Immigration has risen to the top of the issue list for a clear majority of Americans. For many voters, it is now more important than the economy, inequality, health care, education, housing, climate change, etc.
Immigration is a huge issue in other parts of the world as well. This was predicted 50 years ago, as we began to see the uneven benefits from globalization, along with rapidly growing populations. But how often do we ask: What are the reasons why people choose to flee their homes and countries? Among them are war, oppression, lack of jobs and environmental degradation.
The movement of people across borders is a complex matter. Unfortunately, it’s easier to blame immigrants – and sometimes entire peoples – than to deal with the many facets of the issue. This tactic is not new, and it has reared up at various points in the history of the United States as well as in many other countries.
Tragically, the idea that some people are the “real” Americans and others are intruders is a bad movie we’ve seen many times: with harsh treatment of Blacks, Asians, Latino/a, Catholics, Jews, Muslims and others. Ironically, the Indigenous peoples of the U.S. and Canada have also been viewed at times as “not belonging,” although they are truly “First Nations,” and all other Americans are immigrants.
The blaming of immigrants, though, doesn’t make a lot of sense if we think about the desire of others to join a country where they will be safer and have more opportunities – even though their journeys may involve great personal cost leaving their families, the only home they’ve ever known, and great risk.
The fascinating book “How the Irish Became White” outlines how early Irish immigrants were an oppressed group strongly aligned with African Americans until they came to be seen as part of the dominant group and not as “Others.”
When political rhetoric degrades to a level of dehumanizing and demonizing another group – by place of origin, ethnicity, or religion – the situation can become dangerous because people who already “belong” can feel justified in attacking others who are different.
We’ve witnessed the results throughout history – from Jews being called “rats” in Nazi Germany (1933-1945) to the Tutsis labeled as “cockroaches” by the Hutus in 1994 Rwanda – in both cases, before mass slaughter. Sadly, it can be hard to get people to come together unless they have a “goat” in common – meaning, a scapegoat – as the 20th century writer Kenneth Burke sharply observed. We can and must do better.
Besides running counter to the tenets of every major religion and ethical perspective, the denigration of immigrant groups makes it very difficult to deal with the challenging questions of how best to maintain border security, how many immigrants to allow, how to process often urgent applications for entry, how familial connections count, and so forth. But as a society, we can’t even get to those kinds of policy questions when the rhetoric is heated, exaggerated and frankly, scary.
The title of a great book by an American political scientist, written in 1935 between the world wars was “World Politics and Personal Insecurity” – a timeless title. Especially concerning for Harold Laswell, the author, was how perceived threats to identity – like the notion of keeping blood “pure” – could be used to rile up entire populations against others.
As we deal with the complex issues of immigration today, let’s ask ourselves questions to calm the mind and the fears and get to decisions about what to do. Let’s start with real statistics and confirmed stories about immigrants. Then let’s ask: How does immigration – illegal and legal – affect our economy? What do immigrants contribute to society? How does immigration affect me personally? Finally, how do we deal sensibly, compassionately, and effectively with the issues and the people involved?
George Cheney is a retired professor of communication from the University of Colorado and an independent consultant living in Cortez.
