Thread: How Unions Justify Illegal Immigration

The following is email correspondence between myself and a Kansas City Union activist named Judy Ancel (my messages are bold-faced). Ms. Ancel sent an unsolicited response to a letter I sent to a local radio host. On his weekly program, "Tell Somebody," he featured a one-sided debate on illegal immigration. I complained. This is what happens when you complain:

Albert Lacona sent me your response to his show last Friday and I thought I'd try to respond to you as someone who studies labor (and hosts the Heartland labor Forum) and has fairly extensive experience dealing with the results of NAFTA. I know a lot of immigrants through my political work and live in a neighborhood that is "going immigrant."

My letter was to the radio program "Tell Somebody," not to the "Heartland Labor Forum." I consider it inappropriate for Mr. Lacona to be passing my letter around to other people and encouraging them to attack my point of view.

1) Everybody who identifies as Progressive is not a supporter of illegal immigration!

This is true. Actually few people "support" illegal immigration. So that's kind of a straw man. Those who are more sympathetic to illegals generally think that our immigration laws are broken and not functioning to bring in the people we need or keep out the people who actually do us harm. For instance people who have been here 22 years who grew up here often have no way to get legal.

I'll tell you what they can do to "get legal." They can leave! They can return to their home countries. If you have bad immigration laws on the books, you don't promote change by deliberately violating them. Violating them will produce a result opposite of what you want. You change those laws using legal means. And, if you support amnesty for people who are living here illegally, you DO support illegal immigration! It doesn't matter if you support it directly or indirectly.

2) I strongly resent the suggestion of Mr. Lacona's guest that anyone who doesn't support it is racist.

If that was her suggestion, I didn't hear it. You should not ignore the fact, however, that the organized groups who have been campaigning for a crackdown have racist roots and backers and have generally not repudiated them. I suggest you read the reports on them by the Center for New Community http://www.newcomm.org/

How dare you patronize me? I don't care what you did or didn't hear! I listened to the show, and I heard what Laura Carlson implied with my own ears. Are you suggesting that I can't oppose illegal immigration just because racists oppose it? Don't insult my intelligence. I feel that abortion is wrong, and I don't personally support it but neither do I support the tactics of the Radical Right. Some anti-abortionists advocate murdering gynecologists. Does the simple fact of my opposition to abortion equate me with murderers? I don't think so.

3) How can anyone in their right mind advocate for open or porous American borders in the post 9/11 world?

I don't think that's what people are advocating. The confusion of 9-11, terrorism, security, and immigration policy is most unfortunate. It has led to us spending the overwhelming majority of resources on stopping Mexicans at the southern border when virtually no one has been arrested for terrorism that way. That's part of the reason why people are charging racism because all the remedy is aimed at largely non-violent brown people who come on foot when there a many others here illegally (Poles in Chicago, Irish in Boston – thousands) and no one mentions them, or the fact that most illegals come legally and overstay their visas as was the case with the 9-11 terrorists.

In fact, most of the illegal aliens in the US right now hail from Mexico. But I don't care HOW they came here, and I don't care WHERE they came from if they are illegal. Neither do most other people who oppose illegal immigration. We simply want our borders enforced. You and your radical immigration reform friends are the ones claiming that border crossing by Latinos is the only thing people are upset about. It's a dishonest and transparent tactic designed to make your ludicrous position seem less ludicrous, but guess what? It's not working.

The issue of 'open borders" as I've seen it discussed has to do with the movement of labor. We have agreements that allow for the deregulated movement of goods, services, and educated workers (Filipina nurses, managers, software engineers, etc). The deregulation of trade and labor standards has meant that capital is free to bounce around the world looking for cheap labor, but labor is stuck in medieval conditions unable to move freely. Amont the solutions proposed are a global minimum wage and global labor rights with restrictions on movement of goods and services not produced under these minimum conditions. Those who propose these things also talk about a period of transition such as occurred under the EU as standards are brought up and investment in social infrastructure in poor places is made. Only on that basis could open borders become feasible.

The issue of open borders as I understand it has little or nothing to do with movement of labor and everything to do with the need to heighten our national security in a time of terrorist threats. The difference between our positions on this issue is patriotism. Or lack of same.

4) Why should I be okay with competing for low-skilled jobs in the $15 - 25K range with people who come here illegally?

You shouldn't. So how do we fix this if in fact you are which I doubt. It's a mixed bag. Take meat packing. In the 1980s unionized meat packing jobs paid $10-11 an hour. The packers deunionized, demanded concessions, relocated to western KS and Nebraska while poultry factorie farms moved to the south. Wages declined precipitously to as low as $6.50. Then they were only fit for the most desperate – the illegal immigrant. Employers ruin jobs, not immigrants .

No, you're wrong! Greedy employers ruin jobs for ordinary working Americans, and illegal immigrants help them to do it. You really ought to practice using the adjective "illegal" with the noun "immigrant" to distinguish what kind of worker you're talking about. I don't allow people to get away with blending the two.

