I've always found that the dominant anti-immigrant narrative in this country -- despite paens to the great mythical "melting pot" I read in my grade-school social studies textbooks -- is that immigrants take. They come here to take our jobs. They take up social services. They take formerly pristine street corners and make them look dirty by standing around looking for work. They take the money they earn back home rather than keep it in the local community. These are the things I hear repeated on crap cable shows like Glenn Beck's, or when I sit down to dinner with my conservative relatives.
It's also a theme that popped up a lot when I was doing some reporting several years ago in a small town -- Milan, Missouri -- where more than 50% of the 1,000 or so residents were Latino immigrants, due to the opening of a pork processing plant. The fascinating thing about Milan (pronounced MY-lan, not Mi-LAN like the city in Italy) was that, prior to the pork plant opening and the influx of immigrants, the town was basically dead. A small chicken processor was there, providing jobs for a few hundred residents, but the town was clearly in decline. And while it was by no means a seamless transition from a town of 500 mostly white folks to a town of 1,000 that was half white long-time residents and half Latino immigrants, it was undeniable that Milan was more alive and more vibrant because of its new residents -- despite what some of the white folks said about the immigrants "taking" resources from their community.
This narrative wasn't in the forefront of my mind as I watched the news unfold about the immigration raids in Postville, Iowa last May. But an article in my hometown paper, as well as this recent article from Mother Jones, on Postville nearly one year later, make really clear how screwed up the "immigrants take from our communities" narrative really is.
Indeed, the 389 arrests eliminated more than one-third of the meatpacker's workforce and nearly one-fifth of the town's population. It also prompted an exodus of hundreds more Hispanic residents who were either afraid of being targeted or simply opted to escape the town's inevitable tailspin. Postville's businesses began to suffer almost immediately. Even the Wal-Mart in Decorah, a half-hour away, called Postville mayor Robert Penrod with concerns about the economic impact. Penrod, who stepped down as mayor this month, can recall an eerie calm settling over the town, as though it were part of some Twilight Zone episode. "Before, it was all hustle bustle, and you'd see people walking up and down the streets and driving and listening to music," he told me. "Then all of a sudden, boom! I mean nobody was walking the streets."
I followed the stories of the separated families and the deplorable detention practices in the wake of the raid. Immigrants themselves were the most violently affected by the ICE raid, without question, and it's important to keep them -- as human beings, as people who contribute not just to our economy but to our communities -- at the center of the conversation. But it's also helpful to think of this holistically, as an issue in which everyone who lives in America, immigrant or not, has a serious stake. Honestly, it never occurred to me that something horrible was happening to everyone in Postville and the surrounding area.
We might acknowledge in big, sweeping terms that our economy runs on immigrant labor. But because people with anti-immigrant views are so good at focusing the conversation on "those outsiders who are taking our jobs," we don't often see stories like this one told. The story of small towns in places like Iowa and Missouri suffering in the absence of immigrants. The story of immigrants not taking, but giving life to their adopted communities.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Immigration: Who gives, who takes?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12707
From the time people were first beckoned by Lady Liberty's torch to come here from Europe, it was always with a view to better their lives. In previous times, there were quotas on how many people could join in our melting pot. This is because there has always been a wide consensus that immigration needs to be controlled, for a variety of sound policy reasons, including the size of our economy. The problem today is that the laws have not been enforced, a lot of good people are here illegally now, and the issue of how best to control immigration has taken on moralistic tones. Some don't want any more "foreigners" and others spout elitist views deriding those those who want to control immigration.
The answer is very simple: enact a law that we can live with and actually enforce, and just enforce it. Opening the borders has never been the solution, but neither has erecting our own version of the Berlin Wall.
Did you read the piece? The argument is that our conception of immigrants taking from society is flawed. When you said, "a lot of good people are here illegally," you totally missed the point. We need to stop thinking of immigration as charity to poor brown people, because we are profiting from it.
Also, enforcement of laws isn't always important or good. Laws exist for a reason, like societal welfare or public safety. Laws, just laws even, can be broken without affecting the value they are meant to uphold. Furthermore, enforcement of immigration laws has definite harms and procedural problems. It unfairly targets PoC and the less fortunate. (I'm sure you think of illegal immigration as running across a fence, but it's way easier to take a vacation and never leave. But Europeans on 10-year vacations aren't targetted.) This leads to racial and class-based animosity, which I would consider a bigger problem than immigration.
