Let's start off with a 'fact:' the U.S. Government spent 18 billion dollars on illegal immigration prevention in 2012. Considering the number spent on arms, military technology development, and other militaristic ventures, this number may seem somewhat inconsequential. However, the political emphasis on this issue tells a conflicting story to the straight economic one. Politicians--both Democrats and Republicans--seem to discuss this issue much more than the various "Terror Wars" in the U.S. For some reason, war seems to be a non-issue. One makes immigration so interesting is the way in which it relates to so many other political issues at this moment. The economy, of course, is an important one; not only with the apparent dip in GDP, but also with the limits on jobs and the high rates of unemployment and underemployment. We discussed, somewhat with Marx, that, since basically the beginning of this country's 'humble' beginning, the economy has depended in large part upon an unpaid or severely underpaid labor force. During incipience--colonization, etc.--this free labor came from slaves who were stolen form their homelands and traded like cattle. During the current moment, an undocumented labor force serves this purpose to some degree, but, of course, not in the same quantities or with the same economic impact. That is not to say undocumented workers do not play a very important role, because they do. Job searching without papers is a nearly impossible venture. Those without documents have trouble applying for positions; and, when they do receive those positions, employers are put into a scary position of power that they can use to manipulate and abuse. Apart from the validity of some of the arguments against immigration--one of which presupposes that undocumented workers are taking jobs from citizens--what can we say about the impact this sort of anti-immigration rhetoric has on the social relationships within the U.S. community. Clearly, semantically and psychically, there is a sort of campaign to essentially other undocumented workers, or, more specifically, anyone who looks like they could be undocumented worker. There is a corporeal schematic being created here. We've seen how this manifests itself in border states in the past five years. This stance has a very real impact on the way in which we think of our Southern neighbors. Imagine, you move into a new community and, once you do, the family next to you constructs a massive fence, designed as much to disseminate a certain message as it is to keep you out. This new construction would seem to create a difficult relationship between these two groups. The question becomes, how do you go about systematically reorienting the current immigration discourse that gives dignity to undocumented workers and recognizes their position within the economy. Rather than criminals--for the most part--they are simply human beings attempting to find a way to subsist in a brutal capitalistic economy. Of course, we could also try to address the role the U.S. plays in Mexico's economy in particular to try to address why this kind of immigration--a terrible risk--seems, for many, to be the only option. We are lucky to be born into one of the countries with the highest average rates of living; but this isn't some divine right. It was was an accident. We should recognize this privilege, appreciate it, and make attempts to create policies that recognize these arbitrary differences.
Although I agree that social relations between American-mexican/American-of Latin descent have been made hostile due to the corporeal schematic created by political anti-immigration rhetoric, the same rhetoric that has been used to ‘other’ all other peoples of ‘other’-descent, I do wish to emphasize the importance of maintaining a national border, especially one that has been shown to be fluid if left undefined. To say we need to recognize arbitrary differences in our physical appearance is one thing. To claim that legislation promoting the exportation of undocumented people also promotes the alienation and active discrimination of Latino communities/Latino looking people is a fair claim. The reduction of border enforcement/definition is not something that will fix the issue of discrimination. I might argue that redirecting ninety percent of the deportation budget to illegal immigration prevention may help the situation more. If the security of our borders were guaranteed, citizens would know that all those within the borders are here because they have agreed to the terms of our particular social contract, our laws. The point should be that all those within our borders are documented. Those that are not should be given the opportunity to sign or leave. There is no highly functional governing system that does not emphasize the definition of its borders as a priority. If America differed in that behavior, what would we suggest for other nations? I think that national borders are an important physical construct to upkeep. The ideological barriers existing within the borders should be dealt with separately.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you have said about the U.S. immigration policy. If we devoted more resources into the Mexican economy and state then maybe “they” wouldn’t feel the need to flee into the U.S. The current situation as it stands now is a major issue due to the various viewpoints of both parties, which see any sort of compromise as unacceptable and a violation of their deepest beliefs. The only ethical solution to the problem, as I see it, is to when formulating policy to place ourselves in immigrant shoes. Our nation’s original settlers were fleeing conditions in Europe that were not unlike that of Mexico today. How then can we rightfully pass judgment on those whose condition is so weaker then ours? As the situation in Mexico deteriorates at alarming speed, the problem with emigration from Mexico will only become worse. Along with the flow off innocents fleeing north will also be the elements of the Cartel underworld that are causing the exodus in the first place. This potential threat must be cut off in its early stages by the enacting of higher and better security on the border. Only then will the U.S. be in a position of power to truly effect positive change not only in Mexico, but also amongst the Mexican people. The United States needs to organize better border security, however the U.S. also needs to speed up the process of immigration and allow for America the opportunity to truly be the “land of immigrants” again. Without this change in policy, and compromise between the two gridlocked parties, then America is in danger of suffering the same turmoil as our neighbor to the south.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tim that a “corporeal schematic” is created in immigration policies. Illegal immigrants are not allowed to work and are exactly the salves in our economy. By building a fence against immigrants, citizens of one country are blinding themselves against all the sufferings in other places of the world, pretending that they are not responsible to anybody else other than themselves. As a foreigner I personally experience the annoying limitations that I have in terms of working and studying (for me it is nearly impossible to attend Med school and illegal to get jobs outside of campus). Despite the complaints we have against these laws, we have to keep in mind that opening the boarders and allowing foreigners to work does not touch the structure of an unethical system. When we really start treating foreigners with dignity, we would be extending citizenship to everyone in the world. However that won’t happen until the capitalist system changes for the better.
ReplyDeleteMarx would point out that whether we allow immigrants to work in the U.S. or not, we are all subjugated to a capitalist system that is fundamentally unfair. Opening the borders does not help reversing the immorality of the system. There is definitely anti-immigrant sentiment among Americans. However loosening the immigration policy is only a temporary treatment for the suffering of illegal immigrants. The real source of suffering comes from the structure of the capitalist system. Owners of the means of production may welcome immigrants as workers but what they are really welcoming is more laborers who would gladly participate in the alienation from themselves, from products, and from other people.
Illegal immigrants are hard-working and appreciative. They do not need as much as Americans to subsist. These people seem to be the ideal laborers that will keep the capitalism system afloat. American workers are the more troublesome ones: they have the rights to unionize and demand changes. Marx would argue that in order to make the system less unfair, we should not just start appreciating the illegal worker as human being (i.e. not arresting them); but also prompt them to unionize and develop class consciousness to revolt against the capitalists.