By RT Vaden
Monday, September 11, 2017
Note: This piece originally appeared at Acculturated.
For more than 16 years, senators and congressmen have
been trying to pass bills giving legal status to people who illegally
immigrated to the United States as children. The latest iteration had a name
with the initials D.R.E.A.M., so the beneficiaries of the proposed law became
known as “DREAMers.” When the DREAM Act died in the Senate in 2010, President
Obama circumvented Congress and unilaterally granted nearly 800,000 DREAMers
the right to live and work in America. The Obama aAdministration called this
move DACA or “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.”
The Trump administration recently announced that it would
phase out DACA. The White House emphasized that it would not target DREAMers for deportation and that it would allow many
DREAMers to renew their legal status for another two-year term. Since the
president’s announcement, he has even suggested that he will extend DREAMers’
temporary legal status again and again until Congress grants them permanent
relief.
Despite the complexity of the facts, celebrities rushed
to Twitter to accuse the president of evil, prejudice, and cowardice. Mia
Farrow and Morgan Fairchild retweeted a Washington
Post article titled “Ending DACA would be Trump’s most evil act.” Hamilton creator Lin-Manuel Miranda
tweeted, “The bad man [Trump] continues to do bad.” Fifth Harmony singer Lauren
Jauregui tweeted a little more vitriol, telling the president: “You disgust me.
You and your squad of Republican elite/cowards are truly sick humans.” Movie
executive Franklin Leonard made a not-so-subtle racism accusation: “Jim Crow
was the rule of law too.” Bernie Sanders calls the administration’s move “one
of the ugliest and cruelest decisions ever made by a president in modern
history.” Michael Moore claims that protesting the end of DACA is necessary “if
we are ever to be a decent country.”
DREAMers are a sympathetic group, and their advocates are
clearly motivated by compassion. But are critics of the DREAM Act and DACA
motivated by cruelty?
According to social psychologist Jonathan Haidt,
compassion is only one of several distinct foundations of morality. Those who
support ending DACA are not fighting to spread evil in the world. They are,
instead, drawing their conclusions from different moral foundations. Haidt, a
political liberal, explains in his book, The
Righteous Mind, that people on the left tend to emphasize liberty and
caring in their moral reasoning. Political conservatives, on the other hand,
make their moral judgments based on a wider range of moral criteria. Liberty
and caring are important factors for conservatives too, but so are fairness,
loyalty and respect for authority.
If you read what DACA critics are writing, you’ll find
arguments based on all these moral foundations. For example, on fairness: It’s
not fair that the children of illegal immigrants should get more privileges
than the children of people who followed the rules. Loyalty: As Americans, we
need to watch out for Americans first, and every university spot or job taken
by a DREAMer is a position an American cannot have. Respect for authority:
Everybody — including the president — should obey the law, and the law currently
does not allow DREAMers to live or work in the United States. While these
arguments are not unassailable, they are hardly rooted in cruelty and racism.
Lefty celebrities and Democratic politicians would
convince more people of the worthiness of their cause if they acknowledged the
moral validity of some of the arguments against DACA and made the case that, in
this specific instance, compassion should prevail over other moral
considerations. Until tweeting celebs realize they don’t have the morality
market cornered, the breach between Hollywood and Middle America will only
widen.
No comments:
Post a Comment