Celebrating the 4th of July
~ by Anna
Yesterday, I was distributing lit for Congresswoman Melissa Bean (D, IL-08) in a parade. Most people who declined to take one just waved me away or said, “No thanks.” However, one man told me, “I don’t like her, and I’m NOT INTERESTED.” Feeling particularly bold and sufficiently startled by his vitriol, I decided ask him why. He asked, “What’s her stand on immigration?” The congresswoman is a blue dog, and generally speaking stays on the harsher side of the illegal immigration debate. I told him that she viewed illegal immigration as a security concern and opposed it like most rational people, but that she supported legal immigration. The man took issue with the latter part of my statement and grumbled something to indicate the conversation was over. I thanked him for his time and opinion cheerfully, took pleasure in imagining myself flicking him off (the Bean shirt I was wearing prevented me from actually doing so) and ran to catch up with the rest of the caravan.
It reminded me of another incident, a couple of years ago. I was sitting in class the Friday before spring break, and the teacher was realistic enough to know that we wouldn’t do actual work. Somehow, immigration came up in the conversation. My teacher said, “You know, sometimes I think that we should just close all the borders and not let anyone else come in this country. I mean, what claim do they have on it? We’d certainly be safer.” Many of my classmates nodded or voiced their enthusiastic assent. I raised my hand, and I said “That’s great, Mr. Nowak, but I personally think your class would be diminished without my presence.” My classmates laughed, and the conversation continued to other topics, but I was surprised and hurt that a teacher would feel comfortable saying that in a class with two immigrants and 5 first-generation students.
Immigration is an intensely personal issue for me. I’ve been ridiculously fortunate my entire life, and I am so aware of how much of that has to do with living in this country and not in Putin’s Russia. I also have a heightened awareness of how the illegal immigration problem has poisoned the national dialogue on immigration in general and the alarming xenophobic trends the public exhibits. More and more, people just say “immigrant” to talk about illegal aliens, and stigmatize those of us who did it the right way.
I have trouble understanding the nativism. I don’t see that there’s any significant difference between legal immigrants in 1607 in Jamestown, legal immigrants in the 1840s, legal immigrants in the 1890s and 1900s, and legal immigrants in the 1990s and today. I’m not an expert, but the man I talked to certainly didn’t look in the slightest like a Native American, so my bet is that somewhere along the line, someone in his family came here on a boat. I don’t see how we can draw an arbitrary line to distinguish between previous waves of immigrants and those trying to come here today.
The Swedish in New Amsterdam, the Irish in New York, the Germans in Pennsylvania, the Poles and Italians in Chicago, the Chinese and Japanese in San Francisco all faced attacks because they didn’t fit in to our white, anglicized, Protestant culture. They, too, created racial and cultural enclaves that provided social services and community for new arrivals. They formed a base for city bosses, political machines, and absolutely staggering corruption. And yet, who will say today that they diluted and destroyed our national identity?
They became part of the popular notion of American identity, even before the advent of mass media and a truly national popular culture. Today, with those benefits, it’s ridiculous to claim that immigrants are here in too great of numbers to assimilate. Economically, it’s an advantage to learn English, and that fact isn’t lost upon immigrants.Just look at the statistics for Spanish retention among successive generations of immigrants, via the good people at Language Log:
“In point of fact, though, all the evidence suggests that Hispanics are learning English very rapidly — more rapidly than the Germans and other groups did at the turn of the century. There’s also no evidence that the rate of Spanish retention is higher than the rate of retention for other groups. This was the clear finding of an extensive study by Alejandro Portes and Lingxin Hao of 5000 second-generation Hispanic children in San Diego & South Florida. Overall, they found that 95 percent of the children speak English well and that 40 percent speak no Spanish.”
