By Victor Davis Hanson
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Can we be honest about illegal immigration?
It is a common challenge to almost every advanced Western
country that is adjacent to poorer nations.
American employers and ethnic activists have long
colluded to weaken border enforcement and render immigration law meaningless.
The former wanted greater profits from cheaper labor, the latter wished more
political clout for themselves.
Mexico conspired, too. It received billions of easy
dollars in remittances from its expatriates in America. Mexico had few qualms
about letting millions of its own citizens illegally cross its northern border
into the United States — even though the Mexican government would never
tolerate millions of Central Americans illegally crossing the border to become
permanent residents of Mexico.
For better or worse, illegal immigration is tied to race
and ethnicity. No doubt, ignorant racism drives some to oppose illegal
immigration. But by the same token, the advocates of open borders, many of them
with strong ties to Mexico, would not be so energized about the issue if
hundreds of thousands of Europeans or Africans were entering the U.S. illegally
each year.
There is too often a surreal disconnect about the
perception of the U.S. in the immigration debate.
Millions, we sometimes forget, are fleeing from the
authoritarianism, racism, corruption, and class oppression of Mexico. They have
voted with their feet to reject that model and to choose a completely different
— and often antithetical — economic, social, cultural, and political paradigm
in the United States. Somehow that bothersome fact is lost in the habitual
criticism of a hospitable and magnanimous America.
Then there is the matter of law. America went to war over
the Confederate states’ nullification of federal laws. A century and a half
later, do we really want hundreds of sanctuary cities, each declaring
irrelevant certain federal laws that they find bothersome?
For every left-wing city that declares immigration
statutes inoperative, a right-wing counterpart might do the same with the
Endangered Species Act, gun-registration laws, affirmative action, or gay
marriage. The result would be chaos and anarchy, not compassion.
Controversy has arisen over the number of undocumented
immigrants who have committed felonies or serious misdemeanors, such as the
Mexican national — a repeat felon and deportee — recently charged with the
fatal shooting of a young woman in San Francisco. But the furor begs the
question: Why would any guest violate the rules of his host? And why is the
data on such violations so hard to come by and so prone to controversy?
Either the number of undocumented immigrants who commit
crimes is so vast that no one knows the extent of the problem, or there are
political hurdles in determining that number — or drawing politically incorrect
conclusions from it.
We should not minimize criminality. Creating a false
identity, using a fraudulent Social Security number, and knowingly filing
inaccurate federal forms are serious felonies for most Americans. They are
neither minor infractions nor simply the innocuous wages of living in the
shadows, but undermine the sinews of a society.
Numbers also count. When millions come to a country illegally,
integration breaks down and tribalism takes over. Do we really want permanent
Balkanized ethnic lobbies, frozen in amber — another century of a monolithic
Asian, white, or Latino vote? Are Americans to fragment even more, as they
collectively sigh, “If they vote predictably along ethnic lines, I guess I
should, too”?
President Obama talks grandly of “immigration reform.”
But he apparently does not mean what most Americans would assume from that
faddish catchphrase.
Reform should first include strict enforcement of the
border. A new, ethnically blind immigration system would select from among
applicants based on skill sets and education, and consider candidates from all
over the world — not on the basis of ethnic identity or proximity to the
border.
Immediate and lasting deportation would ensue for those
who committed crimes or cynically chose to receive public assistance rather
than work while here illegally.
Many Americans are in favor of offering a path to legal
residence to those undocumented immigrants who have long lived and worked in
the U.S. and have crime-free records — after they pay a fine for breaking
federal law and then wait patiently in line while the legal process plays out —
as long as the border is sealed to prevent future illegal immigration.
If some newly legal residents wished to become
full-fledged citizens, then they could pass citizenship and English tests and
assimilate into the American body politic.
Somehow I doubt that this fair, reasonable process is
what the president really wants.
No comments:
Post a Comment