Immigrant Wisdom/The Big Job
I can't think of a single Anna Quindlen column that didn't either move me or make me think or connect with me in some way, and she doesn't disappoint here.
The immigration issue, like few others, always seems to bring out the hypocrite in so many.
"...most Americans find themselves "on the one hand reveling in the nation's immigrant past and on the other rejecting much of its immigrant present." "
If you're running for office, it's always helpful to play up the "child of immigrants" angle while simultaneously espousing a "get tough on immigration" policy. That should immediately disqualify you for high office, but I'm afraid if we start down that path we'll empty the halls of congress right down to the local tax collector.
The fact is that we need immigration, both for Quindlen's reasons (someone to cut the grass and wash the sheets and the thousands of other jobs we won't do) and because we need thinkers and people of vision who can approach things with a wider perspective than is generally available here.
But, most importantly, we need to let immigrants be President. Not Ahhhnold, who has taken hypocrisy to new levels, but everyone else. In fact, that should be part of the amendment. Take the "natural born" clause out but make sure no groping Austrian born steroid freaks can assume that high office. But, I digress.
We need this change because, as those of you who are parents know, the best story to tell the discouraged little one is "you can be anything you want to be if you only (insert your wisdom here)..., even President." Unfortunately, I can't tell that story to my kids, the littlest immigrants.
The immigration issue, like few others, always seems to bring out the hypocrite in so many.
"...most Americans find themselves "on the one hand reveling in the nation's immigrant past and on the other rejecting much of its immigrant present." "
If you're running for office, it's always helpful to play up the "child of immigrants" angle while simultaneously espousing a "get tough on immigration" policy. That should immediately disqualify you for high office, but I'm afraid if we start down that path we'll empty the halls of congress right down to the local tax collector.
The fact is that we need immigration, both for Quindlen's reasons (someone to cut the grass and wash the sheets and the thousands of other jobs we won't do) and because we need thinkers and people of vision who can approach things with a wider perspective than is generally available here.
But, most importantly, we need to let immigrants be President. Not Ahhhnold, who has taken hypocrisy to new levels, but everyone else. In fact, that should be part of the amendment. Take the "natural born" clause out but make sure no groping Austrian born steroid freaks can assume that high office. But, I digress.
We need this change because, as those of you who are parents know, the best story to tell the discouraged little one is "you can be anything you want to be if you only (insert your wisdom here)..., even President." Unfortunately, I can't tell that story to my kids, the littlest immigrants.
posted by John at 2:30 PM
4 Comments:
A couple of things about immigration and what it means to be born an American, or, for that matter, a Mexican, an Iraqi or a Frenchman.
The reference to Anna Quindlen's column writes:
"There are all those people who are born-again Americans, who chose the place instead of becoming citizens through an accident of birth."
Looking at the common definition of an accident--something unexpected, unintended usually undesired--this makes it seem that Anna's idea of birth is that it's not expected, intended, or desired. (Perhaps that's why she's such a staunch proponent of abortion--to clean up all those 'accidents').
Perhaps the 'birthee', to coin a new term, did not intend his own birth, but there is the notion of 'creators rights': the child's parents have the right to expect that child to have the same nationalism as they do. Sure the child can change and move to a new country, but as a percentage, how many really do--specifically *from* America? Sure the logistics of changing nationalism may play a part, but I think it's more that unexplainable bond--being born here gives one a bond much stronger and more innate than simply moving here.
It can't really be quantified--like a child's unswerving love for it's mother--a natural born American tends to care more about his homeland than someone who jets in (or swims across a river) here to make a few bucks. And that's not to say there aren't natural born Americans who truly hate this country (it seems many liberals do--they rarely stand up for it and are quick to act as apologists to those who attack us both literally and verbally), nor that immigrants can't come to love this country more than many naturals. But from a logistical legislative standpoint we have to draw a clear line--and the line at birth-country line seems the best choice. It's not to say I wouldn't accept exceptions.