It hardly seems necessary to list the accomplishments and contributions of immigrants. Suffice to say, I feel good in the company of Joseph Pulitzer, Harry Houdini, Albert Einstein, Enrico Fermi, the Curies, Henry Kissinger, Madeline Albright, Niels Bohr, Charlie Chaplin, Andrew Carnegie, Nikola Tesla, Alexander Graham Bell, Alexander Hamilton, and that most American of icons- Bob Hope. I consider diversity an advantage. It has certainly been a boon for science, art, industrialization, and even constitutional law in this country, because having different perspectives and conflicting opinions promotes progress. According to the UN World Economic and Social Survey on international migration from 2004, immigrants have an average of 7.2 more years of schooling than those they leave behind. Even the low-skilled workers coming in from Mexico have an average of 1.2 more years of schooling than Mexican nationals who stay.
There is no immigrant invasion. No one is trying to steal or destroy this country, it’s a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship. We’re just beneficiaries of the greatest, oldest, and noblest American tradition. Even if you were to justify somehow cutting off immigration, the attempt would be a waste of time. As Thomas Friedman so helpfully tells us, the world is flat and there’s no escaping global economic forces. As long as half of the world lives on less than a dollar a day and watches 300 million of us dying of our own gluttonous excesses, there’s going to be something of an urge to migrate.
That having been said, I don’t think that being American is one of those inalienable right endowed to all 6.6 billion people on Earth. I’m angered as much as anyone else, probably more, at illegal immigration in this country, especially programs that would provide a path to citizenship for illegal aliens in less then 10 years. I’ve been here almost 11 and I’m not eligible to apply for citizenship for another two years. The Washington Post has covered recently the backlog at the State Department in processing passports, which sometimes takes months. My family has friends who have been here on H-1 working visas, paying taxes, and living in limbo for 6-8 YEARS, waiting for review of their cases and resolution of their legal status. These people are bound to their employers. If their jobs are outsourced or they are laid off or fired, they have to be ready to leave the country within two weeks. They have to renew their work authorization every year, and they can be deported for traffic violations. Some of them are joking now that it’s probably easier to just go to Mexico and re-enter the country illegally than to wade through the bureaucracy of the the Immigration and Naturalization Services, now a part of the Department of Homeland Security.
It’s pretty telling that one of our first national immigration laws was the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Emma Lazarus wasn’t entirely incorrect- “Give me your tired, your poor,your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, ” just provided those who preceded them like their looks. Our immigration laws trump even the tax code for that unique combination of complexity and stupidity that characterizes them. The system is still rooted in the worst, most paranoid parts of our nature. We shouldn’t even consider a guest worker program without also extensively reforming the existing immigration laws.
This 4th of July, let’s set aside our hysterics. While the President and Congress acknowledge the failure of their attempts to resuscitate the illegal immigration bill and Lou Dobbs pontificates about the imminent downfall of the middle class, let’s consider making it a little bit easier for our newest Americans, instead.
Comment by Hanno on 1 July 2007 at 7:44 pm:
Interesting and thoughtful post Anna. As you noted, the first immigration law was the Chinese Exclusion Act, so to condemn illegal immigration is a bit silly considering when most of our grandparents came here there was no such thing. I do, however, agree with you that the immigration system in this country should be massively overhauled and we should make it insanely easy for hyper-educated immigrants to get in and give us their skills.
Guest worker programs are stupid because once you let someone in, they’re going to want to stay unless they have binding obligations back home, so asking them to leave after two years then come back, etc will just lead to lots of people overstaying their guest worker status and being here illegally anyway. Immigration is a sticky issue and there’s no silver bullet, but sane admissions policies are probably the most obvious start.
Comment by Allan Niemerg on 2 July 2007 at 12:11 am:
Nice Post.
Personally, I think immigration should be thought of as a form of recruiting. Just as a good business seeks out great employees, or a football team seeks fresh talent, the U.S. should seek out the best candidates for citizenship. Personally, I think we should start by dramatically increasing the number of H-1 visas. I want every smart, ambitious person on this planet to be able to come here and improve our country.
