kill them in America. And it happens every day. And that was the overwhelming consensus from law enforcement officers that I talked to.
>> Okay. So naturally then do you think it should be
>> a
>> well, because this is a problem?
>> Yeah.
>> Uh
>> do you think it is something that America should focus on and try and fix to make sure that we don't have these
>> almost slaves in our country anymore? I feel like that should be prioritized over just sweeping the problem away.
>> Yeah. Well, I I think you have to I think you have to resolve both issues in order for this to happen. Um, I think probably the more pressing issue is the illegal immigration and the allowance of the illegal immigration in the first place because like I said, it just feeds the cartels, and that's where you get the slaves. Like American citizens, people who were born of America, you know, born on this soil as of right now become American citizens. And you're people who hire them are not going to pay them less money. The only reason you would hire an illegal immigrant is because you can pay them less money
>> than an American citizen. They're under the table, right?
>> What about to give them an opportunity?
>> I don't think anyone hires them for that reason.
>> You don't think anyone has that sense of moral pride or dignity
>> to hire an illegal immigrant? No. The only reason that you hire an illegal immigrant in the United States is because you can hire a [ __ ] ton of them for next to nothing. That is the only reason because you can't legally pay. I I couldn't legally pay you. If I hired you right now to work my camera, I couldn't pay you a dollar an hour, right? But if you were illegal, I could I could, I mean, not legally, but I could do it. I'd get away with it. You get what I'm saying? As long as I didn't get caught. Um, and it's much easier to do that to illegal immigrants because they don't have the same rights as American citizens. You get what I'm saying?
>> Okay?
>> Cuz they're not supposed to be here anyway. It's kind of like if you go tell on the person who's paying you $1 an hour, it's like mutual destruction. You get what I'm saying? Hey, this guy's paying me $1 an hour. I'm an illegal immigrant. Okay, now you're getting deported, and this guy might get in a little trouble.
>> Okay, so in this instance, the core of the problem is the presence of these illegal citizens. If that is the cause, then wouldn't you want to either amend the actions of these almost slave owners or would you want to make them legal so that the rights, the human moral rights, not legal, moral um, which you know, don't exist
>> has to be through legal. Yeah. Um,
>> but the moral obligation to treat these people as people.
>> Do you think that that should be tackled by making them citizens by no longer making them these slaves, people that are
>> then you slam into the same problem where it's like anyone who comes here is automatically a citizen. Like it doesn't make any sense. Like now you have unmitigated, you have you have unmitigated immigration and no control over your borders. Now, now terrorists could come here and and have mass amounts of babies and build a standing army in the United States. Like, should it should it be based on geographical location or should it be based on descent? Because I think it should be based on descent.
>> Okay. So, um, from what I can tell, a lot of your uh issues, the negatives with this uh is perpetuated by this this fear of foreign bodies using using this or terrorists. The continued, it's just a logical issue with it. Like the the possibility for destruction or problems to arise is massively exacerbated by the allowance of just soil laws. Whereas if you make it through descent, you're probably going to, you could you could potentially still have some issues, but it's going to be far less likely than if you just have unmitigated control. Like you also run into an issue where you could have like an infinite citizenship glitch where now theoretically, if all it takes is to be born on American soil, you could have a scenario where every person on the planet is an American citizen if their parents came here and had them. And now you have no, it's probably not going to happen, right? Very unlikely.
>> Wouldn't America want that?
>> No. Every person on the planet to be an American citizen. We don't have the resources to sustain that. Wouldn't you want a worldwide allegiance to a country that would want
>> that doesn't citizenship doesn't equal allegiance. That's that's the crux of the problem is like they could still be loyal to the the country their parents came from. And not only that, even if they were all allegiant to uh, you know, had allegiance to America, um, you still run into the problem, we don't have the resources for that. Uh, we don't have the space for it. We don't have the resources for it. It's obviously not going to happen. But you could have a massive citizenship boom where there are more people who don't have allegiance to America and there are people who do have allegiance to America, and then you're you're [ __ ] You get what I'm saying? So like, it there's just so many like paradoxical problems with just soil laws that have caused so many countries already to overturn it. I don't know why people kind of like freak out over in the United States, but really, it's not outside of the US. It's not a controversial thing. There's like four other countries that have it. Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina, I think, are the only other countries in the world that have it.
