17 April 2006

Eliminationist rhetoric

As I've written here, regarding illegal immigration, I'm generally opposed to offers of amnesty and any type of guest worker program implementation. Not that I an evil hearted xenophobic radical, I, like many other Americans, feel that people should play by the rules and that temporary worker programs are an invitation to flagrant worker abuse and exploitation. However, when I read invectives on the issue like this one, it makes me shudder to cast my political lot with those who flaunt hate speech, wishing to dehumanize fellow brothers and sisters.
We can learn from Buffalo, New York. Now in Buffalo the rat problem in the city was a huge one. Exterminators could not handle the problem. But then in 2001 the city mandated that everyone would have to begin using special anti-rat garbage totes that the rats could not open. With no way to get to the garbage, the rats left Buffalo. Now, they went to the suburbs and now the suburbs are fighting them. But it is no longer a problem for the people of Buffalo, New York. Here is how to do the same with our problem:

1) No services.

Absolutely no services of any kind for those who cannot prove they are in the country legally. Nothing but emergency medical care. Without all the social services, medical and other services provided for them, the illegals will find life here less attractive.

2) No schools.

Absolutely no schooling for anyone who cannot prove they belong here legally.

3) No easy birthright.

Change the law. Now, if you are born here, you are a citizen. I say, if you cannot prove that you were born here and that your mother was here legally at the time, then your citizenship is that of the mother and not of the USA.

4) No legal status. No drivers licenses. No bank accounts. No ability to sue a citizen. No legal standing for anyone who is in this country illegally.

5) No free lunch for "The Man". Make it a criminal offense (and enforce it if it is already on the books) to hire an illegal alien, or to rent a dwelling place to him, or to sell him a home knowing that he intends to live there. Make employers provide documentation for all of their workers. You put the onus on "The Man" and it suddenly becomes less appealing to take advantage of the illegals.


David Neiwert notes that this same "rat comparison" meme, propagated by popular right wing talk show hosts, was used by the Nazis to drum up hatred of the Jews and is also employed to demonize gays and lesbians.

Furthermore, are illegal immigrants, as Arizona politician Russell Pearce is quick to pounce on this point, totally without constitutional rights? Do folks really wish to treat fellow human beings in such a manner, like vermin to be eliminated?

I have a feeling the immigration debate is going to get uglier, as a pushback against the recent spate of marches and protests starts to surface coincides with an intimidated legislative bunch who keep floating solutions that dissatisfy the majority of Americans. Yet, from my perspective, the answer is quite simple:

  • More punitive employer sanctions for hiring illegal workers and more importantly, enforcement of these laws.
  • Full worker rights for anyone working in the United States — if the labor force is empowered to exercise, to the fullest, laws of economic activity, it is a win win situation for all, American workers and those trying to forge a better life.


First, calling Savage a popular right wing host is like calling Mike Malloy a poular left wing host; please spare me the implications you wish to portray here. I couldn't give a shit what Malloy said, because his audience is limited; same goes for Savage. The conservative hosts I listen to have never said anything like this horseshit you've showed us by hateful shitheads.

One thing you left out here, and in your previous post (which is why I never bothered to respond) is the issue of border security.
I'm sure you will all cringe to hear that most conservatives favor closing the border through whatever means, and initiating a controlled immigration policy, by which immigrants are allowed through "legally"; Krauthammer states it perfectly in his recent editorial (build a wall, and allow immigrants to pass through controled points).
As for the estimated 11-12 million here now, Krauthammer simply says-give them citizen status; AFTER the border is secure.
Sounds simple doesn't it? Close the border (like stopping a major leak in the house), and THEN deal with the immigrant issue (legal status).
So why is it that our politicians have such a hard time? Contrary to some of your hopes and fantasies, this issue will not split the Republican Party.

I and many others hope that it will put a flame under their asses. Why? Because I and many others are quite confident that the Dems have no strategy for this (except pathetic disaplays of pandering by the likes of Hillary and Uncle Ted). And that's even worse than the do-nothing Republicans in Congress now.

