The Dangerous Mythology of Immigration

American Thinker ^ | November 28, 2010 | Frank Burke

[neverdem]

No question on the national agenda is more important than the resolution of our immigration policy. The U.K., France, Spain, and Germany have discovered that, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated recently, multiculturalism has "utterly failed." Nor do we have to go as far as Europe. The Separatist Movement has long been an expensive and divisive thorn in Canada's side. 

Unrestricted and unmanaged immigration is more than a question of expense. It can destroy a nation's identity and wipe away its culture, customs, and laws. The recent law passed by the citizens of Oklahoma making it illegal for judges to rely on Sharia Law in deciding cases (a law that was inexplicably stayed by a federal judge), as well as Arizona's move to enforce federal immigration law -- a movement seconded by a growing number of states -- all show that it can happen here.

Adding to the difficulty of crafting a just and effective policy is the amount of mythology and emotionalism surrounding the entire immigration question. Some of this is understandable. Immigration is a central facet of the American identity and is reflected in one of our most cherished icons: the Statue of Liberty. Virtually all our family histories boast chapters on immigration. Knowing what the opportunity to become an American has meant to us, it is hard to imagine that the door of opportunity -- the "golden door" -- is now closed to many. Yet unless and until we are willing to look at the situation realistically, we risk not just our icons, but the land that they represent.

Here are three myths central to the problem of immigration: 

Myth No. 1: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore..." Well, not quite. Emma Lazarus's 1883 poem "The New Colossus" -- written in the year the Statue of Liberty was dedicated -- has been taken by many to reflect a true picture of immigration. This is not the case. From the colonial period on, there were standards that immigrants had to meet. Originally addressed at the regional level, then by the states, they were eventually federalized. The immigration stations, such as the one at Ellis Island in New York harbor, were not welcoming centers. They were processing points for the inspection and certification of new arrivals. Individuals with physical or mental problems, or who were known to be criminals in their country of origin, were denied entry. Older or underage family members required sponsorship. All of this was to ensure that the newly arrived immigrants would not be a burden to their new country and could either support themselves or be supported by others. 

Further, the America of the 17^th through the early 20^th centuries possessed a large appetite for unskilled or semiskilled labor. Labor contractors advertised in Europe for workers. Likewise, the railroads solicited farmers with offers of free or cheap land situated along the right-of-way. Many of the jobs were hard, dangerous, and poorly paid, but given good health and a desire to work, the new immigrants, both male and female, could find opportunities to establish themselves.

Today's situation is different. The market for unskilled labor is a tiny fraction of what it was. Even in agriculture, many of the harvesting processes once performed by migrants now utilize machines. America still has a place for immigrants, but with the advent of technology, the qualifications required have markedly changed.

Myth No. 2: People come here because they want to become Americans. Some do, but today, many do not. Most of the early immigrants who fled to these shores came due to trouble and desperation. They sought a new life in America, and from the time they arrived, virtually everything they made was reinvested in their new country. Travel was difficult and expensive, and most who made the journey knew they would never see their native land again. 

Unlike previous generations, those who come today do so for a variety of reasons. Some come seeking economic opportunity but have no desire to break ties with their own country. This is observable in the demonstrations held by Latinos seeking amnesty. Some carry Mexican flags and signs proclaiming what they believe the U.S. owes them. The second-largest source of income in Mexico derives from remittances sent from the United States. So-called paths to citizenship have not met with an enthusiastic reception.

Others, in turn, come for more nefarious reasons. Members of the Mexican Reconquista movement, including the National Will Organization, Mexica movement, and La Voz de Aztlan, seriously wish to reclaim the lands lost by Mexico in the Mexican War, as well as other states with high Hispanic populations. These would include California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Nevada, and Colorado.

Other advocates of multiculturalism, including foreign nationals, religious sects, and cults, seek to reduce the United States to colonial status for their own purposes. Just as radical Islamists in the United Kingdom and elsewhere are advocating the imposition of Sharia Law on the population, some here seek the same end.

