"The bosom of America is open
to receive not only the Opulent and Respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and
persecuted of all Nations and Religions, whom we shall welcome to a
participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of
conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment." ~ George Washington
***
This post is part of my Immigration
Series.
In the
first part, I introduced the topic.
In the
second part, I looked at the (lack of) regulation of Immigration from the
founding of our country and the easy path to citizenship for white immigrants.
In the third
part, I detailed the racist history of immigration restrictions dating from
the Chinese Exclusion Act to the present.
In the fourth
part, I looked at the realities of current immigration law, which provides
no legal path to entry for the vast majority of those who wish to immigrate.
***
Let me start by mentioning the elephant in the room:
Donald Trump
campaigned and has governed on the nativist platform of the 1920s KKK.
You do realize that, right? It’s not that hard to see - just
read some history. This
article is a good place to start. The most consistent policy of the Trump
administration has been to restrict immigration, and ethnically cleanse America from as
many brown people as he legally can.
You can see it in his termination of legal status for
Salvadoran immigrants. (They are here with our permission, under a portion of
the law granting status to those fleeing disaster or violence in unstable
countries. El Salvador
is still a mess, and sending these
people back would certainly end up with many of them dead.) You can see it in
his “shithole
countries” comment. You can see it in his termination of DACA (replacement
of which he has held hostage until Democrats agree to his preferred immigration
restrictions - see below.) You can see it in his decision to end legal status
for Somalis here as refugees. You can see it in his claim that third world
countries are sending us rapists and drug dealers. You can see it with his
alarmist characterization of groups of refugees from South and Central America as caravans of invaders. And, of course,
you can see it in his obsession with building a giant overcompensation for
small “hand” size wall to keep the dirty brown people out.
Every time he opens his mouth (or tweets) regarding brown
skinned immigrants, it is to denigrate them and stir up fear and hate against
them.
So, I’m sorry, he is thoroughly racist, and bears personal
animus against non-whites. It’s pretty darn obvious.
But let’s look at his policies, because there is strong
evidence that his policy goals are in fact driven by racism - and would have a
racist effect.
***
The bottom line of the Trump Administration's policy on
immigration is this:
End the vast majority
of LEGAL immigration. And end virtually ALL immigration from the third world.
When you hear references to “merit based” immigration, that
is what is meant.
How about we take a test? Under the version of proposed
legislation the administration endorsed last August, prospective immigrants
would need to have at least 30 points in order to qualify. Time Magazine put
together a nice little online test, which you can take
here.
By the way, I would not qualify, despite being fluent in
English, having a professional degree I earned in the United States,
and being relatively young. A few years ago, I would have qualified, but I am
now too old to be desirable. I would have qualified after I graduated from law
school, but only if I had a solid job offer before applying. That’s not that
easy - legal jobs are not an automatic. And, if I intended to come here and
hang out my own shingle, then forget it.
Would you qualify?
Now here’s the thing. I am a highly qualified prospective immigrant compared to most. For
example, let’s say I had a bachelor’s degree I earned (with my hard work!) in a
foreign country, speak excellent English, and am in my 20s. I even have an
offer of a job at the US
median salary. Do I qualify? Not even close! Or what if I have a high school
diploma from another country, speak good but not excellent English, and have an
entry-level job offer. Do I qualify? Nope. Barely halfway there. And don’t even
imagine trying to get in without a diploma, with marginal English, and a
minimum wage job waiting.
It’s pretty obvious who would be let in, isn’t it?
Immigration is for the rich. People from wealthy nations (mostly white), who
had the economic privilege in that country to earn a graduate degree, learn
perfect English, and have a job offer here paying out well above the median
wage. Wow. I can’t see most people having ANY shot at immigrating legally.
And that is the point.
In fact, you can see this demonstrated by both Trump and
those he surrounds himself with.
For example, here
is Trump saying we allow too many “migrants” (that means legal immigrants) to
“resettle” in the United States.
Here
are (former and current) advisors Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller talking
about how legal immigration - including that of skilled workers - is the real
problem, and that we need to basically end all immigration.
Oh, and let’s not forget the times Steve Bannon (and fellow
white supremacist Steve King from Iowa) praised the neo-Nazi novel The
Camp of the Saints, which envisions the overthrow of (white)
civilization by immigrants and native-born brown people. (Note too that
Sessions, even though he hasn’t specifically mentioned the book, uses the same
ideas in his rhetoric on immigration.)
You can see it everywhere in the rhetoric of Trump and those
around him. An appeal to fear about the “Browning of America.” Kind of like Steve
King and his “you can’t rebuild a civilization using other people’s babies”
comment.
This leads me back to the question of DACA. A large majority
of Americans believe justice and fairness require that we accept those who
immigrated as children, regardless of their documented or undocumented status.
Trump created the crisis in the first place by terminating DACA before a
replacement was prepared. He now has refused
to support a replacement unless it comes with a big appropriation for his
wall, and a change to a “merit-based” immigration policy on the lines outlined
above.
Basically, he’ll send the kids back unless he gets to end
legal immigration from Mexico.
Yeah. Classy.