Saying "enact a law" is a bit oversimplified and naive in my opinion. There is no "one law" that deals with immigration. In fact, it's not even a misdemeanor to cross the border. It's a civil violation. The only reason that so many migrants are now jailed by ICE is because DHS is cheating and denying them rights and criminalizing them by charging them with fraud and other criminal charges, running around the actual civil process to shuffle them into the growing detention industry.
And the reason a moral tone needed to come to the dialogue is because people are being exploited and harmed and hurt, too many are apathetic and misinformed while at the same time benefitting from all the work and labor and goods and that is WRONG.
Kudos Ann!
I work as an immigrant advocate and the myth that immigrants somehow take from the communities that they live in is one of the most common I encounter.
I think the story of Postville, and countless other communities that have been traumatized by ICE raids, speak volumes about how scapegoating immigrants is having negative consequences on American communities.
Immigrants - both documents and undocumented- put into the system in countless ways (paying rent, paying state and local taxes on food, restaurants, etc). Undocumented immigrants are not (though people don't seem to get this) entitled to benefits such as food stamps, welfare, social security. There are even restrictions for legal immigrants to access those benefits.
The bottom line is that our immigration system sucks right now. Picking on the most vulnerable members of our society isn't going to solve any issue. We don't need more helicopters, SWAT teams, or broken families. We need to change the system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sei-eEjy4g
MIA wrote this song about this very topic- about the idea that all immigrants want to do is come here to take our money and commit crime..
I doubt that the first thing on her mind was people coming "here" as in America, considering the fact she's from England/Sri Lanka, and she wasn't allowed into the US until 2006. I dunno, I won't pretend that my way of thinking isn't as equally US-centric. Just a thought.
Yeah this is a tough one both politically and policy-wise. While its well documented that immigrants contribute much more to the economy than they take, there is a strong perception that immigrants come here for social services. Even though immigrants (even legal ones) are ineligible for social services. There are also nativistic comments made about immigrants "changing" America (never mind that America is itself a nation of immigrants). Its easy enough for college educated, white collar workers to dismiss these concerns.
The hard part about this--and the reason neither political party has the will to fix it--comes if you're a blue collar worker who actually does find themselves competing with immigrants for work. For, in fact, that's what happening. 12M illegal workers will impact the labor pool & wages, and it will impact precisely those lower income Americans who already face the stiffest struggles. You can't find a non-Hispanic bus boy in Texas. So why would the "blue collar" wing of the Democratic Party care? And even though the "Chamber of Commerce" wing of the Republican Party is eager to legalize immigrants, the nativistic wing of the Republican Party couldn't be further away on the issue.
While I lean toward legalizing existing immigrants I don't deny this is a significant issue with serious ramifications for the bottom rungs of the economic ladder. One other thing, my hometown has "browned" significantly in the last 5 years and while I welcome the 20 new taquerias in the neighborhood, its not hard to see why some people dislike the change: its the passing of their world. Its startling even to me.
True. Though it must have been pretty startling too, when the US stole half of Mexico's land. And also startling to the campesinos living on it who were suddenly told they were now beholden to US law, which has been abusing them for a long, long time. Pushing them off their lands, and eventually actions of ours have pushed them out of their means of making al iving. (NAFTA, etc). I dont' say this to minimize the feelings and experience of whites who get shocked to see la cultura cambando, just to add back to the conversation what the US's policies have set up in our minds in terms of whose culture is changing, and what it changed from. "Holistic" is a good word, and I think it should include temporal and geographical issues as well.
I definitely think it's true that a lot of people jump straight to the conclusion that illegal immigrants are like leeches sucking the blood from our sociey without considering any evidence.
And it's also true that immigrants can bolster and even help create small communities accross rural areas. But so can Wal-Mart, and that doesn't necessarly make them a net positive effect on our country.
Illegal immigrants have a different effect when considered en masse in very large communities, like Dallas where I live. Their presence - while certainly positive in many ways on the economy - is also literally crippling public school systems, hospitals (several of which have gone bankrupt because of it) and other social welfare services here, and in other cities dominated by immigrants such as LA. Even nonprofits are overwhelmed with assisting these people - many of whom actually don't have viable work and don't speak any English.
I'm not arguing that illegal immigrants are all good or all bad - and that point probably doesn't even matter anyway, since they are here to stay. But I do think it's important to look at the big picture and realize that while one small town might be better off because of the contributions of illegal immigrants, that doesn't necessarily translate to the nation as a whole.
Meg,
I agree with you and I don't.
I agree that these immigrants are here to stay. Deporting 12 million people is an absurd and revolting proposition which no one -save a small, but loud, fringe group of xenophobic activists in this country- thinks is a good idea.