Even where the intention is not initially malicious, multiculturalism can have problematic results. National and other groups that choose to live apart from the mainstream, retaining their own language, culture, and customs, frequently experience serious problems in the second generation. Raised in an extremely restrictive environment but unavoidably exposed to American ideas, these young people develop severe identity problems. As with earlier immigrant groups, the result frequently takes the form of antisocial behavior and gang membership. This trend is observable from the multiple ethnic gangs of early organized crime, down to the drug cartels of the present day.

Myth No. 3: Everyone is really seeking the same things. No other myth is more insidious than the one world philosophy that has impacted not only the immigration debate, but also our foreign policy for over half a century. Traditionally, people who came to America in pursuit of a better life assimilated into the American mainstream. Defining themselves along similar lines, they shared many of the same values and goals. As a result of that experience, it has become very easy for Americans to project the idea of mutual tolerance and communality worldwide. Like the dream of a united nations, this has along been a favorite mantra of those on the left. In June of 1963, in delivering the commencement address at American University, John F. Kennedy sought to advance a nuclear test ban treaty by equating the attitudes of the United States and the Soviet Union, stating, "For in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's futures. And we are all mortal." In 2009, speaking at the United Nations, Barack Obama, again supporting disarmament, stated, "No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed." 

The wishful thinking that all nations are somehow equal and that we all desire the same things is naïve on the face of it and deadly in its implementation. The individual who murders his daughter in an honor killing; the family that celebrates the martyrdom of children who destroyed themselves while killing innocent people; or the tribe whose members practice genocide against its neighbors are not going to be satisfied with a good job, a nice house, education for their children, and a wide-screen HDTV. 

Those who project a rosy vision of world brotherhood play into the hands of fanatics. Our concern for others, including future immigrants, will be best-demonstrated in securing our borders and insuring our survival as the seat of freedom.

[neverdem]

The current immigration law needs to be repealed. With no end in sight of prolonged, high unemployment, this is the perfect opportunity. Low skilled, no skilled immigrants are not needed, except for those who can be accepted for military service.

[wardaddy]

agreed

you’ve been here long enough to recall when this topic was fiercely fought over here

times have changed...folks have woken up...some anyhow

[InABunkerUnderSF]

I agree but would point out that large numbers of low skilled immigrants are not just “not needed”. They are an absolute liability to our society. In a world of remittances where anyone can just pack up and return home as fast as an airliner can carry them, I wonder if it’s time to reconsider the whole “Nation of Immigrants” paradigm.

I disagree regarding those who might be accepted for military service. The Romans tried this and it didn’t work out well for them in the long run.

[wiggen]

Military service has a dual nature. Yes its the military but its also a paying job. What happens when the defense budget starts getting cut down and suddenly the armed forces get a little more restrictive in whom they accept? Fewer spots for American citizens? As labor intensive as the military still is it’s far less so than it used to be. I simply believe that we need to view armed forces as part of our labor pool and not as a path to citizenship.

[momtothree]

I don’t know if it is the best idea to have your standing military infiltrated by citizens of other countries. Sort of defeats the purpose, right? Are you really going to defend your second country or the one you hope to have dual citizenship with? Another point with the article not mentioned is dual citizenship. You essentially are a citizen of two countries. My relatives became citizens of the U.S. (no other). Just a thought.

[Clintonfatigued]

Ping

[RoadTest]

“as German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated recently, multiculturalism has “utterly failed.”

Multiculturalism and socialism have always failed. Always will. Obama is their Failure-in-Chief.

[Liz]

THIS JUST IN Sen. Lindsey Graham said efforts to pass THE DREAM ACT THAT RAINS GOVT FREEBIES ON ILLEGALS -- "is going nowhere." "How can you give citizenship to 2 million people without securing our borders first?" he asked.

Graham also announced he's switching from Folger's Decaf to Lipton's flow-thru tea bags.

[okie01]

Teddy Kennedy has much to apologize for.

But his biggest crimes against America were his immigration policies.