I’m more ambivalent about the illegal immigration from Mexico. I think we need to be serious about stemming the tide of illegal immigration, but I think it’s somewhat futile. There are almost half a million (or more) determined people who try to cross every year. Given that much desire to get here, a wall seems silly. Maybe, the “virtual” wall of cameras idea could work. Maybe.
That said, I’m pretty much for amnesty. Deport the criminals, but levy a large fine and get the rest into the system. The extra taxes would be nice. I’m annoyed by the conservatives who think amnesty is awful because illegal immigrants are “criminals.” As if crossing an imaginary line in the sand is some sort of wicked crime against humanity. (It’s not and those racist fuck-tard Glenn Beck-wannabe xenophobes need to shut the hell up.) I’m equally annoyed by those on the left who are crying over the fact that illegal immigrants lower wages. Why the hell should we want American-born people doing unskilled labor for $20 an hour while just across the border there are millions of capable workers poor and idle? (It’s stupid, and the protect-my-job-and-no-else’s Lou Dobbs-watching fuck-tards need to also shut the hell up.)
Comment by sigh on 2 July 2007 at 6:43 am:
“As if crossing an imaginary line in the sand/grass/concrete can get you charged with criminal trespassing.”
Come on Niemerg, it’s called “amnesty” because it’s a pardon; doesn’t that usually indicate that a crime has been committed? Illegal immigrants ARE criminals. The fact that they come here illegally to help themselves or their families is irrelevant.
“Why the hell should we want American-born people doing unskilled labor for $20 an hour while just across the border there are millions of capable workers poor and idle?”
Maybe because there are millions of unskilled (not to mention skilled) workers here LEGALLY that are out of work? But that’s just a guess.
Comment by Hanno on 2 July 2007 at 7:05 am:
“it’s called “amnesty” because it’s a pardon; doesn’t that usually indicate that a crime has been committed? Illegal immigrants ARE criminals”
But why is it a crime in the first place?
Comment by Anna on 2 July 2007 at 8:37 am:
As I said in the post, I can’t support amnesty because it’s a slap in the face to immigrants coming over here legally.
As I believe Peggy Noonan has said, what does it say when someone’s first act in America is criminal ie crossing the border. Yeah, it was her- http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110007648
Illegal immigration is a security concern. While most are coming here to work, some are drug dealers and God only knows what else.
By far the greatest part of immigration to America is family reunification. It’s a noble cause, but we need more H-1 visas, and we need to be better about refugees.
You hear all these horror stories about people who flee North Korea to China, and then can’t get aid because they don’t have documentation. What are they supposed to do, contact their consulate in Hong Kong? It’s ridiculous.
Comment by J. Prescott on 2 July 2007 at 9:05 am:
I think a major concern about the modern “anti-immigration” kick is that it is more than just a fear of the alien or different, which was the main reason for anti-immigration in the past.
Back in the late 1800s through early 1900s, immigrants could rely on three things in the new country; their family, their friends, and their church. If those three things failed, they were screwed. Now, with the advent of a greater social security welfare net, the perception is that immigrants can rely on the government to pull them through, a comparably facelss entity. If you borrow or took money from dad, well thats a face, and you want to work hard to make it look like you are doing something with it. If you take money from some faceless oovernment employee, who cares. It would appear that people are being SUBSIDIZED to be American, something most people would not feel comfortable with. Therefore, the social welfare net exacerbates the underlying “we don’t like anything new” tendecies of current citizens with the fear that it is being forced upon them by the government. So I think the current hysteria over immigration transcends “fear of the new” to “fear of being taken advantage.”
In other words, like so many other things, I blame the democrats.
Comment by Anna on 2 July 2007 at 9:37 am:
Unless you have a green card (permanent residency) you can’t get unemployment benefits, you can’t get Medicare/Medicaid, and you can’t get social security. People who come here legally and leave, like a family friend of ours, Yuri, get money withdrawn from their paychecks for Social Security just like the rest of us, but never get to take advantage of it.
Illegal immigrants still largely depend on individual acts of charity, and their families, friends, and churches.
Comment by J. Prescott on 2 July 2007 at 9:56 am:
All True.
