![[Ed says Yea]](http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4958/1794/320/trust_fully.jpg "Ed says Yea")
DallasBlog.com | Ed Ishmael:Anti-immigrant Anglo commentators seem to think the protests were a failure because they alienated ... anti-immigrant Anglos. The Mexican flags really ticked off these spectators. What they don't realize is that the intended audience for most such protests is not the community at large, but the community of the protestors themselves. Consciousness raising, solidarity, awareness and education are the goals, not trying to win debate points with anti-immigrant Anglos. When someone says "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore", he probably doesn't really care what you think. He's taking power into his own hands, not trying to supplicate you into doing him any favors. Perhaps we're seeing the beginning of that for the Latino community as a whole. Perhaps.
8 comments:
It's the "illegal" part, not the "immigrant" part. Perhaps some on my side of the debate are bigoted--but not all and not even most. Calling us anti-immigrant is wrong. Especially when some of the strongest of us are those who immigrated here legally.
The "illegal" part doesn't bother me as much because I think our current immigration laws are a disaster. Whether it's the 55 MPH speed limit, Prohibition, or immigration, when ill-conceived laws turn tens of millions of people who I consider to be hard-working and family-oriented into criminals, I think we need to find another way to deal with the situation.
Ed,
I would agree that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are hard-working and family-oriented.
I would say that ENFORCEMENT of current immigration laws is a disaster.
I would disagree that border security laws are ill-conceived. It is our country--we have a right to decide who gets to come here.
*Mexico has an absolutely closed border to their south. If they think immigration is so great, why is that?
*If we as a nation are concerned with the socio-economic system in Mexico (the root of the problem), why don't we help the Mexicans insist on change in their own country? Vive la purple revolution in your own country!
*I was just reading that about half of the foreign born terrorists in this country were illegal immigrants. The Mexican immigrants get the lion's share of the news coverage, especially here in Texas, but we ought to have the money and the manpower to keep out and deport those who are here illegally--especially those who may mean us harm (from islamo-fascist terrorists to communist agitators to outright criminals). Catch and Release has made INS a joke.
Enforcement of our current immigration laws is a disaster, but that doesn't bother me as much as the fact that our immigration laws themselves are ill-conceived. Change the laws, make it easier for honest immigrants to legally come to this country, and much of the enforcement difficulties resolve themselves. In fact, it becomes easier to spot the terrorist if he can't disappear in a crowd of millions of hard-working, family-oriented undocumented aliens hiding in this country.
Using the 55 MPH speed limit example again, enforcement of that was a joke, too. But rather than hire a zillion state troopers to enforce an ill-conceived law, we eventually just raised the speed limits.
Ed,
I'd go along with "make it easier for honest immigrants to legally come to this country" if there were money and manpower dedicated to making sure of the "honest" part!
I suspect that I would differ with you, though on the details of the "make it easier" part. I am not in favor of guest worker or amnesty programs. It is wrong on many levels to reward the cheaters.
By the way, thank you for allowing me to "argue" with you here. I enjoy a civil debate, but wasn't sure if it would be welcome. You know...some bloggers don't like dissent or criticism. So, thanks for not flaming me!
As others have said, the devil is in the details. A solution that a majority can live with is going to be some kind of combination of border control and guest worker program. Refusal to compromise will leave us with the status quo that no one is happy with. So far, that's all our leaders in Washington have managed to give us.
P.S. I always welcome civil debate. I especially enjoy hearing thoughtful opposing viewpoints. There are few things as satisfying as hearing that imaginary light bulb click on over your head as you think, "I never thought of it that way before!"
Ed, you know what they say about compromise? A solution where everyone walks away mad!
Perhaps that is part of the reason politics today is so (or seems so) "us vs. them."
The US Constitution is a prime example of what can be achieved through principled compromise. I don't care whether the authors walked away happy or mad at the time, the balance they achieved has served our country well for over 200 years. A lot of examples where one side got everything their way proved to be disastrous.
Post a Comment