John O'Leary writes:
"The fact is that we need immigration, both for Quindlen's reasons (someone to cut the grass and wash the sheets and the thousands of other jobs we won't do) and because we need thinkers and people of vision who can approach things with a wider perspective than is generally available here"
Are you (and Anna) saying that immigrants are a 'lower class' of people simply by the fact that they're immigrants, and will do those jobs (and Americans wont) because of their non-american status? That's quite a prejudicial and racist statement.
But John, how can you say that in this country of nearly 300 million--many of them legal immigrants and sons and daughters of immigrants--have a narrower perspective than any random person from any random other country? Someone from any other country has a "wider perspective than is generally available here" simply by the fact that he's from another country? Please. That's like those people who pay extra for that 'Swiss Chocolate' you find in the ethinic aisle of the supermarket. Just because it's 'foreign' means it's better? I've traveled far and wide and tried all of those expensive chocolates and have never had better chocolate than Hershey's. But people just assume it's mundane because it's American and that anything foreign must be better. That's a poor, negative attitude. We have some of the world's best minds and best thinkers in this country (as well as the best chocolate).
Back to immigration--possibly you and Anna are confusing illegal aliens with immigrants. Illegals will generally accept lower pay and menial jobs because they have little choice--after all, how can they fight for and demand a higher wage when the employer holds the better hand with the INS card? In addition, it's their choice--nobody forced them to come here, they knew the tradeoff.
But immigrants--legal immigrants--are very important to this country and always have been, but not for the reasons you seem to be suggesting--low wages and menial jobs. The immigrants I'm talking about are the ones who come here and invent, innovate, and create: Doctors from India who help find cures, scientists from China who reasearch in a vast array of fields, all the way to Latin baseball stars who entertain and excite us. I embrace them all and count immigrants as vital to this country's essence. But again, from a logistical standpoint--it makes sense to wait until the second generation to allow someone to run for the presidency.
But back to illegal immigrants and the menial jobs with low pay--sure, I like paying less for a burger because they guy flipping it is paid less than I might accept as a wage. But we do accept the good with the bad as far as illegals--even though we may not know it. I wonder if we did a 'balance sheet' to find out how much the lower price of burgers, a clean house, and a well lanscaped lawn is offset by the increased crime, the higher health care costs we end up paying for them, the extra taxes needed for schooling, and all the other public 'entitlements' that illegals take without directly paying for as a citizen.
And add to the debit side of that balance sheet the good American boys who lose their life in war--how about some of the millions of illegals take the place of some of our innocent young men being killed there. Somehow I think we're getting the raw end of the deal on that balance sheet.
For those who want illegals to recieve all the public benefits that citizens have--including voting rights and a drivers license--how about we put them on the front lines like real citizens and let them pay with life and limb the way real citizens do. No? Too much? Unfair?
Hmmm. If there were only a way to make it fair, to give those hard working illegals a way to recieve the public entitlements we recieve, for them to recieve at least the minimum wage, and for them not to be the subject of scorn and disdain. Hmmm. How about citizenship??? Get legal, get citizenship, pay taxes, pledge allegiance and put your life on the line like so many young Americans do, and then I'll welcome them all with open arms, and maybe one day I'd even vote for them.
--Jim
Jim -
Thanks for the thoughts and the effort. I think you misunderstood some of what I was saying - specifically that we need immigration both for people to take menial jobs and for the big thinkers who "invent, innovate and create."
Anyway, I appreciate your - thesis? - and it's always nice to know someone is reading. Unfortunately, I've been forced to conclude that you're way off base on the most imporant question of the day. Chocolate? Hersheys? Come on.
Where can I find the full text of the aritlce that Quindlen quotes: "Today instead of...diluted by a stream of alien blood" (i.e. author, title, exact date, etc.).
I would like to use with my classes.
RR -
The quote is attributed to one Albert Johnson, a Congressman who co-sponsored the Johnson-Reed act to - well, basically keep immigrants out. You can find some things about it here -http://www.mcgillreport.org/remember_1927.htm or here http://www.answers.com/topic/immigration-act-of-1924
Sorry about the "type it yourself links, but it's not my technology.
Just out of curiosity, what are you teaching and to whom?
Post a Comment
<< Home