Reporter Jose Antonio Vargas wrote a moving piece for the New York Times magazine about his status as an undocumented immigrant. One hope is that his story might improve the tone and substance of media coverage of immigration; Vargas has suggested as much, at one point tweeting this message:
Undocumented Immigrant trending. So let’s drop “Illegal” and “Alien.” No person is illegal or an alien.
His story has received a tremendous amount of media attention. But as Monica Novoa pointed out at ColorLines, too much coverage has dwelt on Vargas’ “illegal” status:
Vargas’ story has drawn enormous media attention and drove “undocumented immigrant” up to a top-trending term on Twitter yesterday. But it’s a shame that in the dissection and retelling of his story, a fine point has been lost on many of Vargas’ colleagues: He came out specifically as an undocumented immigrant and not as ‘illegal.’ The distinction is a central part of his story. He is rejecting a legally inaccurate, dehumanizing and racist label that helps to prop up an ignorant and limited immigration debate, along with all of the violence and unconstitutionality the concept of an ‘illegal’ human being engenders.
That brings us to his Sunday appearance on ABC‘s This Week. Check out their headline:
Language is a virus, and the core purpose of the corpress is to ensure we are all infected.
Un amigo Mexicano actually brought this issue to my attention almost a decade ago. It was a real eye-opener. “Illegal alien…” he commented, “I’m not from another planet…”
I thought about the connotation in those words and it stuck with me. We must choose our words wisely. It’s great Mr. Antonio told his story. Many props!
If a stranger enters your house without your permission, we would say that person entered your house illegally and is guilty of trespassing. The same logic applies to a county. If a stranger enters the country without permissionâ┚¬”Âin other words, documentation, that person has entered the country illegally. Why is it so hard to call a spade a spade? Moreover, why do people fail to see the difference between immigration and illegal immigration? Why pretend that to oppose the latter is to oppose the former? This type of rhetoric does nothing but obstruct debate over an important issue.
American usage of English allows the term illegal alien for those who break US Immigration Laws.
There is no confusion for those who accept this reality. Likewise the word ‘undocumented’ does not denote a man without a country or with no citizenship documents in his own country.
Americans also speak of illlegal gangster families, illegal businesses, illegal drug users, illegal professions, illegal sales, etc. Soory if you are confused by American English. All these illegal acts merit jail time. For further clarification check out the Immigration Laws in your country.
The “illegal” adjective is not only accurate, it is relevant and appropriate in the context of Vargas’s story and message. What is inappropriate is the negative connotation that the term “illegal” has.
Legality is a formality – it has no ethical standing (certainly not in a society which, like ours, is oligarchical and has its laws determined in an anti-democratic manner). There are many things that are legal and are reprehensible and should be illegalized, and there are many things that are illegal and should be legalized. The idea that all laws – just or unjust – must be obeyed should be rejected.
Vargas’s message is exactly that he is an illegal immigrant due to an unjust law. Mincing words does not serve the cause of the illegal immigrants.
This woman made me livid. If one steals, one is called a thief, and in other manners of lawbreaking the miscreants are called what they are. Breaking the immigration laws is illegal, and “illegal” alien is totally valid. I have nothing but praise for legal immigrants and am so tired of people like this who say one who objects to illegal immigrants is against all immigrants. This is totally untrue! We can tell the difference between legal and illegal actions; why should we mince words about it?
J.A. Vargas appearance on ABC’s Sunday This Week “debate” about the “melting pot” was a redeeiming feature. George Will’s comments were typically of the Samuel Huntington racist variety. With Michelle Rhee (Korean-American) on one side of him and Eric Dyson (Afrrican-American) on the other, Will extolled the supposed ethos of one-hundred years ago of the “Atlantic” immigrants who understood, he said they had to break the bond between their relationship with their new country and their old (european one).
Michelle Rhee’s ancestors would not have been allowed to immigrante one hundred years ago, due to the Chinese (read Asian) Exclusion Act of 1886. At the height of Jim Crow, migrating from Africa to Ellis Island, wouldn’t have been permitted.
Will’s reaffirmation of exclusionary racist immigration policies of the past, fits in with his characterization of “underdeveloped” Mexico. Tell that to the “Mexicans” who were in the U.S. before the Anglos (northern europeans) arrived, and those who have supplied the grunt work to build the Southwest U.S. megalopolises. And, of course no mention of who supplies the labor to get the harvests to feed the gustatory habits at those fancy Washington soirees Will, Amanpour, Jonathan Karl, and company attend. Latino agricultural field laborers (in their millions) were completely erased.
Altogether, a very one-sided account of U.S. immigration. Former Senator Mel Martinez, was there to play the Cuban-card on immigration, stating his “political” reasons for having immigrated.
He provided little voice about the complexity of Latino immigration to the U.S.
Somewhat ironically, over at Univision in S. Florida, that Latino “death-squad” network, Jorge Ramos was interviewing Rigoberta Menchu about her presidential aspirations in upcoming elections in Guatemala. Ms. Menchu mentioned the racism and genocide of the Guatemalan state in the past. That elicited no followup quetions from Ramos about those issues, who was more interested in Menchu’s opinon about documented genocidal killer Efraim Rios Montt’s wife’s political aspirations in Guatemala.
So it goes on both anglo and Latino channels. Very limited discussions and biased interviewers and commentators.
