So, I'm going to post a few last thoughts on immigration here. Part of this is in response to a friend's reaction to my previous post. Part of this is because my last post was a very sarcastic rant against most of the assholes I hear on right wing radio, which I listen to way too much of. This is partially a response to responses, and partially a more level headed explanation of why the rhetoric of "invasion" bugs the hell out of me.
First, a little history. When people start talking about the "invasion" of illegals -
Wait. Let's be honest. We're talking about Mexicans. I mean, really we're talking about Peruvians, Chileans, Costa Ricans, Puerto Ricans, and any number of other people. But they all get melted into one big Mexican by the time the talking heads on Fox News get a hold of them.
Okay, so when people start talking about the "invasion" of illegal Mexicans into our country, I think of Valley Park, Missouri. Valley Park, just minutes away from downtown St. Louis, is not a bad place. It just has a few really crazy people in it and the town elected one of them mayor. Last year, the mayor of Valley Park made it a crime to be an illegal alien and imposed fines on businesses that hire and landlords who rent to illegals.
He apparently has a double major in redundancy.
You can read the details here.
Now, normally I'd write this off as one of the countless idiotic wastes of time government engages in. Making it illegal to be illegal sure seems like one of those symbollic gestures that usually just mildly annoy me. But, as soon as the ordinance was approved St. Louis County police were flooded with calls from Valley Park reporting illegal immigrants.
Anonymous calls of course. Anonymous calls from people whose only evidence of someone being here illegally (in most cases) is - what, the color of their skin? Their inability to speak fluent English? Their last name? Because unless you've some really cool mutant ability that you haven't registered with the government, you can't tell and illegal Mexican from a Mexican who's just having a hard time learning the language.
So, as a result, Hispanics had the risk of always having to prove their legal status on demand. And many whites saw no problem with this because they're simply trying to stop the invasion of their town.
Now, I'm a fiscally conservative, socially liberal, constitutional Libertarian. I believe that every citizen has the right to live a life free of molestation by the government. Each day I see a million tiny encroachments into my private life that are rationalized in a number of ways. I forgive these encroachments for the most part. But one thing that is unforgivable, is anything that would ever force me to have to provide documentation of my right to be here to authorities on demand.
Luckily I'm white. If you're white like me, take a sigh of relief. Because man, if I had a dark tan, I'd be worried about what happened in Valley Park, Missouri. Luckily, that ordinance was struck down by the courts. Others followed. Some approved and some failed.
I'm still happy that I was born with blonde hair and blue eyes.
So, when I hear the word "invasion" that's why it gets my hackles up.
Okay, so why not "invasion". After all, there's not denying that a lot of illegals make their way into our country each year. And with recent news stories about the rape and murder of a child by an illegal immigrant, my friend makes a statement that doesn't really seem all that unfair:
"last time I checked raping, pillaging, and murder of a country's citizenry(especially children) is all things that happen in an invasion"
Those are things that happen in some invasions (though i'd like to think our recent invasion of Iraq was more benign and lacked the viking aspect). They're also just fucked up things that happen in any society.
My problem with "invasion" rhetoric is that it's hyperbole to the nth degree. How many illegals are in America today? The conservative estimate is 12 million last time I checked? Some of the more reactionary groups estimate 24 million. Everyone else falls somewhere in between.
How many violent crimes like this have been committed by illegals? Is it between 1.2 million and 2.4 million? If at least 10 percent of the illegals were raping and killing our citizens, I'd almost allow the rhetoric to pass.
Almost.
"Invasion" turns all illegals not just into dangerous criminals, but into something damn near a military enemy. It's just not so. They're not organized. They're not actively trying to tear down the country. They're not sneaking ied's into courthouses. For the most part, they're living under our radar. That's why they're so hard to find and send back.
"Invasion" allows us to lump rapists and killers into the same class as the woman who snuck in to clean floors for $3 an hour to send money back to her family. Both are criminals. Neither should have been allowed to sneak into the country. But I hope it's obvious that the level of force used to aprehend either them should be significantly different, as their threat to our social order is significantly different.