>> Okay. Uh, so,
>> and they even have some restrictions.
>> Okay. Uh, um, so two points on that. Uh, both individual things. Uh, your most your recent point there in
>> the sentence that you just said, a couple sentences. Um,
>> do you think us as America being one of the very few countries that do this kind of thing,
>> doesn't that naturally make us more appealing to then make it so that individuals come over more often?
>> I think it makes us more appealing to abuse. I think it makes, yeah, I think it makes us more appealing for people who want to illegally immigrate to a place so that they can have a baby here that becomes a citizen of that country. I think it makes us far more appealing than anywhere else. We're the most strong economically in the world, and we're one of five countries in the world that has these laws. Makes us very appealing for abuse. And what that is, is just like exploitation. You're just cutting the system. It it doesn't seem like I I just don't understand why geographical accident should determine citizenship. It seems like it should be based on lineage. I I don't, it's the way the entire world does it, and it makes the most sense because you have the most um, it creates the most ties to the country in the most likely scenario that you're going to be loyal to it.
>> Okay. So if America in your eyes, uh, given this instance, is a target of abuse, being one of the few people that countries that do this,
>> uh, do you think that in equal sense, it could be one of the few targets of hope for people that are displaced in the world? People who are bothered? They see America as a bastion that
>> I think hope for them, in detriment for us. I think. And like I said, um, illegal illegal immigrants are a net negative. They're a net drain on the US economy. They they take more than they give. And we create a situation where if you have an American citizen in this country, like a, you have a child, and it becomes an American citizen in this country, now the parents are allowed to stay here. It's like it's anchor baby right now. Anyone can just drop anchor and be here for as long as they want and skip the line, the immigration line, um, while everyone else waits and and works hard for their citizenship. And I think it creates a real problem. So does this, I guess this negative minority, do they define the policy that should be taken with every single individual that crosses? Like, for instance, some of the people that I know that are kind individuals who have provided for the nation, who have shared sentiments of American nationality. Do you think that the, I guess you could say mistakes of the few should define the policy for the many?
>> Well, they're all, it's not, it's not a minority. Everyone who's in this country illegally has broken the law. Every single one of them without exception. All of them.
>> Is that equivalent to these issues that you're talking about, like rape and smuggling? Do you think that's equivalent morally?
>> I think if you've shown blatant disregard for the laws and standards of this country, I think that the likelihood that you will commit another crime is extremely high.
>> Interesting.
>> Okay, think about it like this. Think about it like if I have you over to my house and I say, "All right, so um, you know, I shoot you text real quick when I before you come over um, and I say like, I'm not going to be home immediately. Just, you know, keys under the mat, whatever. Um, take your shoes off at the door, and the bathroom is the third door on the left." I walk in, and you have tracked mud into my house and taken a [ __ ] on my kitchen counter. Like, I'm not going to want you in my house anymore, right? Like, you, your first action entering into my house was breaking the rules and disrespecting the home that I live in. Um, but let's say you do the dishes after. I don't care that you did the dishes. You took a [ __ ] on my counter and tracked mud into my house. You get what I'm saying?
>> Yeah. Why did you let me in?
>> Uh, I don't know. Maybe we're friends. Or maybe maybe you just walked in. I don't know. But like, I don't think it really matters. Maybe we were just friends and you thought you could come into my house.
>> Well, then that's maybe you were my neighbor, right? Which seems
>> pretty analogous, right?
>> Whole different scenario.
>> Or I told you, let's say like, you know, I told you if you ever come over, I'm not saying you can come over, or we're planning anything, but like, we're neighbors. If you ever come over to my house, so just know that the bathroom's on the left and take your shoes off at the door. And then you just decide to waltz on over and you know, Cam won't mind cuz we're friends. We're neighbors, and you again track mud into my house, take a [ __ ] on my kitchen counter, and then do the dishes after. I don't care that you did the dishes. I just care that you track mud in and [ __ ] on the floor or on the counter.
>> So I I feel like especially for this prior friend analogy or pri uh prior established neighbor, we were like, "Oh, I like him. He's a good neighbor."
