Carp aren't people. I don't ascribe most human rights to non-human...
· Comment — Archer T. Ships replied to his own comment. · View on Facebook · Markdown source
Carp aren't people. I don't ascribe most human rights to non-human animals. (Among other things, I'm fine with carp being fished and eaten.) Therefore, trying to block Chinese carp from entering US waters doesn't have the same moral import as preventing Chinese people from fleeing China. I would also note that government meddling _caused_ some of our problems with invasive species. Kudzu for example: "Kudzu was cultivated by Civilian Conservation Corps workers as a solution for the erosion during the Dust Bowl.[16] The Soil Erosion Service recommended the use of kudzu to help control erosion of slopes which led to the government-aided distribution of 85 million seedlings and government-funded plantings of kudzu which paid $19.75 per hectare ($7.99/acre).[7] By 1946, it was estimated that 1,200,000 hectares (3,000,000 acres) of kudzu had been planted." And government meddling in the agricultural markets more broadly has had a number of deleterious environmental effects: obesity, crop monoculture, habitat destruction, water shortages. You can't cherry pick the few government policies that might have a positive impact, and ignore all of the policies that don't. Similarly, I think a lot of the problems associated with immigrants are caused by government policy. For example, unemployment among immigrants is higher than it would be in the absence of minimum wage laws and other state-mandated benefits.