Here it goes from a supporter of legal immigration: how are we to make sense of the current Arizona debate? One should show concern about some elements of the law, but only in the context of the desperation of the citizens of Arizona. And one should show some skepticism concerning mounting liberal anguish, so often expressed by those whose daily lives are completely unaffected by the revolutionary demographic, cultural, and legal transformations occurring in the American Southwest. . . . Mexico is now more violent than Iraq. The unrest is spilling across the borders. The old shrill argument that criminals, drug smugglers, and violence in general are spreading into the American southwest from Mexico is not longer quite so shrill. . . .
Many minorities realize that the greatest hindrance to a natural rise in wages for entry level jobs has been the option for an employer to hire illegal aliens, who, at least in their 20s and 30s, will work harder for less pay with fewer complaints (when sick, or disabled, or elderly, the worker is directed by the employer to the social services agencies and replaced by someone younger as a new cycle of exploitation begins). In this context, the old race card is less effective. The general population is beginning to see not that Americans (of all races who oppose illegal immigration) are racist, but that the open borders movement has itself a racially chauvinistic theme to it, albeit articulated honestly only on university campuses and in Chicano-Latino departments, as a sort of “payback” for the Mexican War, where redress for “lost” land is finally to be had through demography. . . .
(note: there is also the smaller side issue of lingering mistrust between at least one of the Indian tribes in Arizona and Mexicans enamored with the idea of "La Reconquista". The Indians still remember the history of long-ago abuses of their ancestors by invading Mexicans).Reynolds also links posts about what the Feds might do, "self-righteous outrage and bone-deep ignorance", why prospective LEGAL immigrants from countries other than Mexico should consider going to Mexico to enter the U.S. illegally, etc.
Heard a couple of minutes of Glenn Beck on the radio yesterday, and he argued that the best thing we could do for Mexicans was to ensure that the traditional American form of government survives (well, that's my interpretation of his argument). Interesting. With all our political problems in the U.S., the government is a much bigger mess in Mexico.
There's nothing unusual, really, about police with "reasonable suspicion" asking someone for I.D. Happened to our blonde nephew last week when he pulled over to use his cell phone. Someone called the police, worried about the "suspicious" car. But there may be some problems with the new Arizona law, particularly with regard to police asking for drivers licenses from states which issue those licenses to illegal aliens. Even so, all those hysterical, bigoted, progressive "haters" out there who are calling the majority of people in Arizona "Nazis" need to remember that legal immigrants have been required by federal law to carry their identification "papers" at all times for 70 YEARS. But since the Federal Government does not enforce immigration laws very well, Arizona is struggling to find a way to enforce federal laws themselves, it seems to me. I also think there are far more glitches in the new federal health care legislation that in the new Arizona law, don't you? And Obamacare requires you to "show your papers".
Remember when Democrats fell all over themselves trying to prove that Obamacare would not cover illegal aliens? When Joe Wilson shouted "you lie" about coverage for illegal aliens, Obama and Democratic leaders assured the nation that illegal aliens would be excluded.The intrusiveness continues for everyone after you have proven your legal status in order to get insurance. But illegal immigrants will not be able to get insurance. Isn't that cruel? And they will be fined by the Feds when they pay their taxes. So why aren't more progressive haters calling the Democratic Congress "Nazis"? Do you think it's less intrusive for a police officer to ask for identification at a traffic stop, or for the IRS to demand proof that you have federally-approved health insurance? For the people whose values run to equality over other values (limiting kidnapping and murders, for example), the answer is clear: any request for identification which could possibly lead to "unequal treatment" based upon a person's appearance is evil. Even if there is a very good chance that it will prevents violence, suffering and societal breakdown. The IRS will invate the privacy of EVERYONE.
Under the final Senate health care bill signed into law (unlike the earlier House version), illegal aliens are screened out. Only persons who can prove they are "a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully present in the United States" get to participate.
In other words, when you try to buy a policy through an exchange, or seek a subsidy, or receive any of the other supposed benefits, you will be told "show me your papers. . . . "
Some details about the law. A Supreme Court Decision which may go further than the Arizona law.
A reasoned discussion of these issues would be more helpful than sending Al Sharpton down to Arizona to rouse the masses. Al Sharpton is a guy who has incited people to murder in the past. Maybe after the haters have blown off some steam, we can get some serious movement to reform our stupid immigration system. Polls are supporting the Arizona law. But maybe I am indulging in wishful thinking. Some thoughts on border vs. internal security, including an assessment by a federal border patrol agent. .
Ironically, the political and cultural aversion to racial profiling which has helped lead to the lack of enforcement of immigration laws (at least with regard to ILLEGAL immigrants) has led to the dangerous situation in Arizona, which is leading to the response which some people feel is such a threat to freedom and equality. At least Arizona isn't asking for National Guard troops on the streets, as illinois lawmakers are doing with regard to violence in Chicago.
Glenn Reynolds:
Let’s start our display of compassion with those who are trying to come here legally. Instead of, you know, making them feel like suckers. Why is it that the Big Government party is so eager to make people who actually obey the law feel like suckers, anyway? Because that’s how it seems . . . .More -- Are Democrats re-playing a May 2006 tactic?:
“This plan is one of extreme provocation, and if the right allows itself to get sucked into it all - and defined by the left and the press – then the left will have won a huge PR battle, and that is the win they want.”She also chides the Right for failing to fix the problem when they had the chance.
By "extreme provocation", she may mean things like inducing children to batter effigies of the Arizona Governor. Reminds me of the Palestinian indoctrination of their children to hate Israelis. Direct threats of violence might also qualify as "extreme provocation", too.
All in all, I am a proponent of VDH's ideas about making legal immigration and assimilation easier, and pressuring Mexico to improve conditions for the people who are now desperate to leave. If they can provide security for rich Americans who have second homes on the Coast, they should be able to do a little more for their own poor. Supporting illegal immigration to America, while severely limiting immigration from Central America, relieves Mexico of the responsibility to facilitate better conditions in the poorer regions of their own country.
No comments:
Post a Comment