>> Maybe a barbecue together in the backyard or something once.
>> I feel then our relationship then started on a degree of trust, then. Correct. So then it, I feel like again, chicken and the egg here thing, but that degree of, oh, you're you at some point wanted to let me in to begin with, and then you're just setting that starting line to just when I enter the house as opposed to the relationship.
>> Let's say you like heard me tell my wife, let's say, or like um, one of my other friends. Say I had like, we had a barbecue at your place or something, or you know, maybe we were just taking the trash out and saw each other, and my friend was like, "Hey, I'm going to head in now," and I was like, "All right, she's off the door, bathroom's on the left."
>> And then you just decided, well, we're, you know, we're friendly enough, I'll just head on over to his house, maybe he's got something good cooking in there.
>> And you, I mean, at that point, the um analogy for real life now, that's just like blatant
>> disrespect, right?
>> Well, obviously disrespect, also just like that's not even the equivalency of uh, like attempting to immigrate. That's just taking advantage. Going over to take advantage. I I don't see any way that it's not just going to take advantage when you disrespect the laws of the country as your first action entering it. Like you're going only for your own gain. You completely disregard the situation, the wants, the needs, the desires, the aspirations of everyone else who is in very similar situations to you. People who are trying to e uh legally immigrate to the country. You say, " [ __ ] them. I'm cutting the line and I just walk right in." Right? So, you tracking the mud through my house is the equivalent of violating 8 US Code 1325, improper entry. Right? And you taking a [ __ ] on the counter is the equivalent of any other crime you might have committed along the way. And then you did the dishes because you're a hardworking American in my house. Like I said, I don't care that you did the dishes. I I'm more concerned with the other things you did that were bad. Um,
>> I mean, I Yeah, I I feel at that point then it's an issue of, oh, why did they come over, right? You got to ask the eventual like, oh, why did this even start? Why did they feel the need to say, oh, I can break into your house and take [ __ ] on your floor or counter?
>> Either one.
>> Okay.
>> Doesn't really matter.
>> All right. Cuz I mean,
>> same effect.
>> We're talking Am I Am I taking a [ __ ] on Texas, Mexico? Um, but all right. Yeah. No, I take a sharing camera. Whatever. Um, that original issue of, oh, why did I think I could come over? And what is it that is kind of building that issue, right? I feel like let's say, let's say you saw me put like a the box for like a really nice apple pie in my in my garbage can the night before, and you're like, dude, I'm I'm I'm going to get me some of that apple pie. I know he's got, you smell it coming from the window. It's wafting into your window, and you're like, "Damn, I gotta get me some of that good life. He's got the apple pie over there." So you run over and grab it.
>> Yeah. I mean, that's
>> and help yourself to the kitchen counter on the way over. You know what I'm saying?
>> Yeah. I I I feel like at that point, it's just turning into a question of like robbery then. I I don't think it's even a matter of, oh, it's your house, right? It's your stuff. It's just I saw pie, I'm doing it. Well, isn't that what they see is a is a big old American pie?
>> My
>> in America, my my my Miss American pie sitting over the border to Texas, and they walk right over and say, "I need to get me some of that good life, that American pie. I'm going to go get some." And they disregard the laws of the country on the way in. And they go and grab a slice.
>> So, what about this? You are a parent, right? You have a kid, you send him off to daycare or whatever. Yeah.
>> I'm also a parent and I have a kid, and I send mine over to daycare, and our kids get along. They are just like, oh, you know, how are you, right? Um, and naturally my kid thinks, oh, oh, okay, well then I guess let's go over to his house, right? Uh, he could also go over to my place, but in this instance, going over to yours.
>> Um, where then obviously, I mean, you don't trust me to just to hang out in your house. It's our kids that have this relationship. It's this next generation of sorts where then my kid is allowed to stay at your house, and then as they play, you realize, oh, there's a good kid, right? Like he's he's not [ __ ] shooting on my counter. He's not eating my pie. And eventually, uh, you're like, "Oh, okay, I trust my kid with your kid. Your kid can come over and hang out with my kid." I feel like naturally that seems okay to allow this kid who has proven themselves separate to their parents to then venture into your house. I mean, he can come visit every now and then, but I mean, he doesn't he doesn't own the house just because he's been there a couple times. You get what I'm saying? Or, you know, if your wife came over and had him on my living room floor, he's not like, "You guys don't own the house now." You get what I'm saying?