What immigrants need is full labor rights so they can demand overtime pay, the right to organize, health and safety without fear of retaliation. Give them rights and bring them out into the daylight, and they won't undercut us. That's what will remove the incentive to hire them, not criminalization of them which will only drive them further underground where employers will take greater advantage.

What ILLEGAL immigrants need is honest leaders in their home countries who will provide for their welfare and don't encourage them to violate American borders for the sake of acquiring illegal employment and sending money back home. We absolutely do not need to award citizenship to people who don't think it's important to become a citizen in order to work here. Most of them had no desire at all to become US citizens! They just wanted the money.

Without a real change in our government which for the last 20 years has dismantled labor law for all of us not just immigrants, we will not see a change. It's totally unrealistic to think that prosecuting employers is going to stop this. Our government hands out billions to employers, they will not have any kind of effective employer sanction program. They're too easily bought off. Look at the history of labor law enforcement on Saipan where the factory owners just hired Abramoff and he got Tom Lelay to stop any legislation that would have improved the situation.

With enough public pressure, prosecuting companies that employ illegals would make a BIG difference. The problem is, it has never been done in a consistent manner. The only part of your statement that I agree with is that a change in our government will be necessary to enforce the law. US citizens are more than prepared to make that change now that they understand our nation's sovereignty is at stake.

5) Despite her statements to the contrary, illegal aliens ARE criminals, and she needs to face up to it. If they weren't criminals, why would they be marching for amnesty? Being an economic refugee does not erase the crime of violating American borders.

OK call them criminals. Please also call someone arrested for running a red light a criminal or the children who sat down at lunch counters in the 1960s in the the segregated south. Slavery was legal and running away was a criminal offense, also helping those who ran away. Do you feel better calling them criminals? Now lets talk about laws. They are not sacred. They are political and they are made by people with interests. Our immigration laws are made to favor corporations which want maximum flexibility to hire and fire and to pay as little as possible. By getting stuck on the criminal thing, you miss the larger point.

Comparing the act of running a red light to the acts of people who participated in the Civil Rights movement is just sick! So is comparing it to the institution of slavery. Segregation laws violated the Bill of Rights and were themselves illegal. Taking human beings as slaves was immoral and inhuman. It is neither immoral nor inhuman to enforce national borders! That you would make such offensive comparisons tells me how little respect you have for Black people and their struggle. Let me also point out to you that the Civil Rights activists were AMERICAN CITIZENS! Their citizenship was not in question. Their rights as citizens were being denied, and they sought to claim those rights. Illegal immigrants are NOT citizens and they CANNOT claim citizenship rights! Civil Rights marchers were willing to go to jail for their cause, and hundreds did. Would illegal immigrants be willing to march into jail for their cause? Would they? Or would they run like jackrabbits at the first indication "la migra" was after them? There is no comparison. Black Civil Rights marchers were brave and principled. Illegal immigrant marchers are cowardly and opportunistic. I find your attitude toward the law very, very troubling. You seem to feel you have the right to choose which ones to follow and which ones not to follow. I know a group of people who feel the same way as you do about the law. They are the crack dealers who have overrun my neighborhood! And you know what? I've got no use for any of you!

6) NAFTA was wrong, but there were serious economic problems south of the border before NAFTA.

When I first went to Mexico in 1970 it was not a third world country and its economy was not a basket case. Yes there were illegal immigrants but they were far fewer. Mexico's disastrous slide into massive poverty coincides with the opening of Mexico to global corporations starting in the early 1980s with the first debt crisis. All along there have been rich Mexicans who profited from the takeover of their economy by the US, but I doubt you want to argue that that makes all Mexicans complicit. By the time NAFTA passed, Mexico was facing another major crisis because it couldn't pay interest on its massive debts to the Wall Street bankers. Salinas at great personal profit proposed NAFTA. The upsurge of immigration, as Lacona's guest pointed out really took off with the agricultural "reforms" which occurred as a requirement of NAFTA. It's estimated that up to 15 million Mexicans will leave the land over the next ten years because of the destruction of their ag economy. At the same time wages are held down by the multinationals and their Mexican managers in the export factories (maquiladoras). Mexico needs a revolution, but just take a trip to the museum of history in Chapultepec Park in Mexico City to learn what happens to Mexico each time they have some kind of revolution and even when they don't. They get invaded, usually by our government which we put in place or so the logic goes.

Wake up! Thirty years have passed! Mexico has had plenty of time to screw up its own economy since 1970! The US is not responsible for each and every financial crisis suffered in South America. Certainly, we should work to repeal NAFTA. Certainly, corporations should pay reparations to countries whose citizens they have exploited. However, the solution to Mexico's problems is not to let it become a parasite on the back of the United States. How could you advocate harming American workers in order to benefit poor people from other countries? Two wrongs don't make right! I think people like you have a grudge against the United States. You don't want to reverse the bad policies our government has been able to impose elsewhere. You want to punish the government for those policies, and you want that punishment to take the form of unchecked illegal immigration . . . something that has the potential to destabilize this nation. You don't care if the American people suffer in the process. I wonder if you know the definition of the word "traitor?"

trai·tor
Pronunciation: 'trA-t&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English traitre, from Old French, from Latin traditor, from tradere to hand over, deliver, betray, from trans-, tra- trans- + dare to give
1 : one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty
2 : one who commits treason

Progressive liberal activists need to question themselves closely on this issue! They are doing the bidding of the oppressor! Under the guise of helping poor people, they are preparing to deliver unlimited illegal cheap labor on a silver platter to Wall Street interests. Think about it.

