|
July 31, 2010
Race & Immigration
By Tom Ehrich
As immigration moves center-stage for November elections, many will fixate on the word “illegal.”
It’s a safe word -- who would ever vote for illegality? “Illegal” presents a visceral issue as high-minded civic principle. It’s code, like “states’ rights” during the civil rights era and accusations of “socialism” and “communism” thrown at anyone who advocated restraint on the greedy.
The reality, of course, is that we haven’t suddenly become a nation of legal scholars. If civic principle were at stake, we would be quoting Emma Lazarus’ words posted next to the Statue of Liberty.
No, Americans resort to code when their guts are churning but they are embarrassed by their emotions or want to attack without exposing themselves to risk. Code is for cowards.
Let’s be honest. This is about the “browning” of America. A nation whose self-perception has been white and European now finds itself truly a “melting pot.”
In New York City, where I live, whites are now officially a minority. The same is true in large swaths of the South and Southwest and in many Northern cities. Non-whites are the fastest growing portion of the US population. It’s an historic watershed.
So, let’s talk about it. Let’s discuss immigration -- the opening or closing of America’s borders to anyone not already here. Let’s discuss the “browning” of America -- is something fundamental to the national identity or national interest lost when whites are no longer the majority?
No phony legal niceties. No code words. No maneuvering of opponents into seeming to affirm bad things like illegality or Gestapo tactics.
Let’s just name it. Without necessarily being filled with racial hatred, many whites wonder what will happen to a nation dominated by people other than themselves. Many non-whites wonder if whites will ever just accept them as people, not as the dreaded “other.”
 Is something fundamental lost or gained when non-whites filter into American life at all levels, not just government, athletics and entertainment? When non-white participation ceases to be a token but becomes the dominant fact, what else needs to change or not change? Can we shift our national profile without a violent upheaval, as the English and French also are wondering?
That discussion of race and immigration is long overdue. We’ve been avoiding it for decades. Despite the shrieking of candidates and commentators, I sense we are ready for it. Not because race and immigration have suddenly imperiled the nation, but because fundamental ideals are at stake and people with legitimate concerns are losing their voice in the shouting.
Let’s ask New Yorkers if life has gotten worse or more dangerous as the racial balance has shifted? That isn’t what I see in living here. But let’s talk about it.
Let’s ask Arizonans if being a conduit for illegals has undermined their state. Some might legitimately believe it has. That’s worth hearing.
Let’s ask every vulnerable minority in America -- from persons with disabilities to workers older than 55 to the obese and unattractive -- if they want a nation that can target any segment for repression.
Let’s talk about who we are and what we want our national experiment in democracy to be.
This is too important to be left to politicians and talking heads. We have the tools for such a debate -- social media, church basements, family meals -- and it certainly would be in our best interests to consider what kind of nation we want to be.
Follow me on Twitter @tomehrich. Facebook at tom.ehrich. Watch for a new daily update on my writing and thinking.
|
Discuss
