Mexico and the border problem

I just saw the following headline: "Mexican President Calls for American Superstate, Open Borders . . . Will Democrats Say No?" This is obviously in the spirit of globalist transnationalism, which sets me against it immediately. I've come a long way from where I used to stand, years ago: I used to think the Star Trek vision of a single world government was a good idea. These days, though, I believe exactly the opposite: humans, taken as a species, need to keep their national borders because we are nowhere near mature enough to think of ourselves and each other as part of one human family kept apart by essentially meaningless boundaries. The truth is that we need our borders the way human bodies need skin: as a way to regulate what goes in and what goes out in a reasonable manner. Life without skin would be short and painful as the body filled up with all manner of pathogens. Having borders that are permeable in a limited sense would be ideal.

Meantime, I think the US and Mexico would do well to examine closely the question of why so many Mexicans feel the urgent need to cross the US/Mexico border illegally. What's so horrible about Mexico? I'm pretty sure I have a vague idea of what the problem is: corruption throughout the political system, and whole regions under the thrall of drug gangs that do not have an interest in seeing the people prosper. It would be nice to see the US aid Mexico in trying to make Mexico a state that people don't want to escape from. This can only happen when Mexico's deeply entrenched problems—the ones mentioned above, among others—are dealt with. I doubt any five-year plan can turn Mexico around, but what about a fifty-year plan, assuming generations of citizens and politicians are capable of staying the course?

I think the US needs to prioritize Mexico—strengthen it, help make it livable for its own citizens—and when that happens, Mexicans will stop trying to flee their own country. Meanwhile, a borderless superstate in the globalist mold is not the answer. The result of such a new world order would not be mutually beneficial symbiosis: it would be parasitism.