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
>> Okay. What are your questions? My question is how what is your proposed change in citizenship and what would it look like if it's not birthright citizenship?
>> Yeah. So I would say that I think at least one parent has to be a US citizen or both have to be permanent residents of the country. Um, this is an issue that a lot of countries have run into recently. Um, so the Czech Republic repealed their, it's called just soil, is when you're if you're born on the soil of the country, you become a citizen. Just soil. It's a legal doctrine. So
>> on the soil of the country, isn't that perfect?
>> Yeah, basically that's it's the that's like the Latin term. Yeah. So they repealed it. So there there have been numerous countries that have repealed just soil citizenship, which is no requirements other than your support on the soil. So Czech Republic overturned it in 2013, Dominican Republic in 2010, Australia 2007, New Zealand 2006, um Ireland 2005, Germany 2000, Denmark 1999, and the list just keeps going. France, Italy, etc., etc. I think you run into a lot of like paradoxical issues when you have just soil citizenship, and I think that it creates a lot of vulnerabilities within the country.
>> Okay, that was my only question. I have no other thoughts on this topic.
>> So guys, just before we wrap this video up, I just want to say put that back on the table. Adrian, this is Adrian, and he brings me tacos every time I'm here. He bought cookers and all kinds of stuff for him to make tacos, and he cooks them out of his dorm and sells them to people. So if you're at UDub, if you go to school here, you should definitely hit Adrian up, find out where he's selling his tacos and buy some. Where do you sell your your tacos out of?
>> Out of my dorm.
>> Where can they find you?
>> Uh, I'm in McMahon. Uh, usually you can send a message to me. Uh,
>> Adrian said he's been looking for a job to help him get through school and he couldn't find one, so he bought some induction cookers and now he makes tacos. That is a grind. That is a grind. He bought cookers. I bought cameras. It's how you do it, man. in their investments and um, it's it's a very not a lot of people have the gall to you know, start their own like kind of small business, you know what I mean? And really work at it. So um, but he brings me tacos literally every time I'm here. I'm about to take some home, and this is his taco. He brought me tacos right here. So
>> thank you Adrian. I really appreciate it and I hope you get some sales from this.
>> I I hope I hope so too. I I've I've just been trying to find a job and and I tell my friends, I'm like, I I like cooking tacos. I don't like cook, I'm not the biggest fan of cooking.
>> But I mean, I like cooking tacos. I like meeting people. Um, I like the perspectives that people bring to me.
>> Mhm.
>> It's just that I I I feel bad about because I'm like, I want to give people, you know, the opportunity to get tacos, but I can't give them it because I'm such so so low, so low scale, and a lot of people like have come.
>> You can't give them, you're saying you can't give them away is what you're basically.
>> Yeah. No, it's like
>> well, you bought the, you bought the stuff, you got to pay off those investments. So that's
>> it's it's been it's it's been fun. It's been really fun. And I I think everybody who's like helped me out. I thank you, Cam.
>> Yeah.
>> Thank you for this. This was
>> You're welcome. What do you put in your tacos?
>> Huh?
>> What do you put in your tacos?
>> Uh, well, I do really basic uh tortilla, meat, um, which is uh beef, and then I season the beef. And then if you want, you can put uh onion and cilantro. And then I also make my own salsa.
>> Nice. I remember when people were like, "Oh, I'll just go get some salsa from like my room because I have some original." I'm like, "Oh, wait. This isn't store-bought. This is like, you know, I made it myself." And they're like, "You made it yourself?" Like, yeah, I make my I make my everything. Um, I'm really close to actually start making my own tortillas. So, it's like, I'm once I start picking up steam, hopefully,
>> yeah,
>> I'll start making like, you know, tortillas and m make making them by hand. And I hope I can, you know,
>> perfect. Well, buy some tacos, guys. Seriously, if you go to Udub, I know a lot of people from Udub watch these videos. So,
>> buy some tacos from Adrian. You probably recognize him from some of my other videos, my older videos. Buy some tacos from Adrian.
>> Thank you.