Whenever the topic of amnesty for undocumented immigrants comes up in the U.S., it is always accompanied by the unique tone of Korean middle-aged men.

"Back in the day, the U.S. used to grant amnesty to undocumented immigrants a lot, right? Why aren't they doing it now?"

The real ignorance is not realizing that those times are not now.

In the past, there were indeed large-scale amnesties, and just staying for a certain period would lead to a vibe of "Sure, we'll make you legal~".

At that time, the number of undocumented immigrants was not as high as it is now, and airport security was lax, and the identification system was weak.

It's just a statement that "the past was like that," yet they compare it to today and say, "It worked back then, so why can't it work now?"

It's exactly the same level as someone who has been out of the military for 20 years saying, "Back in my day!"

Since the 1990s, the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. has exploded, and public opinion has started to shift towards, "Why should we grant amnesty?"

So in 1996, laws were enacted to tighten regulations on undocumented immigrants, making it much more difficult to change status to permanent residency.

By this point, they should have caught on, but middle-aged men still cling to the past, hoping that "someday there will be amnesty again."

What's the difference from a boss at a company who only talks about past success stories while nagging younger employees?

In politics, just mentioning amnesty for undocumented immigrants leads to an explosion of backlash like, "So if they come in illegally, they'll just be made legal later?"

The logic that granting amnesty ultimately encourages illegal entry has gained traction, and openly stating that amnesty will be granted could lead to losing votes in elections.

Thus, nowadays, instead of a 'full amnesty', we only see uncomfortable compromises like temporary protections that do not lead to deportation.

Granting blanket amnesty like before, in a clear and straightforward manner, has become nearly impossible politically, legally, and realistically.

In the end, the statements of Korean middle-aged men reminiscing about "there used to be amnesty" are just expressions of not accepting the times.

The world has changed, yet they are using past references. The fact that there is no amnesty for undocumented immigrants is simple. The numbers have become too large, the laws have changed, public opinion has shifted, and amnesty does not win votes.

If they still interpret all of this as "the current government lacks will," then that is not a lack of information but a failure to grasp the times well.