II. Strangers, Different Folk

There’s at least a little xenophobia in all of us—including you and me. And it is too often exploited and heightened by populist demagoguery, and worn brazenly, a badge of ersatz patriotism. Yet nothing could be more dysfunctional, more damaging, in the continuing advancement of American society and culture. We have to get over it.

Of course, I am not talking about the fear of foreigners invading us in the military sense, or the antipathy toward them that is born of generations- or centuries-old territorial, racial, ethnic, or religious antagonisms between one country and another. I am talking about the more benign process of immigration into the United States, and more particularly about immigration of Central and South American Hispanic people across Mexican borders. Although to many it may be cast as an invasion and seem like one, too, it is really just this century’s next major influx of immigrants into this great American land of immigrants.

That is not to say there are not major issues and problems associated with it, problems that distinguish it from prior cycles of immigration. There are. Each cycle has always created its own unique problems and issues. But primarily there has always been the same issue: they were strangers, different folk, from different societies and strange lands. And always there has been the fear and resentment of America’s working class that an influx of low paid immigrants jeopardizes their jobs or their pay scales.

And that is not to say that I don’t have my own concerns and fears about the unique problems posed by this cycle—or the weak responses and poor answers that have so far been forthcoming. For example, I don’t think immigration policy should be a matter of default along the Mexican border. And I don’t think it should be a matter of who is brave enough, strong and fortunate enough, to survive the torturous journey over forbidding lands, or the often dangerous, cramped and dehydrating, cattle-car passages by those often abandoned in the process. Each has taken its toll in injury and death to brave, desperate seekers after work and a better life.

We will talk about problems and policies: the need for reasonably secure borders, a realistic process for legal immigration. But—agree or not—a necessary part of any workable answer is a one-time amnesty and immediate legal re-entry process for qualifying illegal immigrants. Of course, those who are employed or seeking employment would have to make the appropriate commitments to bring them into conformance with the expectations of new, legal immigrants—to do what it takes: whatever is practicable, whatever is right.

But let’s be realistic. There are more than 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. right now, and repatriating them would be near impossible, logistically and financially. And the truth is that most are employed and needed by American businesses. Confirming that, studies indicate that on a national basis, their presence has not increased unemployment of American citizens. That is not to say there aren’t issues of unemployment and competition for jobs in some areas, but that is more a matter of matching immigrant job seekers with areas of job opportunity, and assuring that all job applicants are paid the same, full, minimum or competitive wage. And notably, amnesty assures that all qualifying illegal immigrants become U.S.taxpayers, as well.

Isn’t this what it comes down to: America needs its continuing flow of immigrants seeking a better life? We need the additional labor resources, the intellectual and creative potential—and the challenge to us to become more than we are. We need the personal and cultural growth and enrichment, the increasing strength and resiliency it brings to America as a nation. And right now, we need the illegal immigrants that have been absorbed into productive work and life in the US.

And, yes, we also need better policies and practices regarding illegal immigration from Mexico. There are real and practical limits to our need and our ability to offer opportunities to legal immigrants. Illegal immigration, if continued, will exceed our ability to assimilate or finance services for the throngs who will continue to slip unnoticed across our borders. But would they continue to take such risks to enter The U.S. illegally when there are no jobs or opportunity?

We know that many who enter the U.S. illegally through Mexico are here only for the work and higher income, while others also enter harboring hopes of finding residence and becoming citizens. We have also learned that when the U.S. economy is poor and jobs are difficult to find, when companies no longer need their services, many illegal immigrants return to Mexico or their countries of origin. Surely, then we could identify some areas for needed change and some intelligent, useful initiatives based on those facts. For example:

• Creating a credible ongoing process of polling potential employers and estimating potential employment for immigrants would be a helpful first step.

• Then, creating a clearinghouse for this information and providing it through public media to Mexico and all countries of potential immigrants would be an intelligent next step.

• Lastly, reforming our immigration process, creating a guest-worker program, increasing our immigration limits to meet the varying needs of our employers, and spreading those new immigration quotas across an appropriate range and number of foreign countries would seem to address a lot of the problems.

Then, the decisions of potential immigrants would be far better informed based on whether or not job opportunities may await them. And pursuing a process of legal immigration or legal guest-worker status might seem more attractive than illegal alternatives. And policing the Mexican border might become an easier process and less of a national and political issue.

We also know that most of Mexico’s sociopolitical elites, its wealthy class, would rather see the US and its taxpayers bear the expense of better educating, compensating, and providing healthcare to as many of their overwhelmingly poor population as possible. Many on both sides of the border view it as an unstated policy and undeterred practice by the Mexico government. But a more realistic and thoughtful reform of our immigration policy and process may force them to be more responsible public leaders and more reliable U.S. neighbors.

So we can sort out more effective ways to secure our borders, in part by providing for a well-informed, fair and efficient immigration process. We can increase the numbers of immigrants or guest workers granted entry based on the potential needs of our employers. And we can find a reasonable, practical way to extend legal status to those of our 11 million-plus illegal immigrants who make the appropriate commitments. And, yes, if our resolve is real and our actions effective, the government of Mexico will have no choice but to work with us more constructively—and also take more responsibility for a progressive tax system that will finance the education and other services its many poor desperately need.

What we shouldn’t do, what we can’t do, is be moved by the disingenuous voices with narrow cultural or ideological axes to grind, or the opportunistic demagogues with political ambitions. Look past these angry, misleading people with their own selfish, xenophobic and exclusionary goals. Think past their rhetoric that is intended to stir, inflame and divide people. Be the great people of promise, opportunity and community that we have the potential to be and often have been.

Only if the pose we strike is as welcoming as it is practical and realistic can we minimize the problems that inevitably arise. Only then can we marshal the good will and intellectual power, see the common cause and join the mutual effort, to solve these problems and continue to grow this country of immigrants in a way that serves us all best. That’s called community, the human family growing closer and stronger. And we can do it better. A lot better.

Our heart for people and community, like my faith, calls us to reach out to the strangers, the different folk, to invite them and welcome them in. But there will be complications. There will be issues of our national need or ability to assimilate, practical limits on how many we can welcome and the conditions of the invitation. Nevertheless, we must hold tight to that impulse, that leading, toward an open mind and welcoming spirit.

First written: September 2006


© Gregory E. Hudson 2007