By Kevin D. Williamson
Friday, March 10, 2017
Sometimes, the language of the media takes an almost
synchronized turn, as though someone had flipped a switch. For the past month
or so, news stories about illegal immigrants have been remarkably consistent in
stressing the fear they feel: “living in fear,” “fearful of ICE agents,” etc.
It is easy to understand why a sympathetic reporter would want to emphasize the
fear and the stress felt by these people, who are, for the most part, poor and
vulnerable.
But of course people who are breaking the law are afraid
of law enforcement. The fear of getting caught is an inescapable part of
violating the law. It is the only reason why speed limits are even kinda-sorta
obeyed. The liberal attitude here is, in essence, “Gosh, should we feel bad for
making them afraid!”
Well, no.
Here is what I think is going on, something that touches
a little on Rich’s and Ramesh’s argument about nationalism: Illegal immigration
is basically kind of low-level act of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience
doesn’t always have a theory behind it or a real political agenda — often it is
just that: disobedience, refusal to comply with a law that is seen as unjust or
intrusive. Most of the people smoking and selling marijuana do not have any big
political idea about it — they simply intend to live their lives and they
please, irrespective of what the letter of the law says. The situation with
illegal immigrants is unusual in that we have millions of citizens of one
country committing a very large-scale act of civil disobedience against the
government of another country.
To people who see citizenship and the nation as more than
a legal arrangement, that is intolerable. To those who see these as
formalities, Mexicans’ being present illegally in the United States is
something like violating the speed limit.
Which is to say, how we feel about illegal immigration is
more about how Americans feel about America than about how we feel about Mexico
or Honduras or Ireland.
Rich and Ramesh write: “Trump’s view of immigration is of
a piece with this nationalism — we have the sovereign right to decide who comes
here and who doesn’t, and policy should be crafted to serve the interests of
U.S. citizens.” Aside from a few fringe libertarians and dotty one-worlders on
the left, I have not encountered very many people who dispute that the United
States, or any country, has a sovereign right to create and enforce immigration
law. There are those who see the elevation of the interests of U.S. citizens
above the interests of others as a pernicious form of bias, but the more common
attitude is that there really is no such thing as “the interests of U.S.
citizens” corporately, or that, to the extent that such interests are real, the
legitimate interests of U.S. citizens are not in conflict with the interests of
those seeking to immigrate here.
(The Left tends to get Millian in a hurry on these kinds
of questions: “Tell me how my gay marriage hurts you!” Etc.)
And thus the emphasis of the fear and stress experienced
by those on the wrong side of immigration law. To inflict suffering needlessly is cruelty, and those who
take an overly indulgent view of illegal immigration do so in no small part
because they do not see the point in enforcing the law, which seems to them
cruel. To the extent that we do not agree about what the United States is, we will disagree about why things
like citizenship and immigration law matter.
Naturally, I do not expect to read any sympathetic
accounts of how generally law-abiding Americans subject to whimsical and
capricious interpretations of the law — say, gun-store owners or grocers — live
in fear of the ATF or the EPA, and the nice lady with the badge and the gun who
took what seemed to me an excessive interest in the relatively trivial issue of
my rate of highway travel on a recent trip to California seemed distinctly
unsympathetic.
But surely I am not alone in thinking, when I hear NPR
reporters choking up about illegals living in fear of immigration enforcement:
“Well, good. That is as it should be.”
No one who has traveled much in Mexico or Central America
can fail to be sympathetic to the plight of the poor and the powerless there,
but one of the things that most plagues such unhappy corners of the world is
lawlessness, first and foremost lawlessness on the part of those entrusted with
enforcing the law. Lawlessness north of the Rio Grande is no remedy for
lawlessness south of it. That lawlessness engenders a great deal of fear and
anxiety, too — on both sides of the border.
No comments:
Post a Comment