Calling them both "invaders" removes the necessity to think rationally about how they're dealt with. It means that the housekeeper whose only crime is paying some opportunist way to much money to be dropped off in South St. Louis gets let out of her home at gunpoint, just as the rapist is.
I don't like that. I think we should have to make the distinction - even if it's only in our heads - between someone who may kill us in our sleep and someone who simply minds their own business. When we become unwilling to do that by viewing all illegals as invaders, then it's a short step to viewing everyone who comes running across the desert as a potential bomb and justifying the use of any force necessary to stop them from crossing the border.
That's not a slippery slope. It's a very short inclined plane.
And yes, we should find illegals and send them back to their home countries. Their actions are an affront to the immigrants who come here legally through the processes we set forth. But, just as the guy sitting in his living room smoking a joint is not the same threat as the coked up drug lord inviting you to say hello to his automatic rifle, not all illegal aliens pose the same threat either.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
"Invasion" part deux
Labels:
Society,
Stupidity of Fear
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Yeah.. pointing out an example or two of an illegal immigrant who happens to be a rapist brings to mind religious bigots who point out a few examples of child molesters who happen to be homosexual so they can claim all homosexuals are sexual deviants.
It comes down to applying the correct punishment to the crime. Trying to relate rapists to border jumpers in order to safely use the term "Invasion" is a tiny bit far fetched.
That whole argument that someone who breaks the law is more likely to break laws in general is kind of understandable but I'm not sure it automatically means you're going to go the way of a violent criminal. I mean, people who download (steal) music and movies from the internet are probably not going to break into your car and steal your radio.
Someone who is trying to save their family from a crappy living environment by illegally jumping a border isn't unnecessarily going to rape your daughter because they got a taste of breaking the law.
I've also heard people claim that these illegals do deserve the same fair treatment as American criminals. Well.. if we think that way then way the hell do we care about the rest of the world? Why bother ever caring about another human being outside of our country? Maybe some do think that way. They need to be kicked in the nuts. We're all fucking human beings.
Yes, the crime should be punished but the punishment must fit the crime.
"Yeah.. pointing out an example or two of an illegal immigrant who happens to be a rapist brings to mind religious bigots who point out a few examples of child molesters who happen to be homosexual so they can claim all homosexuals are sexual deviants."
That's a good point. Another example is gun crime and gun owners. If a gun owner commits a violent crime, we constantly hear the ridiculous assertion that all guns need to be taken out of the hands of the public. The assertion is that a) every gun owner has the potential to murder or be an accessory to a murder and b) if there were no guns, my mother/son/father/daughter would still be alive.
But thankfully, many of us recognize the faulty logic required to make that leap. Just because you and the criminal both own guns doesn't mean you share any of the characteristics that led to him being a threat to society.
"Trying to relate rapists to border jumpers in order to safely use the term "Invasion" is a tiny bit far fetched."
For the record, I never used the word invasion to reference Illegal Immigration till ZK brought it up. In all honesty, I dont agree with the use of the word invasion in this context. In the same vein, dont try to tell me every illegal here is a good person trying to make a living who is helping me get cheaper produce, cause that is crap.
"the crime should be punished but the punishment must fit the crime."
Couldn't agree more. My only issue is I am tired of being called a racist for saying that illegal immigrants who are discovered should be deported.
Yo, Grif.
"I am tired of being called a racist for saying that illegal immigrants who are discovered should be deported."
Agreed. There's a lot of sweeping generalizations of people on both sides of the issue by the opposing viewpoint. It doesn't help the discussion at all.
I think illegals who are discovered should be deported too, in most cases (I've no love for absolutes and zero tolerance policies). I guess that could mean I'm racist against immigrants. But, considering how cool I think the folks who come here legally are, I doubt it.
"In the same vein, dont try to tell me every illegal here is a good person trying to make a living who is helping me get cheaper produce, cause that is crap."
I think we're in agreement here too. Just like any population group, there are some fucked up people who are illegal immigrants. I think where many lose me is when they link the fact that a violent criminal is an illegal to the fact they've committed a violent crime.
Oh, and don't knock cheap produce. I likes my strawberry daquiries (however you spell that thing).