But that doesn’t mean thats not the perception.
Also, while the people who came over the border don’t get benefits, all of their kids that are born here do. That still counts, to me, as government help
Comment by Hanno on 2 July 2007 at 10:19 am:
“while the people who came over the border don’t get benefits, all of their kids that are born here do.”
Funny thing about citizenship at birth is that well, if you’re born here you’re a citizen irrespective of who or what your parents are. Your parents could be crocodile men from the Kuiper belt and you’d still be a citizen. That silly 14th Amendment…
Comment by tet on 2 July 2007 at 11:56 am:
Three steps:
1) Phase out all Federal social programs over the next 10-15 years for all Americans.
This, in and of itself, will reduce a lot of the pressure on the border.
2) Create porous membrane allowing Americans to emigrate, restrict all others until current war of civilizations is over. Let useful people in after extensive background checks.
3) Fast-track citizenship for those already here in exchange for learning English.
One of the difficulties with the current situation in the American Southwest is that it can be viewed as a reconquista. That makes me nervous, especially since the Latinos were willing to wait 700 years for success last time they did that. Just a thought…
Tom
Comment by Hanno on 2 July 2007 at 12:33 pm:
“2) Create porous membrane allowing Americans to emigrate, restrict all others until current war of civilizations is over. Let useful people in after extensive background checks.
3) Fast-track citizenship for those already here in exchange for learning English.
One of the difficulties with the current situation in the American Southwest is that it can be viewed as a reconquista. That makes me nervous, especially since the Latinos were willing to wait 700 years for success last time they did that. Just a thought…”
Ok as to the first what “war of civilizations?”
As for the second, I’ve always suspected you had xenophobic proclivities, but this sort of confirms it. The Spaniards were not, are not, and have never been Latinos. Latino implies from Latin America. The Spanish are Hispanic, but not Latino. Latino is the mestizo cultures of native American and Spanish that grew out of the conquest of the Americas.
Comment by tet on 2 July 2007 at 1:23 pm:
Making a mistake on a term hardly qualifies me as a xenophobe, Hanno.
If I am wrong in my terminology I will stand corrected and not use the term that way again. [Please note that when I learned to read Spanish, I learned how to read the type that is written in the New World, not the Old. I understood that there was prejudice between the lighter-skinned Spanish descended folks and those with more Native and Black blood, but didn't realize that people were rejecting the Spanish side of their origins to that extent. Is this a general thing, Political Correctness or a personal prejudice on your part?]
Can you truly say that some of the folks from Mexico do not count the US Southwest as land that was stolen and rightfully theirs? Activists even call their migration a reconquista, don’t they? Your remarks seem designed to divert attention from that point.
At the present time, there is a clash between the Islamic and Western Civilizations going on in the Middle East, Central Asia and Europe. It may be hyperbolic to call it a war, yet there is certainly shooting going on in a number of countries.
I don’t consider myself a xenophobe as much as a realist.
Tom
Comment by Brian on 2 July 2007 at 1:59 pm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic#Synonyms_and_antonyms
Comment by tet on 2 July 2007 at 2:54 pm:
You know, Brian, I read that article and I still don’t understand the whole thing. That’s not really surprising, since the article says that the people involved don’t always make the distinctions, and it means different things to different people.
How about this? I’ll try to use the specific countries of origins (or areas of origin) in the future in my writings and let those folks with varying amounts of Spanish blood figure out what the hell they want to call themselves somewhere other than in my commentary.
Since this issue is so damned obscure, I have to conclude that Hanno’s comments are mostly designed to be a red herring. I call foul–you’re more than capable of debating the issues without playing a race card.
Tom
Comment by Anonymous on 1 August 2007 at 12:41 am:
The parable of the two wolves: One evening an old Cherokee told his grandson about a battle that goes on inside people. He said, “My son, the battle is between two “wolves” inside us all. One is Evil. It is anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego. The other is Good. It is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith (”faith in me and you”). The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather: “Which wolf wins?” The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”