Good God call “them” whatever you like.Just catch “them” and chuck their butts back over the fence.
Illegal alien – bad term. Illegal immigrant – not much better. Undocumented immigrant – perhaps. Hopeful American – YES!
The vacuum that white America is holding this conversation in and that black Civil Rights “Leaders” are following is oxymoronic. First because it is presumed that white liberals believe in The Civil Rights Act and that black Civil Rights “leaders” marched and died for it. Well one of the things in that act was supposed to protect us from the ole boy network. Today that is called network hiring, which allows mostly white Americans to hire around black ones. Young black people don’t remember the struggle and they certainly don’t know what protections we were fighting for. Those who follow the old fools who have abandoned the very remedy they marched for, but today don’t remember have been bamboozled by “liberal” media. Whether it is a good ole boy or the network where white employers and illegal immigrants circumvent the system, we are still left out and behind and our unemployment numbers bear that out. Stop believing liberal white propaganda it isn’t FAIR it’s a narrative. And we can buy into it or we can say stop leading us around like you still own us. Illegal immigration does not help us it cuts into our economic and political power and we have no intention of supporting your continued assault on our community no matter how well intentioned you pretend or think you are. Ever wonder why all these liberal activist weren’t up in arms and running endless stories about the Coast Guard intercepting Haitians at sea during the Clinton years? Did they just discover poor people looking for a better life or is something else afoot?
Desnee
You are not reading the tea leaves or the census. Mexicans and latin Americans(lets just call them spanish speaking people)are not just edging out blacks in the minority/majority battle for all things “from the government” .They are swamping them.They will eclipse blacks in their minority role, while becoming the majority.Of course the only thing i see is a bigger nanny state and more sheeple.
The reason black “numbers “are still down I would lay at the feet of the democratic party that they vote for, who continues to impoverish them.
Of course we must blame white America.White America who’s biggest mistake was in giving one black man a job.The job of president.Now stop this racist class warfare nonsense.It really has run thin
Whole lot of Native Americans posting here today apparently. “Get out of my country”. Yeah right. What a bunch of ignorant right wing moonbats.
Right wing moonbats?(love that phrase).My country as in…….Legal tax paying American. Not theirs…… as in//// illegal immigrants.Illegal immigrants get the heave -ho back over the boarder.Legal immigrants stay,pay taxes,and enjoy this country.Really it is a simple concept.As far as native american…..for the most part they have been absorbed into our ever expanding DNA mix.So yes there are a whole lot of native Americans here.As blacks have gotten lighter.And Americans darker,native Americans have also lost racial purity.So be it.Of course with all due respect and apologies to Geranimo,sitting bull,Crazy horse and chief Joseph.Though what I am apologizing for I don’t know.My people came here in 1927.Far after many blacks and native Americans began the diversification process.
As far as native americanâ┚¬Ã‚¦..for the most part they have been absorbed into our ever expanding DNA mix…. Far after many blacks and native Americans began the diversification process.
______________________________________________
Wow. You make it sound so innocuous. I imagine those refugees on the Trail of Tears would be quite heartened to know that their whole ordeal was just part of the diversification process. Next you’re gonna tell me that the internment of Japanese-Americans was just a vacation. Race riots? Those were just hockey fights, eh?
On a larger note: I don’t get this “My ancestors were legal immigrants so I’m against illegal immigration.” Why and under what status my ancestors came here logically should have little bearing on what I think about the matter. Similarly, you sometimes hear the “My ancestors learned English, worked hard, paid taxes, and were proud to be Americans.” I don’t quite get that one either. OK, so immigrants today are different than they were at the time your ancestors got here. Lots of things are different from that time– whenever the heck it was.
And as for hardworking and paying taxes: well, I see a lot of what appear to be illegal immigrants doing some of the most backbreaking work there is and– if indeed they are illegal– I’m pretty sure they ain’t getting union wages. I’m willing to bet that having them as a source of cheap labor is somehow tied to the rather astonishing fact that our nation somehow has managed to grow wealth without a corresponding increase in the cost of food production, and without crises in whatever other industries now benefit from illegal immigrant labor.
If your ancestors came with the Irish influx, they came legally, all right. But it wasn’t some good-hearted gesture on the part of the US to welcome them with open arms. The country needed laborers at the time, so in came the Irish. I imagine the same thing holds true for many immigrant groups: they were legal because the US had need of the people coming. Nowadays, it seems like we’ve figured a way to reap the benefits of cheap immigrant labor and still hold it against the poor saps who provide it. Something about that don’t seem right to me.
And by the way: anyone know how many children of illegal immigrants wind up in the Armed Services? I don’t.
John I don’t disagree with a lot of what you wrote.I think without a doubt that our government allows this to a degree for the reasons you mentioned. And yes illegal immigration has some positives that are irrefutable. But we simply cannot have open boarders.We do not have the resources for such a thing today. And of course future security problems would also rule this out.We need to get a handle on it and decide as a people if we have boarders. And if we mean to enforce them.
I don’t mean to sound calloused regarding the historical plight of anyone. But I owe no apology for actions that took place in 1827 a century before my people came here from Scotland. They landed at Ellis and began the” melt “into the melting pot like millions of others.I was not alive during the Japanese internment….as far as race riots Im not sure what to say.Today i see the left fostering class warfare that is so akin to racial divides.I do what i can.On these blogs in fact.