"I guess that could mean I'm racist against immigrants. But, considering how cool I think the folks who come here legally are, I doubt it."
Again, I couldn't agree more. Being myself the child of legal immigrants I have the upmost respect for those that go through the system.
"dont try to tell me every illegal here is a good person trying to make a living who is helping me get cheaper produce, cause that is crap."
I never did. Was that directed to me?
Although, I disagree with anyone who says that being an illegal immigrant means that are a violent criminal or if being an illegal immigrant makes you more likely to be a violent criminal, like what was insinuated in your personal blog.
"My only issue is I am tired of being called a racist for saying that illegal immigrants who are discovered should be deported."
I Never did. Who was that directed to?
"For the record, I never used the word invasion to reference Illegal Immigration till ZK brought it up. In all honesty, I dont agree with the use of the word invasion in this context."
If you don't agree with the word "invasion" in this context then why did you speak up in the first place? Seems we are all in agreement. Not sure what we are even arguing about here, buddy.
All I only ask that people keep their personal personal prejudices aside and be fair to all people when looking at this issue. The punishment should fit the crime.
By the way, just to be clear, this whole mess of blog comments wasn't ever directed at you. I know you personally and never thought you ever fit the type of person that Chris or I were talking about.
You just jumped into it on your own and took offense to it. I am confused about that.
Also, I'm sleeping with your mom right now.
Kbar, none of my retorts were suposed to be aimed at anyone in this conversation. I was mearly making general points. Though I will admit that I have been called a racist by someone who did not know me well who was listening in on me speaking to another friend about this issue.
"I disagree with anyone who says that being an illegal immigrant means that are a violent criminal or if being an illegal immigrant makes you more likely to be a violent criminal, like what was insinuated in your personal blog."
Here is the quote from my blog.
"Has anyone stopped to think that people inclined to enter and live in America by breaking the law may often be people inclined to break the law in general?"
The point I was trying to make was not that someone would automatically commit a violent crime because of border jumping. The point I was trying to make is that once a person breaks one major rule (like an immigration one) it leads to other crimes such as driving without a valid license/insurance/registration, operating a business without the proper permits, etc.. . Sure, in a perfect world people would only willingly break the law in extreme circumstances (like jumping the border to work because your family is in poverty) but who is to say what laws are ok to break(I only assaulted the border guard because he tried to arrest my son)? I just believe it is a terrible precedent to set if we start allowing people to not follow the laws they dont agree with.
And right now, not enacting tougher immigration laws or not trying to hault future illegal immigration is just setting that bad precedent.
"You just jumped into it on your own and took offense to it. I am confused about that."
The original post Chris made was a little one sided and that drove me nuts. That is why I spoke up.
And right now we are just a couple of friends having a discussion. I would hope we all know eachother well enough that we would not get offended by such simple exchanges of words.
No worries. I wasn't ever offended by anything you said. You'll know if I get offended cuz I'll post about it in my blog!!
Just kidding. :)
except for that part about your mom.
"And right now we are just a couple of friends having a discussion. I would hope we all know each other well enough that we would not get offended by such simple exchanges of words."
Exactly. I love you Grif. I mean...not in a gay way...okay...maybe a little...
"The original post Chris made was a little one sided and that drove me nuts. That is why I spoke up. "
My original post was one sided. It was one sided against the dipshits like Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Glenn Beck (and the millions of listeners who blindly parrot what these paragons of idiocy say) who casually through out loaded terms like "invasion" without so much as a critical thought as to what the term means, in the context they're using it.
It wasn't one sided on the immigration debate though. Honestly, I admit every time that this is a complicated issue and I think anyone on either side who presents the problem as easily solve by their simple solution, or absolutist position, is doing a disservice to the public debate at large.
Reading what I wrote, I clearly say that I don't agree with any open border policy. I just also don't agree with this notion that every illegal alien is a threat to the sovereignty of our nation, the sanctity of mom's apple pie, or the purity of Mary Jane Rottencrotch's virginity.
Obviously we won't agree totally on this issue, but I don't think any of us are as far apart on the issue as it seems.
Post a Comment