But I still find it hard to believe that as American's, in a country built by the sweat of generations of immigrants, we still debate weather immigrants are good for our growth as a country.
In the 1800's we put down the Chinese immigrants. We put quotas on the number of them that could enter the country (eventually forbidding it). Now we have have thriving Chinese communities across the country that make up the culture centers of cities like LA, San Francisco, New York, etc.
At the turn of the century we put down Italians. Lambasted them for not learning English fast enough. We called them Mafiosos. Now we're a country proud of our Italian-American heritage. Can you imagine New York without any Italian influence?
Then we put down the Irish. Now we celebrate St. Patrick's day in Chicago and New York every year by turning river's green.
Can you imagine America without immigrants?
Each generation pushes back on these immigrants coming in, but each time they add to the fabric of America. Their presence creates jobs, and pushes our economic engine forward.
What needs fixing is not the immigrants, but our broken FEDERAL immigration system that saddles states (i.e. schools and hospitals) with the costs failing policies.
It is childs play to knock down the idea of immigrants, even ones here illegaly, are taking from us.
Just ask which taxes, specifically, are not being paid. Income taxes? No, the IRS collects tens of billions of dollars per year from "illegals." Think about it. Hundreds of people working on one SSN. The gov't keeps all the witholding.
And so on. Property taxes? Don't landlords include that in the rent? I would. Excise taxes? Those are hard to avoid. Ditto for sales taxes.
One other very large point. I am a Gen-X'r. I, and others like me, in our tiny generation, have a few *tens of millions* of Baby Boomers to put through retirement. The more immigrants we have, the more workers we have per Baby Boomer retiree. That settles the matter as far as I'm concerned.
I am pleased that this issue is getting some space here on Feministing.
As someone who works with the Latino community I am sick and tired of seeing all that they give our country as a whole and how little credit they get for it.
People fail to realize how much we depend on this labor and how much we as a society take from these immigrants.
Thanks again for posting about this.
Thank you Ann.
I guess you didn't like my posting of March 28 @ 3:53 so I assume you didn't like what I said. In case you missed it, here it is again:
It may come as a surprise to you but the term “immigrant” defines people who came to America legally. The term “illegal immigrant” is oxymoronic and the term “legal immigrant” is redundant. Often hidden behind the term “immigrant,” is an illegal alien. It means neither Hispanic nor Latino.
“Hispanic” is an American term derived from the Spanish word Hispanohablantes, which merely means "Spanish speaker" encompassing Spain, The Philippines, et al. “Latino” also is an American term derived in 1945 from the term Latinoamericano or Latin-American and it denotes citizenship the same way that the terms Black and Amerind denote citizenship.
Libs & mods commingle illegal aliens with these three groups to create confusion and enhance illegal alien survival where they're not wanted. It’s the same way that fish enhance survival by schooling. Such amorphy makes it difficult to focus on just one. Obscured is the fact that illegal aliens are neither citizens nor immigrants. It’s insulting to immigrants, Latinos and Hispanics alike. But libs & mods hate any clarification because it removes the Mexican camouflage. Perhaps, deep down, you consider the term “Mexican” offensive.
"Immigrant" in common use today simply means people who migrate across borders. I prefer "migrant" myself, as it highlights the constant motion across the globe that all peoples do. And have always done.
"Hispanic" is a term born from the Nixon administration.
It's really hard to say what a term "denotes" without more qualification. There is no empirical way of knowing this. Many people use words differently, and this is definitely the case with words such as these, which pertain to identity and origin and rights.
People wouldnt latch on to "illegal alien" so much if in their minds it didnt immediately stink of crime and grossness and otherliness. The only ones who latch onto it intend these flavors, as far as I'm concerned.
There's something wrong with the statement our economy depends on the labor of illegal immigrants.......IT IS THE FACT THAT IT IS LABOR THAT EXPLOITS HUMAN BEINGS.
That's as useless as the slave states arguing that their economy depended on slave labor......
Face it folks, it is the exploitation of human beings and it needs to be addressed.
It hurts single mothers...minority americans......those having the toughest time....how can you support this? It has frozen wages and only makes those who exploit human beings richer....it doesn't have a real advantage to regular folk.
Amnesty didn't work in 1986 and it won't work now...
Here in the greater Phoenix area, one thing does appear to be reducing the problem...a sagging economy...
Make criminals of those who built this slavery based economy you all sing the praises of.
It's a business folks......the business of human exploitation. Go after the exploiters...and enforce the law.