Illegals Today

"Who will care for the elderly if the border closes?" "Who will fight the forest fires if the border closes?" "Who will pick the grapes if the border closes?" "Who will bus the tables at my favorite restaurant if the border closes?" Don't you just about gag on these news stories?

Hello! How about higher pay and training for American or legal workers in the home health care industry? Here's an idea. Go back to hiring teen-agers and college students who need temporary jobs. Mexicans have been fighting forest fires in the U.S. since the 1940s and 1950s--have they all been illegals? We've known since 1950 that someday the boomers would get old and feeble. Has no one planned for this? Do we need a 21st century slavery system to take care of our elderly?

Here's a tip. If ever Mexico gets with the program and develops a viable economic system and a middle class (I know it's a stretch, but it could happen), those workers will not be coming across the border to change Grandma's Depends. Only then Grandma will be a Gen-X-er. So let's start putting some money into the labor programs we need--if we're smart we'll leave the labor unions out of the loop who just suck up money from the workers and try to bring in more illegals to pay dues.

And here's another tip. All of western Europe is also looking for cheap, third world workers to take care of their aging population and pay into their SS system.. This is a really, dumb, short sighted direction for people who are supposed to be educated and smart.

"What the newcomers of the great migration did not find here was a vast social-services and welfare state. They had to rely on their own resources or those of friends, relatives, or private, often ethnic, charities if things did not go well. That’s why about 70 percent of those who came were men in their prime. It’s also why many of them left when the economy sputtered several times during the period. For though one often hears that restrictive anti-immigration legislation starting with the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 ended the first great migration, what really killed it was the crash of the American economy. Even with the 1920s quotas, America welcomed some 4.1 million immigrants, but in the Depression of the 1930s, the number of foreign immigrants tumbled far below quota levels, to 500,000. With America’s streets no longer paved with gold, and without access to the New Deal programs for native-born Americans, immigrants not only stopped coming, but some 60 percent of those already here left in a great remigration home."

Read more of two interesting articles on immigration at City Journal. "How unskilled immigrants hurt our economy," and "Seeing today's immigrants straight."

Pity the poor student who must sit through the hate and venom of Jeffrey Melnick's American Studies classes at Babson College. And pity the parent who is paying the tuition. I would do a literature search on him, but he sounds like he could be violent, and I don't want my ISP frosting his cookies. But I did peek at Babson College, which is a small business school in Massachusetts. Wow. This guy must have issues, because he nearly vomits when writing about American business and the hateful globalization in his Chapter 11 of "Companion to American Immigration" (Blackwell, 2006).

He begins with the obligatory "mythic images," of American immigration, all inaccurate according to Melnick, but they only get a brief paragraph. He quickly moves on to genocide, mass enslavement, annexation, violence, and pernicious cultural works that destroy everyone they touch. He is a master at "interrogating the historical literature." That's where you take every historical monograph written before 1960 (but ignore original sources), tie them to a chair in the faculty lounge and torture them until they spill their guts about how awful the United States is, was, and forever will be. It's like the torture and interrogation (called deconstructionism) the feminists perpetrate on novels of the 19th century, only more violent. You make the literature say things it would never even whisper if it weren't bound and beaten by faculty seeking tenure at any cost.

Melnick says it took five centuries to re-write and tear apart our history. Funny, I thought it was only about 40 years. My clock must be off. Whatever, he is extremely proud to be a part of the demolition team. He doesn't even like the terms "multiculturalism" and "diversity" and has no use for hyphens. I'm trying to imagine how this guy got tenure at a business college that lauds its ties to American and foreign business, and especially promotes entrepreneurship.

He even "interrogates" his own title, IMMIGRATION AND RACE RELATIONS. Even the word AND isn't safe when Melnick applies the electrodes to the private parts. I must say, I was impressed. I'd never seen that particular interrogation technique. He goes to great lengths to describe a Japanese American (no hyphen please) with sexual conflicts and fears about black men and his "internalized instruction manual for proper racial behavior. . .[and] colonization of his internal life."

It would be, in fact is, easy to make fun of Melnick, but this drivel and dribble is forming puddles on our college campuses. It's beyond puddles--it is a swamp, a cesspool.

It's possible that he and other academics are on the "anti-immigration" team of the far right. I mean, what Asian or South American would ever want to sell their soul for a nice car, some real estate, and a full tummy if they had to subject themselves to such a hateful culture?

I'm leaving soon for Finland and Russia. I have worked both in Slavic Studies and Latin American Studies--I've spent most of my employed years with foreigners and immigrants, and loved it and them. I have tremendous admiration for people who rebuild their lives in another country. But I'm not a world traveler. At my other, other blog I wrote about my trip clothes.

"This trip will be quite international. Most of these clothes were made in China and Mexico, however, in looking over the tags, I also saw Costa Rica, Lesotho, Australia, Ukraine, Vietnam, El Salvado, Cambodia and Bangladesh. Hey, better there than here if workers are being shipped in containers to work in sweatshops or coyoted across the border. Trade agreements will keep potential illegals in their home countries (instead of joining labor unions here and becoming democrats). If they are going to take American jobs, better to do it there."

Sure, you can say the Pledge of Allegiance; it's not a government document and was actually first written for a children's magazine by Francis Bellamy, A Christian Socialist.

But could you say or even read and commit to the Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America?

Oath:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

According to chapter 2, "Naturalization and nationality" in Companion to American Immigration the right to naturalize recognized in the U.S. Constitution represented a conscious repudiation of feudal subjectship when individuals were bound without their consent to sovereign overlords and states they ruled. The Articles of Confederation left citizenship up to the individual states, however the U.S. Constitution empowered the federal government to establish naturalization (Article 1, Sec. 8).