[mvpel]

Leftist logic:

GOOD MULTICULTURALISM:

BAD MULTICULTURALISM:

[Cacique]

Btt

[Once-Ler]

times have changed...folks have woken up...some anyhow

Nope. Posters have been banned. It is still a non-issue to the majority of voters. If it was an important issue there would be a politician of stature pushing reform. Tancredo lost the gov race in CO. Where are the rising star leaders on the issue?

[SunkenCiv]

Unrestricted and unmanaged immigration is more than a question of expense. It can destroy a nation's identity and wipe away its culture, customs, and laws. The recent law passed by the citizens of Oklahoma making it illegal for judges to rely on Sharia Law in deciding cases (a law that was inexplicably stayed by a federal judge), as well as Arizona's move to enforce federal immigration law -- a movement seconded by a growing number of states -- all show that it can happen here.

Correction -- that it *is* happening here. Thanks neverdem.

[wardaddy]

I thought you left in a huff and went somewhere to anti-freep?

I was banned.

I’m back....over 3 years now I think.

Some things here have changed and now youse guys are in the minority here...top to bottom.

But what the heck...hugs and kisses.

but bayourod and stinkspur...no such love for them

[Pelham]

bttt

[Once-Ler]

I never left, just stopped donating. I posted at a couple other forums, but I never anti-freeped, and life prevents me from posting as much as I used to.

I'd send you hugs and kisses back...
but I'm a daddy too...
and I don't swing that way...

...well, there was that one time...
but I really needed the money...

I'm just kidding...

I didn't need the money.

Have a Merry Christmas.

[dixiechick2000]

Posters have been banned, and some have returned. But, wardaddy was banned outright, was baited by the harpies. At least now there is a nic attached to the abuse button.

It’s not a non-issue with voters...it’s just on the back burner right now. But, when it raises it’s ugly head again, and you know it will, it will be front and center.

Let’s see what happens to the DREAM Act, shall we? That is, if it’s not done behind closed doors, with no one of the opposition in attendance.

[skeeter]

It is still a non-issue to the majority of voters.

Surely you've been out of the country.

There have been several attempts by congress to push thru an amnesty in the recent past that have been slam dunked due to public outcry. Notice how quickly the lame duck congress stopped talking about the Dream Act?

You may choose to not notice but what we've seen over the past couple of years is VERY encouraging.

In view of what is now happening in Western Europe things can only get worse here for the proponents of unrestricted immigration.

[Once-Ler]

Surely you've been out of the country.

ha ha ha ha. That was a good one :)

Notice how quickly the lame duck congress stopped talking about the Dream Act?

I'll ping dixiechick2000 because she seems concerned that 0 will try to sneak it in. I don't think the rats want to solve the problem. They can just make promises to illegals and blame the GOP when nothing happens. The issue divides Republicans.

You may choose to not notice but what we've seen over the past couple of years is VERY encouraging.

Help me see what you see, please. In 2005 and 2006 the GOP majority Congress tried to pass an amnesty like Reagan's in 1987. A bill was passed by both House and Senate but Speaker Hastert refused to send representatives to the conference committee to reconcile the 2 bills. When the voters took Denny's majority away he quit. Both parties put up pro amnesty Prez candidates in 08. Are you excited because obambi tells you deportations, and illegals turned back at the border, are on the rise? Dubya, and Clinton said the same thing. If there are any fewer illegals in the US today it's because our economy has tanked and there are no jobs for them. Thousands...maybe tens of thousands of illegals cross our border every day.

Perhaps you are talking about the Tea Party sweeping in men like Scott Brown, Chris “Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime.” Christie, and reelecting McCain and Murkowski. Or Tancredo's defeat in CO.

I ask again where are the anti-illegal leaders? I can't see why you are so encouraged, but I am very happy for you.

In view of what is now happening in Western Europe things can only get worse here for the proponents of unrestricted immigration.

lol. I hope you are not counting on the American voter knowing what is going on in Europe. They don't know what is happening in America.

[skeeter]

My point, which you neatly evaded, is that American public opinion clearly has shifted on this issue, and in a very positive direction. It doesn't matter that the MSM won't acknowlege it - the recent behavior of our political leaders in general is testament enough to it.

What else would have so quickly stopped them from accomplishing what so many of them clearly want to do?