I'll add that some conservative hosts like Hannity and Ingraham still cling to an ideal of "illegal is illegal, we can't simply grant amnesty." However, they'll readily admit that if a bill was passed that focused first on securing the borders, providing quotas for legal immigration; that they would not be so quick to condemn amnesty.
One other thing; why is it so many don't mention the betrayal of the mexican Government to their own people? Why do we have to continuously pander to the government (ie, GW at the last meeting)instead of telling it like it really is? How many decades has the government failed the people, rather than working to keep people in Mexico? Why does the government provide maps of the US, survival kits, and why do they oppose any legislation to this issue?
Why does a Mexican economist declare that McCain's bill, if passed would result in huge monetary losses to Mexico, because no money is being sent back to their coffers? This is a betrayal of colosal proportions, and worth condemnation. Whay are all politicans cowards in this regard? What do we have to fear in declaring the corupt government of Mexico has displaced millions of its citizens, left the country in a state of poverty, and deprived millions more of decent living conditions?
One more thing.....what Mexico needs, coming from a Neocon-is a version of the New Deal program that worked for this country. That is, federal loans, and monies given to private interests to improve community features like roads, canals, dams, etc. At the same time, Mexico needs to implement a reclamation program to provide clean ater, electricity, and sanitation to all its people.
By doing this, they can preserve the democratic, capitalist system, enrichen lives and beautify the entire country (inclusing the preservation of archaeological treasures that Mexico is known for).
One more thing-have a nice day all.
One more thing, because I'll be gone awhile.
I agree with you Naum, that if we call illegals felons, then we must persecute companies and employers who propagate this problem. I also agree that McCain's bill is just wrong, and Bush's support is just damn frustrating for so many conservatives, who have to constantly be on the defensive after being accused as racists, hate mongers, and stupid rednecks.

I would just like to see a crackdown at the border (a wall, and increase in personnel) to bring this human travesty to an end.
We must encourage and somehow force the leaders in Mexico to take an active role in creating a stable country of the people, by the people, for the people.
My spelling is atrocious today. Pardonez-moi. Stupid keyboard sticks all the time.
Thanks Mr. Neocon for all the comments, I seem to have struck a nerve here... :)

1. Yes, I did omit border security and you are correct, especially at a perilous time, when we're told over and over, "we're in a war", it should be a priority to seal the border down. The excuses that it can't be done is baloney, as it was done in past times and past wars (WWII for instance).

2. I'll give you that Savage doesn't represent ALL right wingers, but he does (just like the rancid Mr. Malloy) speak for a significant number of those who call themselves true conservatives. Sometimes, especially in these matters, I think Savage is a Rove-ian plant, to flush out the non Country Club Republicans, but then that's fodder for another post (and one likely to draw your ire...).

3. I could care less whether this issue splits Republicans or strengthens them, or makes Democrats more powerful or less powerful. I care about the effects to working Americans, of which I am also a member of. As great as the schism between Joe Lunchpack Republican and the Country Club Republican, there is a schism in Democratic circles too, especially with redistricting giving Latino bloc a lot stronger voice but then that duels with the old school working class Democrat wing which used to be anti-immigrant too.

4. Mexico is a failed state, and until some corruption cleansing occurs, it's not going to get any better and the globalization trade treaties (NAFTA, CAFTA) have excaberated the economic ills there.

5. Amnesty is the spike that keeps the issue unsolved - it's not like we've not crossed this bridge before - 1986 amnesty had the reverse effect and all the same things said then were not adhered to, so what makes people think it would be different this time in 2006, that the problem would be righted and such an act of universal amnesty not act as strong motivational force for continued illicit worker migration.

6. Worker rights, worker rights, worker rights, and then the problem is not so much of a problem anymore, given that if the border is given proper attention.
1. Amen
2. Whoa, a conspiracy theory
3. Agreed. This should be a nonpartisan issue, considering the population in general favors real action. Interestingly, politicians make this partisan...
4. While I'm not absolutely sure about the treaties' effects currently, I'm with you there.
5. Perhaps...
6. Absolutely.
Have a great day, all. Boy, for some reason, it feels good when I can say I concur with Naum.

Add Comment

This item is closed, it's not possible to add new comments to it or to vote on it