Mary Anastasia O’Grady’s Wall Street Journal column is eye opening:
… many Guatemalans I spoke with here last week are not dreading an anti-immigrant, protectionist Donald Trump in the White House. They’re focused on the exit of Barack Obama, whose foreign policy they saw as politicized in favor of left-wing causes and environmental extremism that harm Guatemalan development. …
The complaints extend beyond a difference of opinion about the role of the state. During the Obama years Uncle Sam repeatedly backed those who flouted the rule of law in the name of “social justice.”
Let me summarize what one might infer the Obama administration’s policy accomplished based on what O’Grady is saying. Yes, I’m insinuating a more cohesive plan than there may have been, but it’s telling whether intentional or not:
- One: Back corrupt groups that share Obama’s general ideology.
- Two: Drive people out of those countries and toward America.
- Three: Open the borders with selective border enforcement and promised benefits.
- Four: Change the electorate of the United States (they think) in favor of the former president’s party.
If that were, in any degree, the plan, one can’t help but wonder whether it assumes too much to think people driven from their homes by leftist governments wouldn’t carry that lesson with them. It seems like there ought to be opportunity for conservatives, here, if we can figure out how to communicate on the level of core values with communities that have this sort of experience in their background.