Op-Ed: Adult leadership trumps adolescent idealism in Rubio v. AOC

---

For most people, the idea of watching a European conference on security is akin to downing an entire bottle of Dramamine before a trans-continental flight: sleep-inducing.

However, the recent Munich Security Conference included a keynote speech from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that all Americans should watch.

The address spotlighted a profound clash of visions on immigration, with Rubio delivering a powerful address that underscored the urgent need for border security as a cornerstone of Western survival.

In stark contrast, the appearance of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., aka AOC, at the same event, coupled with her history of advocating for anti-borders policies, exemplified a dangerously immature approach that prioritizes idealism over reality, and would only serve to accelerate the West’s decline.

Rubio’s remarks identified uncontrolled mass migration as an existential threat, warning that lax policies have invited chaos, eroding societal cohesion, cultural continuity, and national sovereignty. His speech was a masterclass in principled leadership, rallying transatlantic allies around shared values while confronting uncomfortable truths.
- Advertisement -

He declared that pursuing a “world without borders” has “opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.” Far from xenophobic rhetoric, Rubio positioned border control as “a fundamental act of national sovereignty,” essential to safeguarding civilization itself.

Drawing on his background as the son of Cuban immigrants, Rubio emphasized that sound immigration policy must prioritize national interest, enforcing laws to prevent visa overstays, bolstering vetting, and securing borders before addressing those already here illegally. His call for Europe to reject “liberalist” policies enabling mass influxes was much needed amid the continent’s integration struggles and populist unrest.

This is not about party politics or “owning the libs.” The future of our nation is hanging in the balance, and we need serious people to lead us. The pro-borders stance reflects mature, adult leadership. Rubio understands that unchecked migration strains resources, undermines public trust, and invites security risks. As secretary of state, he has already acted decisively, pausing refugee programs and ramping up visa scrutiny to align with America’s safety and prosperity.

His Munich address urged revitalizing U.S.-Europe ties through “ethno-political values of culture, tradition, and religion,” advocating for managed migration that preserves Western identity while fostering alliances. Rubio’s realism offers a blueprint for strength: enforce borders first, then pursue orderly reforms.

European reactions were mixed, with some leaders welcoming Rubio’s commitment to a “new Western century” but others bristling at critiques of their migration and climate approaches. Yet, his message cut through: mass migration isn’t a fringe issue, but a crisis destabilizing the West that calls for decisive action.

This pragmatism contrasts sharply with naive alternatives that ignore the necessity of enforcement. Enter Ocasio-Cortez, whose Munich outing highlighted her unpreparedness for serious global discourse and the vapidity of her solutions.
- Advertisement -

While she focused on working-class priorities and countering authoritarianism, her stumbles – mocking Rubio’s cultural references and fumbling foreign policy details – drew widespread mockery as an “absolute train wreck.” Even liberals critiqued her lack of depth, underscoring her as “callow and unserious.”

Ocasio-Cortez’ immigration views are the most obvious example of this immaturity. She advocates amnesty for all “undocumented immigrants,” granting work papers, and dismantling enforcement mechanisms like ICE detention, labeling them “systemic cruelty.” Criticizing border security as rooted in “racism” and “fear,” she opposes deportations even for minor crimes, pushing for welfare benefits regardless of status.

Her vision romanticizes loosely regulated borders, ignoring how unchecked border crossings overburden systems, erode wages, and fuel “inequality.” By vilifying enforcement and equating detention to “concentration camps,” Ocasio-Cortez promotes policies that invite chaos and weaken national security.

Such anti-borders positions are not just unserious; they’re reckless, hastening the West’s downfall through demographic shifts, strained services, and lost sovereignty.

Ocasio-Cortez’ Munich cringe-fest reveals a worldview detached from practical governance. Her ilk’s empathy-driven approach sidesteps accountability, scapegoating enforcement while enabling exploitation of the less fortunate she claims to champion. Rubio’s framework, by contrast, embodies strength: secure borders enable humane, merit-based immigration that bolsters economies without compromising identity.

At Munich, he charted a path to renewal, rejecting managed decline. For pro-enforcement advocates, Rubio’s leadership is a beacon: firm, realistic, and vital to preserving the West against immature ideologies that court disaster.

Rubio and Ocasio-Cortez have presented two very different visions for America’s immigration policy and, by extension, its future.

One of those visions results in a safe, prosperous country full of opportunity for citizens as well as immigrants who arrive in manageable numbers via a controlled procedure. The other is an even worse version of the Biden years: millions of unknown foreigners stampeding over porous borders, sanctuary communities that are dangerous and insolvent, and America resembling the final days of the Roman Empire.

It’s time for America and its leaders to put away childish things and act like adults.