Thread: Shifting debate over illegal immigration

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opin ... onfront-he

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The shifting debate over illegal immigration

Victor Davis Hanson, a senior fellow and historian at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University: Tribune Media Services
Published October 6, 2006


When I wrote "Mexifornia" more than three years ago, much of the criticism came from the academic and open-borders left. The memoir was considered insensitive in our politically correct age for complaining that it was not wise or moral that millions were here illegally from Mexico.

But lately I have heard far more fault-finding with "Mexifornia" from the grass-roots middle and right over both my advocacy for some sort of earned citizenship for most hardworking illegal aliens and my objections, on practical and ethical grounds, to mass deportations.

Why the shift in public opinion?

Broad class considerations are now transcending particular party, racial and ethnic views of illegal immigration, pitting the well-off few against the less-fortunate many. Many of the more privileged Americans who frequent fancy restaurants, stay in hotels and depend on hired help for lawn and pool maintenance, home repair and child-care don't think illegal immigration is that big a deal.

Those in the higher-paid professions do not fear low-wage competition for their jobs in law, medicine, academia, the media, government or the arts. And many who have no problem with the present influx live in affluent communities with good schools insulated from the immediate budgetary consequences of meeting the needs of the offspring of the 11 million here illegally. These wealthier people aren't so much liberal in their tolerance of illegal immigration as they are self-interested and cynical.

In contrast, the far more numerous poor and lower-middle classes of America, especially in the Southwest, are sincerely worried--and angry. Indeed, it is no longer possible to caricature opponents of illegal immigration as part of a small nativist fringe.

For the broad middle class, the poor and minorities--people who dine mostly at home, travel infrequently, mow their own lawns and change their children's diapers--inexpensive service labor is not seen as much of a boon to them. Plus, lower- and middle-class Americans live in communities where schools are more impacted by an influx of Spanish-only speakers. And as janitors, maids, groundskeepers, carpenters, factory workers and truckers, they fear competition from lower-wage illegal alien laborers. Legal immigrants who wait years in line to enter the United States legally can be particularly unsympathetic to others who cut in front--in violation of the law.

The public is also growing uneasy with three decades of multiculturalism while developing a new appreciation of the old multiracial melting pot. Other minorities don't understand why the Latino immigrant community needs bilingual ballots and special government translation help.

Because the United States is increasingly less a majority of whites of European ancestry and more a mixture of dozens of races and ethnicities, the need for a common unifying language and culture has never been more important. When Americans look abroad at the violent messes in the Balkans, Rwanda, Darfur and Iraq, the notion of emphasizing separation here at home by race, tribe, language or religion makes absolutely no sense. But the idea of letting only enough legal immigrants in who can be easily assimilated surely does.

So how does this new popular worry over illegal immigration play out among a variety of working-class groups and minorities?

While there remains controversy over amnesty and a guest-worker program, there is now little disagreement over first enforcing the law and closing the borders--whether through periodic fortification, more Border Patrol officers, tough employer sanctions or viable identification cards.

In the last three years, while I haven't changed my views about the need for an earned-citizenship program or the impracticality of deporting 11 million illegal residents, an angry public has passed "Mexifornia" by. Once caricatured as illiberal for calling for an end to illegal immigration, the book now reads as middle of the road, if not passe.

Indeed, if extremists continue to demonstrate for open borders, blare out ethnic and linguistic chauvinism and flout the law, then this current public anger against illegal immigration will unfortunately appear mild in comparison to what is on the horizon.

----------

E-mail:author@victorhanson.com

Indeed, if extremists continue to demonstrate for open borders, blare out ethnic and linguistic chauvinism and flout the law, then this current public anger against illegal immigration will unfortunately appear mild in comparison to what is on the horizon.

That's what I'm afraid of. Scenes of Paris and those of the middle-east are quickly playing out here in some of these protests and what happened at Columbia. Small single events here and there, but it doesn't seem enough is being done to stop it.

These extremists protesters are very dangerous in my opinion. They do not want to live in a democratic society or allow for free speech. I would even go as far as to say they might be capable of domestic terrorism if their demands are not met at some point in the future.

Exactly.

I remember listening to Matt Drudge when the big demonstrations took place in the spring. He said that if it came down to deporting these people, there would not be one palm tree left in Los Angeles, so great would the violence be. Back then I was not as familiar with the immigration issue as I am now, and I thought he was being somewhat alarmist. I no longer feel that way.

We need troops! Armed troops! We need to get our country back!

Added to Home Page
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=N ... e&sid=1563

Originally Posted by JAK

We need troops! Armed troops! We need to get our country back!

I agree. Use your vote to oppose the axis of amnestry. Oppose any elected representative that supports amnesty, or "perks", for illegals.
We should all call write, email our respective representatives continuously.
I know this takes time, but we must deliver a never ending message, to them.

I've been continuously communicating with my elected representatives and others running for office. I think it's an uphill battle with some, but I haven't given up.

The axis of amnesty is President Bush and him administration, along with open border democrats, such as Ted Kennedy. Typically, I only contact my elected reps. I imagine most other representatives simply ignore communication from outside their district or state.

Another method of communicating is to write letters to the local newspaper.

We all need to chip in to a grassroots campaign to reduce illegal immigration. This may take several years, unless we have another large terrorist attack. I hope that doesn't happen, but another 9/11 would
cause most Americans to demand SECURE borders. Today, most of us aren't really serious about securing our country. It's too much of a sacrifice and we envision losing personal freedoms.

Great article. The challege is getting the American people to wake up from their "cushy" life and see that their country is being taken away from them one city at a time.

Illegal immigration is like a slow flood. Slowly creeping in...and eventually, it will reach those who are asleep now. It will be too late then to turn back the onslaught.

D.W.

We all need to chip in to a grassroots campaign to reduce illegal immigration. This may take several years, unless we have another large terrorist attack. I hope that doesn't happen, but another 9/11 would
cause most Americans to demand SECURE borders. Today, most of us aren't really serious about securing our country. It's too much of a sacrifice and we envision losing personal freedoms

That's what ALIPAC's here for, MAGYART We have a good, strong start.