And so I return to my original point: The Trump
Administration policy on immigration is to end nearly all legal immigration -
and essentially end the immigration of brown people.
Sorry, that’s racist. And it always has been.
***
Just a note here: while anti-immigration sentiment is nothing
new, it gained currency in today’s GOP initially through the Tea Party
movement. Opposition to immigration - particularly by brown people - was a
central plank of the movement from the beginning. Although I didn’t leave the
GOP until 2013, I was already having second thoughts once the Tea Party came to
prominence and begin to take out moderate Republicans in the primaries.
This worried me in part because I was a Californian during
the battles over Proposition 187. (For those unaware, California allows citizens to place proposed
laws on the ballot - it requires a ton of signatures - so that voters can
approve or disapprove them.) Prop 187 was an anti-immigration bill that sought
to cut off undocumented immigrants from public services. This included some
pretty draconian stuff, such as turning undocumented immigrants (including
children) away from health care, public schools, and requiring schools to ask
about the immigration status of parents of US-born children. It also required
government workers to turn in immigrants to the Feds when they applied for
benefits, and so on. It wasn’t good.
I am embarrassed to admit that I voted for it. (My first
election at 18.) I am ashamed of that vote. I knew better, but was kind of in
the thrall of Rush Limbaugh at the time, and was - to put it mildly - ignorant
and immature. I would never vote for such a law today. I look back on that vote
as one of the times I have knowingly violated my Christian beliefs, and I
deeply regret it.
Anyway, the law passed with a pretty good margin, despite
warnings from the federal government that it would harm immigration and law
enforcement by driving law-abiding immigrants further into the shadows, deny
children health care and education, and not really accomplish anything.
The courts struck down the law soon after it was passed, so
it was never enforced.
But what came after is more interesting even than that. The
California Republican party went all-in on the law, making it the centerpiece
of its political platform. Now, 24 years later, the Republican Party is nearly
irrelevant in California
state politics. With the exception of The Governator’s
tenure - and he was both an immigrant and a moderate - California has been essentially a one-party
state. I don’t think that is a particularly good situation, but California
Republicans seem to have no interest in actually taking positions that a
majority of Californians hold. The inevitable demographic changes haven’t
helped the GOP, shall we say. California
is majority minority - whites are less than half the population. By choosing to
antagonize Latinos, the GOP guaranteed its irrelevance for at least a
generation, and likely more. I believe the GOP at the national level is on the
same path. Their numbers have become increasingly white - and old. Sure, the
electoral college and gerrymandering may preserve their power at the national
level for a while yet. But their course doesn’t seem sustainable. Also
interesting is that Prop 187 appears to have shifted the attitudes of white voters away from the GOP as well.
I am among those white voters who have left the GOP in its new era of
xenophobia - and it seems unlikely they will woo either me or my children back.
***
Speaking of which: during the campaign, pretty much every
pro-Trump evangelical I spoke with cited Trump’s immigration policy as the main
reason they supported him. ‘Build the wall. We have way too many “Mexicans”
here already. Stop the browning of America.’
After a year of the Trump Administration, the only promise
he has consistently fulfilled is to deport and antagonize immigrants. And, hisapproval rating with white Evangelicals is 75% - far higher the general public
- and the highest it has ever been. I think a reasonable conclusion to draw is
that Trump’s racism and xenophobia ARE IN FACT a core value of white
Evangelicalism.
Which I one reason we left. And the main reason I will never
darken the door of an Evangelical church again. And I will certainly never take
my children there. We don’t need to swim in that moral cesspit.
I have been reading your blog for quite a while now and this article has pushed me to comment for once (in a positive way). First of all: I'm from Germany and a christian (catholic and sligthly agnostic though, so from the standpoint of a fundamentalist I might as well be an atheist) and also in the middle of my master studies in evolutionary biology (which led to quite a few very unsatisfying and vile "discussions" with the same fundamentalists). I try to follow what I believe (for myself) are the most important core values of christianity, including (but not limited to) charity, empathy and tolerance (better yet, acceptance) for others and their ways of life. And yes, this includes being for immigration. Yet a new, extensive study about the viewpoints of christians here in Europe seems to show that christians who are close to the churches (no matter whether they are protestant, orthodox or catholic) are much more against immigration, acceptance of homosexuality and other religions, especially jews and muslims than christians like me who don't feel connected to the churches or non-christians. They also seem to be the main voting power behind the wave of reactionary and nationalistic politicians gaining power over here, which are all pushing anti-immigration policies. These are of course only averages, but it's hard for me to understand how someone can be a christian without seemingly believing in these core values. I was also seriously struggling with my faith after several nasty encounters with fundamentalists, during which they told me that my area of expertise, my political leanings and of course my sexuality were all reasons for why I was not a "true" christian and more or less on my way to hell. Yet these are the people voting for people like Trump, who wouldn't feel empathy for others if their lives depended on it. I never understood that. Your articles about the evangelical mindset helped me to cope with this and I wanted to thank you for it. I think I have a better idea now of why these people are like that. It still makes me sad, but at least I have more insight and that's always something I'm thankful for.
ReplyDelete