A new oath of allegiance was being planned for 2003, but the CIS came under heavy criticism for not allowing enough time for public debate. I would guess that following on the heels of the demonstrations by illegals held in May, the public discourse if held in 2006 would not be kind to diluting this oath.

There are many Americans living abroad for many years who would never be able to say this oath if it were required for coming back. Not that they want to (return), but the country in which they reside probably won't allow them to become citizens (few countries make it as easy as the U.S. and Canada), and they don't want to be stateless.

Because tomorrow is the Fourth of July, the Cleveland Plain Dealer carried small op-eds about the meaning of freedom, apparently publishing submitted essays. Mary Nguyen wrote that her parents were immigrants from Vietnam--"there hasn't been one conversation about my future that hasn't included the fact that they left their entire families, their entire lives, behind so their children could have freedom in America." Her parents dedicated their lives to raising 6 children to give them the finest education they could afford. Now, she says, she has the freedom and opportunity to fail, falter or learn.

I don't know how old Mary is, but she will always be older and wiser than another woman whose essay seemed to focus on a "watershed" event in her life--Angela Davis' afro. To her, freedom was wearing her hair any way but straightened--braided, natural, or blonde. Yikes.

That may have been the shallowest essay on the meaning of freedom I've ever read, and why we need immigrants (legal) to renew our faith.

Cross posted at Collecting My Thoughts.

The U.S. government doesn't track illegals--if it did, it might have to send them home. Some may get counted during the census or border patrol may estimate, and the states like that, but there is no official way to know except to use the figures provided by various foundations and surveys, like Pew Hispanic and the New Immigrant Survey which actually interviews immigrants regardless of their legal status or country of origin.

However, we do know this. Immigrants, legal and illegal, go where they know people who know people, where they have ethnic food, religion and entertainment, and they go where their language is spoken. When my great-grandfather moved from PA to IL in 1850 (he was on his way to the California gold rush, but didn't make it) he settled where people from Adams Co., PA had already settled. If your midwestern community helped a Vietnamese family settle in the 1970s or 80s, they probably moved after a brief time to be with others like themselves.

Here are the top six states for foreign born--this is where you'll also find the illegals (in my opinion). 2000 census, people aged 25 and over, here before 1995, % of distribution. Keep in mind this is foreign-born. It includes all those refugees from Communism who came here after WWII, not just people who've crossed the Rio Grande.

California, 30.98% [blue]
New York 13.95% [blue]
Florida, 8.7% [barely red--few percentage points]
Texas 8.65% [red]
New Jersey 4.91% [blue]
Illinois 4.9% [blue]

These 6 states account for 69% of the foreign born population in the United States (with 29% of all foreign born U.S. residents living in California). Immigrants in California and Florida, two states with the highest number of Mexican, Caribbean and Latin American concentrations, are much less likely to move out of these states than are native-born, and less likely to move if they only speak Spanish. Immigrants who know English are more mobile--both geographically and economically.

Two political red flags (no pun) here. First, blue states have a huge stake in the Senate bill which would legalize millions of workers flooding the country with their relatives. Florida could really be called a swing state. The Left is investing very heavily there and needs more voters--and who better than the newly amenesticized--especially if they aren't literate? Only because the Cuban-Americans hate Castro and are upwardly mobile, do they have a different horse in this race. California, NY, NJ and IL need po' folk who need the pols at the polls.

Second, bi-lingual education is a disaster for children who could break out of the home language trap. But you'll continue to see leftist educators pushing it because it helps their political agenda. Yes, it is very nice to know two or three languages, even four might be nice, but only if you know one of them really well, and that one is the English language--a ticket to success in the U.S.

All data from "Companion to American Immigration" (Blackwell, 2006), primarily Chap.14 on residential and mobility patterns, and Chap.23, education.

Check here for the various ways the left sees the maps of the 2004 election--scroll down.

The failures of Mexico’s government fuel illegal immigration.

By Deroy Murdock

"Mexican politicians are the cheekiest participants in America’s immigration debate. South of the border, officials consider it Uncle Sam’s duty to nurture Mexico’s poor. The U.S., their reasoning goes, should accept even more illegal Mexican immigrants. Far be it from Mexico’s leaders to improve conditions below the Rio Grande so that their constituents might stay home."

"Using Economist Intelligence Unit data, [Alberto] Saracho found that, between 1987 and 2004, manufacturing productivity grew 183.3 percent in Chile, 196.6 percent in South Korea, and 307.6 percent in China. Meanwhile, like a tequila-soaked worm, Mexico advanced 2.7 percent."

Read the whole story here.

There's a lot of debate about the goals, purpose and successes of bi-lingual education. While the experts and politicans sort it through, the children suffer. I wonder how many who received it, thus hampering their ability to understand and become fluent in English, were able to read this:

USCIS Warns of Potential for Immigration Fraud [April 7, 2006]

Washington, D.C.– Although Congress has been debating immigration legislation, all customers* should be advised that currently no temporary worker program exists for aliens unlawfully present in the United States. Congress has not passed any legislation that would create a temporary worker program. Therefore, there are no benefits currently available because this program does not exist. Customers* should not pay any fees or fines to any person or organization claiming they can help apply for or receive benefits for a temporary worker program. Be wary of persons or organizations that claim they can assist in applying for benefits that do not exist.

*As far as I can tell, a "customer" in this sense is anyone who's had reason to contact the Citizenship and Immigration Services.