E-mail
Print
Radical presumption
How radicals and extremists polarized the immigration debate
By Johanan Raatz
The radicals did more to feed racism and stereotypes about Latinos than any xenophobe could ever hope to.
When it comes to immigration most Americans are in agreement on what needs to be done. Polls conducted last year by the Wall Street Journal show that 79 percent of Americans agree with giving undocumented illegals temporary work visas, and another 65 percent want a border fence constructed. As for my own opinion, I’m pretty moderate when it comes to immigration and tend to agree with the majority of Americans.
It seems that with this large scale support for common sense measures the immigration debate could have been settled a while ago. So what exactly happened that transformed it into such an intractable and contentious issue?
Well, if we rewind a couple of years we can pin down the point when it all became so polarized. It all started on May 1, 2006. On May Day two years ago a variety of leftist organizations, such as Council of La Raza and MEChA, organized thousands of undocumented illegals in mass demonstrations. After a debate that could have been easily resolved from the center with pretty much everyone happy, things quickly became very polarized.
Why was this? By looking at the demands of the radicals it becomes pretty obvious why. What the radical organizations spearheading the movement were demanding was way out of the mainstream; in fact, it was downright presumptuous.
First of all, they demanded that undocumented illegals be given citizens’ benefits. Now I’m fine with being egalitarian and letting them stay in the country, and I understand why they would want to come here. However, it takes an awful lot of nerve to come into someone’s country without permission and then start to demand things. I mean, who do these people think they are?
This was not an isolated incident, though. The radical organizations running the movement made many other outrageous demands. For example, a smaller but still significant movement was afoot to demand that the U.S. give parts of its land to Mexico. Additionally, they demanded that undocumented illegals be given the right to vote even though they were not citizens.
Then there was the undercurrent of anti-Americanism running through the demonstrations. One would think that if the radicals wanted to make their case that undocumented illegals should be allowed to stay in America then they would not want to express hostility towards America.
However, that is exactly what many of them did. Protestors flew Mexican flags over American flags or flew American flags upside down. Many of them suggested that Americans did not have a legitimate right to be here. Others carried portraits of anti-American terrorist Che Guevara, celebrating him as a hero.
Once all had been said and done the debate was too far gone to be solved from the center. Naturally, many right-wing talk show hosts vigorously denounced the demonstrations. Once the heated rhetoric started to appear on both sides the debate became hopelessly polarized.
Sadly, the organizations, by pretending to speak for the Hispanic community, damaged the reputation of many decent hard-working Hispanics. The radicals did more to feed racism and stereotypes about Latinos than any xenophobe could ever hope to.
To resolve this issue we need to make people understand these radicals do not speak for the whole of the Hispanic community. Maybe we could teach the radicals a lesson or two in civility. If the radicals and extremists can be extricated from the debate perhaps the issue can finally be resolved at its center, and the wishes of the American people can be enacted.
> Comments
_ on Sep 15, 2008 at 10:33 PM:
"did more to feed racism and stereotypes about Latinos than any xenophobe could ever hope to."
Well at least you still have hope.
Johanan on Sep 16, 2008 at 12:37 PM:
"Well at least you still have hope."
Thank you.