The post-election soul searching from Republicans has made one thing clear: there is a sea change in the conservative attitude toward immigration. Conservatives were always split on this issue (support for immigrants and immigration reform is certainly nothing new here in the pages of COMMENTARY), but there has been vocal and influential grassroots opposition to immigration reform. So it is most welcome that after a historic drubbing by the growing Hispanic vote, Republicans have “evolved,” to use the president’s term.
Immigration reform and taking a more welcoming attitude toward immigrants makes sense on every level–economically, morally, culturally, etc. But at the risk of being accused of looking a gift horse in the mouth, I think something needs to be said about the way this argument is taking shape, with particular emphasis on the newfound expression of support for Hispanic immigration on the right. As I said, there are many logical reasons to welcome immigrants and to support immigration reform. But conservatives who have previously opposed it and are now admitting that cynical electoral considerations are driving their evolution are making an understandable, but still devastating, mistake.
The way that conservatives talk about immigration reform must be reformed as well. They must understand that there is now a cultural suspicion of the right on the part of a large segment of the immigrant population, especially Latinos, and for good reason. Immigrants are well aware of the debate over immigration here. And they remember–and will for some time–that when they arrived here with nothing but the clothes on their back, desperate for a chance at a better life for themselves and their children, one party said “come on in” and the other said “turn around and go back.”
Simply supporting immigration reform is not going to do away with this, especially if people describe Latino immigrants as some kind of demographic setback they must alleviate in order to win elections. That’s dehumanizing too. Immigration to the United States creates jobs, and many immigrants–more if the DREAM Act were to pass–are willing to first join the army and risk their lives in defense of this country in order to “earn” citizenship.
Additionally, there is of course the moral problem of punishing children whose parents moved here or of breaking up families. But there is another element to this. The United States doesn’t have nearly the problem with black-market goods that other, more highly regulated countries have, because our government meddles less (though still too much) and therefore does less to distort markets than other, nominally market economies. (Think Europe today, or Yeltsin’s Russia.)
Yet we have one major black market: labor. The free market tells us that we need a certain amount of labor at certain prices. Our current employment and immigration laws preclude this. But you can’t stop the market so easily in a globalized world. So we developed something of a black market in labor, which means a black market in laborers. So in addition to the other challenges faced by new immigrants, there is often a cloud of suspicion and illegality that hangs over their heads. I’m not suggesting we shouldn’t have laws and enforce them. But it’s important to understand the psychological toll this can take.
It is therefore imperative that a bit of compassion accompanies the cold hard intellectual logic of the right’s transformation on immigration. Cynicism and tokenism will not be much less offensive to immigrants than what came before.
"The post-election soul searching from Republicans has made one thing clear: there is a sea change in the conservative attitude toward immigration." n nWhat? There's no evidence of a "sea change"- or any significant change- among conservatives at all. The only prominent GOPer claiming to have "evolved" on the issue is Hannity, a notorious establishment hack. We'll see how many grassroots conservatives follow him- I predict very few.
It's interesting that the conversation seems to forget that we have those little things called laws. What's irritating is that these illegal immigrants seem to think that those laws shouldn't apply to them. maybe if they didn't come here by breaking laws and then demanding free stuff, they would be seen in a different light.
Seth, you are so right and, if your argument is ignored, conservatives will do so at their electoral peril. I just can't understand how and why many Commentary readers will disagree with what you're saying. Many are probably Jewish. Just think how sensitive their Bubbe, Zayde or Tante have been over how someone speaks about Jews. Think how offended, perhaps without justification, they would become if someone spoke of "Jews," rather than "Jewish people." Unless you are a teenager, I can't believe you haven't experienced such sensitivity within your families. It's no different from how Latinos and other more recent immigrant groups feel and interpret, to them, insensitive and hostile formulations. I don't believe that changing rhetoric on the immigration issue is going to cause a groundswell of Latino votes for Republicans. But it's the first place to begin.
There is a difference between those who came here from Europe or Asia seeking to make a new life and those who would effectively reverse the results of the Mexican-American War with the blessing of Democrats hungry for votes and establishment Republicans desirous of cheap labor. I call it Santa Ana’s Revenge.
A business I often patronize just handed out a calendar which not only uses English as a second language but lists more Mexican national holidays than American ones. I may have to put up with it now that Obama has been re-elected, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it.
Incidentally I always said “Jews.”
Let's not fool ourselves. These people are not open-minded conservative Hispanics. They're Democrats. You can toady to them all you want. They're going to take all the free stuff and your sycophantic antics and vote against you. Again.
Latino illegal immigrants are usually from countries hostile toward economic freedom. They instinctively gravitate to big government welfare programs. This is especially true if the illegitimacy rate is high! Democrats inevitably will benefit from illegal immigration. There is no way to prevent the growth of socialism if these people become citizens. I also have little problem in allowing the children of these illegal to earn citizenship by serving in the military. None whatsoever. This has long been my position.
The laws that favor illegal immigration are the laws that create the welfare state. When people who have broken the law to get here (unlike the ancestors of the people who participate in this site) receive food, housing, clothing, medicine, education, etc. (unlike the ancestors of the people who participate in this site) then employment and immigration laws have little bearing on their cynical calculations. Comments above invoke the feelings of our grandparents. My nearly penniless grandfather sponsored Jews fleeing Germany in the 30s by certifying that he would not allow them to become wards of the state. Now I have to pay the freight for criminals (and their offspring) though I never agreed to (indeed, avidly opposed) their arrival. You want to fix immigration? Enforce the immigration laws and end welfare. You say you want to humanize people? Let them earn an honest living and obey the law. Nothing is more humanizing. Of course, in our fully Marxist state with a ruling party dedicated to further economic degradation, this will not happen. We are doomed. I'm sad to see this site greasing the skids with left wing academic psycho-babble. Dehumanizing? I feel dehumanized when I look at my paycheck, and see I am being enslaved…