August 20, 2010
-
Immigration Reform
The U.S. is a country somewhat different from most: The "native" population is a small minority, while the majority of us are the descendants of wave after wave of immigrants - most voluntary, but beginning in 1619 (The year before the Mayflower landed he Pilgrims) also the importation of slaves.
During our over four hundred year existence as a culture (234 years of them as an independent nation); we have had many different attitudes toward new immigrants - but the attitude were very often hostile. For the past several hundred years newcomers have mostly had to start at the bottom of the social order and were despised by the existing citizenry.
In the first half of the 19th century there was actually a political party with some considerable power in many states, (The American, or No-Nothing Party) that was actively anti-immigrant. In 1856 they ran an ex-president of the US (Millard Fillmore) as their candidate - he won eight electoral votes).
The greatest waves of immigration in the 20th century were at the beginning - the US wanted industrial laborers and encouraged immigrants from Europe. While Orientals had been practically excluded after the large importation of Chinese and later Japanese laborers in the mid and late 19th century, Europeans were encouraged until 1913-17, when federal laws were passed restricting the number of new immigrants from certain areas. These quota systems were reduced during the 1920s until we have our very restrictive present system.
Excuses for quotas ranged from cultural (The Eastern and Southern Europeans were "different") to economic (They will take jobs from "Real" Americans). We have somewhat the same attitudes today, but our immigration system is confused by the question of political refugees, so we have, for example, the strange problem of any Cuban who reaches land being admitted, while any Mexican who reaches the North bank of the Rio Grande being excluded. Those Florida Cubans seem to have a very different political outlook toward immigration than California Mexicans.
We have approximately 12 million undocumented persons in the US currently, many of them brought in as children and who know no other life. It is practically a well as morally impossible to expel four percent of our population and the obvious solution seems to me to "document" those already here and implement a system encouraging those who wish to come here to do so in an orderly manner without nearly the number of confusing and restrictive quotas and exceptions.
Your Comments?
Comments (4)
We spend the first twelve months of our children's lives teaching them to walk and talk and the next twelve telling them to sit down and shut up.
Dear Dick,
I still call myself a "Californio" and maintain that I really live in Mexico. The questionable doctrine of "manifest destiny", the invasion of Mexico by the Americans in order to annex the state. (I don't think they really cared about Texas.) Then the gold rush. It might even be said that the U.S. manufactured the war and stole the state. This isn't a widely held belief, however. (The Whig party at the time was against the annexation, but mainly because they didn't want the prospect of another slave state, if memory serves. I'm on the internet, I could just look it up!)
One of the best scenes in a movie diagramming the U.S. attitude toward immigration comes from Martin Scorsese's 2001 film, "The Gangs of New York" which takes place in the volatile year of 1861. In it, hundreds of Irish immigrants are seen leaving the gangplank of one ship, then "welcomed" to America by Tammany hall representatives, and immediately goaded to gain citizenship, vote for their "friends" and on the next dock, a gaggle of new citizens are being fitted for blue Union uniforms and boarding another ship to be sent to fight against the South.
The fight in Arizona of course is against illegal immigration, and fears of Mexican style drug wars on our side of the border. I see it as a political move by the Republican party to cast blame against the Democratic party now in "power" for not "doing anything". However these kinds of issues can always backfire. Mexican American citizens vote too, in massive numbers sometimes.
Any form of "documentation" reeks of "big brotherism" (You mention utopias on Socrates Cafe, which is where I'm headed next.) And of course Nazi Germany. Or Communism. Usually we grant them all amnesty, and a chance to become citizens, in mass ceremonies. Then we invite them to join the army and see beautiful Afghanistan. No, sorry, I'm getting ahead of myself.
I'm in awe at the vocal half of the country who seem to decry illegal immigrants. I was joking to the guys at the pool the other day that if they implemented documentaion here in SoCal and deported the illegalos, we'd lose a quarter of the population. And then who'd mow our lawns?
It seems strange (well, not really, we're pretty "laid back" in our attitudes here, and Arizona is still the "wild west".) that two states right next door hold such differing opinions. I say let's just open the borders. It's a free concert.
(That statement would really cause a ruckus with some folks, wouldn't it. I was born here though. And my parents were citizens, so I can't be deported for my opinions, no matter how insane they may be to the populace at large. Someday I'm going to write about Socialism on my blog. Lots of readers will flee in horror I'm sure.)
Michael F. Nyiri, poet, philosopher, fool
Becoming a citizen has a good many pitfalls and takes some strange turns sometimes. I personally have been the sponsor- guarantor of a family of Nicaraguan (fraternity brother) immigrants and when I was in the army, a friend who somewhat shocked me when he showed me his passport - a red one with a shock of wheat and the letters CCCP on the face. That was back during the Cold War and McCarthy's worst actions. I laughed and signed, though how a Soviet citizen ever got drafted into the US army is still a puzzle to me. The fellow I signed for later became a somewhat renowned professor of economics and made a splash in our history as have some of his children. I'm sure there is a moral or point here someplace
It's hard for me to be negative about immigrants for a few reasons: first, the old stand-by - unless you're American Indian, you immigrated, right? Ok, moving past that to more recent times... My parents both immigrated to the US - my mother legally, my father illegally. Life sucked royally for my mother b/c of the waiting time she had to go through (was left with family who couldn't really support her in barely better than 3-rd world conditions). My father was smuggled in by his wealthy brother, given a job upon arriving here - and never relied on the government for assistance (well, until he had his stroke - but that was after 20 years of being a productive citizen, and he had acquired citizenship by then - no through marriage, btw). So, my came legally - but suffered. Dad illegally - and things were *much* better for him. My mom has lasting health issues b/c of her poor childhood. I'm grateful beyond words that I was born here - but I never forget that the reason I even exist is related to illegal immigration.
Americans are ignorant. We truly are. We should kiss the ground daily because we have the luxury of being so ignorant. It pisses me off to no end when people talk about being ashamed to be an American. LEAVE. Seriously. GO NOW. HURRY.
Just saying =)
We are afflicted with too much NIMBY and greed. The disparity between the haves/have nots is growing daily - and this will continue (and accelerate) because most of us are too numbed by tv/internet/religion/drugofchoice to notice the problem (and really - as long as Maslow's bottom rung is covered, most of us are good! Thanks!).
I'm blogging in your blog. Sorry =)
I'm glad to hear your wife is doing better - hope you're doing well too! =D