The left — including the Democrat Party, of course — has seemingly forever lived and breathed via code words and buzz phrases. From "glass ceiling" to the "Me Too Movement" to "systemic racism" to referring to illegal aliens (which is a term used in existing U.S. immigration law) as "undocumented migrants," Democrats have relied on emotional responses of their base, rather than facts, history, logic, and common sense.

"For years," wrote author and political commentator Jonathan Turley in his column Tuesday, "the mantra on the left was “reimagining” everything from policing to free speech to defense. 'Reimagining' often was a synonym for defunding or limiting the subject matter."

Now, Georgetown Law Professor Sherally Munshi and other academicians are trotting out a few new buzz words and they continue to attack President Donald Trump's border enforcement policy as.. wait for it... “ethically indefensible.” Munshi kicks it up a ridiculous notch with a spiffy new meaningless term, “defamiliarizing” — as she decries the very existence of borders as "morally reprehensible."

Here's the professor: 

Our task, as I put it, is to unsettle the border, to defamiliarize, disenchant, and recontextualize it by critically evaluating the historical processes, the legal developments, the discursive formations that naturalize and legitimate the border.

Rather than redress the fact that the international border regime is practically unsustainable [and] ethically indefensible, majorities in the whitest and wealthiest nations are embracing an increasingly authoritarian form of nationalism and exclusion.

If you have any idea what that first intentionally intellectual-sounding yet meaningless paragraph actually says, kudos. And there it is, in the second paragraph, just like everything else on the race-obsessed left, borders are racist.

And not to nitpick, professor, but it's neither authoritarian nor nationalist for a sovereign nation to protect and defend its boundaries, particularly from illegal aliens who stream across an open border (See: Biden Border Crisis), untold numbers of whom are in search of financial benefits funded by America's taxpayers — and worse.

It gets better.

Borders, according to Professor Munshi, who either lied or is woefully ignorant on something so simple, are simply a concept “within the American imaginary; the southern border divides white from indigenous, purity from heterogeneity, civilization from savagery, settler from Indian.”

ALSO READ:

Working As Advertised: Even Legacy Media Admits Trump's Border Crackdown Is Effective

Feds Bust Huge California-Based Guatemalan Human Smuggling Ring, Suspects Could Pay the Ultimate Price

Turley provided a bit of a history lesson for Professor Munshi and others who absurdly believe what she believes about the "reimagining" of borders.

Of course, this reimagining of borders will have to extend back a tad further than the American founders. The concept of the nation-state with sovereign borders was recognized in documents like the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. It was credited with maintaining a Westphalian peace with nations able to maintain their own territory and governing systems. That, in turn, allowed nation-states to form international bodies and further stabilize global relations.

Facts matter, professor.

The Bottom Line

Often, people who live in insulated bubbles intentionally disassociate themselves from facts and reality. Nowhere is that reality more on display than in the no-longer-hallowed — yet smug as can be — halls of academia.