No we're not although I wouldn't call myself a "liberal". We need to keep pointing out that the solution to the problem will only be global. Until you make it possible for people to survive in their home countries you won't get immigration under control. Migration is a fact of life of today's global economy. There are currently about 145 million people who work outside the country of their birth. The solutions have to do with real economic development, real labor rights, and all us pushing for economic justice rather than blaming poor people and immigrants who are the least powerful to do anything about it .

Workers are not crossing borders illegally because they can't make a living in their home countries. They are crossing borders at the invitation of unscrupulous corporations who offer jobs at unfair wages if they're willing to gamble their lives! Increasingly, they are also crossing borders at the encouragement of corrupt administrations like that of Vicente Fox who don't want to deal with poverty issues. Amnesty for illegal aliens encourages more people to risk death in the desert. It's appalling that Progressives are using undocumented workers as tools to revive the dying labor movement; in my opinion, what you're doing is just as bad as what the corporations are doing. Don't flatter yourselves. It's nothing but blatant exploitation all the way around!

Ms. Ancel, I find you rude and racially insensitive. I also find your "sympathy" for undocumented Latino workers highly suspect. I've had a thing or two to do with unions over the years, and every time I found them as crooked as the day is long! Union officials were in bed with management, and everybody knew about it. Your labor agenda and the labor agenda of the corporate lobby have more in common than you would ever care to admit.

Don't ever email me again, and in the future, think twice before answering correspondence that wasn't addressed to you!

First let me commend you on your answers. They were intelligent and to the point.

Second - what struck me most about her answers is the repeated referrence to global economics. Whether you want to face it or not that is driving force behind this whole mess. The illegals are pawns in a much bigger picture. They are trying to force America into the global plan by destroying the country.

WE have to turn this around. We have to take our government back in hand and force those in Washington to do the bidding of "We the people..." and follow the Constitution on which this nation was founded as they are supposed to do and clearly are not. Our government as we all know has gotten much too big and has inserted itself into our lives much more than was intended. It has thus forgetten that it derives "... its just powers from the consent of the governed..." It is up to us to bend Washington to our will and wrest back control to where it is supposed to be... in our hands, not theirs.

Second - what struck me most about her answers is the repeated referrence to global economics. Whether you want to face it or not that is driving force behind this whole mess. The illegals are pawns in a much bigger picture. They are trying to force America into the global plan by destroying the country.

Diana, you're absolutely right. Sparring with these open borders meatheads has made clear to me that this is about that "new world order" George Bush Sr. spoke of years ago. A world where national borders don't exist, underpaid workers are moved from place to place at will and governments operate at the behest of corporate behemoths. I always knew that extreme right wingers were not to be trusted, but this immigration issue has opened my eyes to the dark motives of leftist groups. I'm totally shocked at how eager they are to join forces with the very same people they call "the oppressor."

How about posting this person's email address on here so some of us can give them a piece of our mind.

Originally Posted by PintoBean

How about posting this person's email address on here so some of us can give them a piece of our mind.

Yeah . . . what's good for the goose is good for the gander! Here's her email address. Let her have it!

"Ancel, Judith" <AncelJ@umkc.edu>

Excellent work, Stuff. Methinks the Master status I carry should go to you while I take the Fledgling but I'm sure you'll be moving along soon. Thanks to your post I'm getting a better understanding.

Stuff,

I must congratulate you on those exceptional rebuttals. I so enjoy seeing a rhetoric spewing, race baiting, truth twisting globalist get their butt kicked by someone using facts and logic. Touche!

Her butt kicking aside, Ms. Ancel sounds as if she is quite familiar with the Security and Prosperity Partnership treason. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if she took part in one of the SPP "working groups" with her talk of a global minimum wage and global labor rights. Very scary, that woman.

You DID send those rebuttals back to her didn't you?

Her butt kicking aside, Ms. Ancel sounds as if she is quite familiar with the Security and Prosperity Partnership treason. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if she took part in one of the SPP "working groups" with her talk of a global minimum wage and global labor rights. Very scary, that woman.

It IS scary. When these immigrant activists talk about the global economy, they start to sound like Stepford Wives.

You DID send those rebuttals back to her didn't you?

Oh, yes. Nobody patronizes me and gets away with it.

Oh, yes. Nobody patronizes me and gets away with it.

SWEET!

I would add to dlm1968 thoughts on "illegals being the pawns in a much bigger picture" I think we are viewed exactly the same way by the powers that be. Sadly our own government is one of those powers in determining the haves and the have nots.

Does anyone have any sources on "Reverse Communism" through capitalism? This is starting to sound like Nazi jackboots coming. Although it will be with a smile or smirk.

I think we are right now, where we never thought we would be.

Trouble