7/30/2015 -
Victor Davis Hanson
Can we be honest about illegal immigration? It is a common challenge to almost every advanced Western country
that is adjacent to poorer nations.
American employers and ethnic activists have long colluded to
weaken border enforcement and render immigration law meaningless. The former
wanted greater profits from cheaper labor, the latter wished more political
clout for themselves.
Mexico conspired, too. It received billions of easy dollars in
remittances from its expatriates in America. Mexico had few qualms about
letting millions of its own citizens illegally cross its northern border into
the United States -- even though the Mexican government would never tolerate
millions of Central Americans illegally crossing the border to become permanent
residents of Mexico.
For better or worse, illegal immigration is tied to race and
ethnicity. No doubt, ignorant racism drives some to oppose illegal immigration.
But by the same token, the advocates of open borders, many of them with strong
ties to Mexico, would not be so energized about the issue if hundreds of thousands
of Europeans or Africans were entering the U.S. illegally each year.
There is too often a surreal disconnect about the perception of
the U.S. in the immigration debate.
Millions, we sometimes forget, are fleeing from the
authoritarianism, racism, corruption and class oppression of Mexico. They have
voted with their feet to reject that model and to choose a completely different
-- and often antithetical -- economic, social, cultural and political paradigm
in the United States. Somehow that bothersome fact is lost in the habitual
criticism of a hospitable and magnanimous America.
Then there is the matter of law. America went to war over the
Confederate states' nullification of federal laws. A century and a half later,
do we really want hundreds of sanctuary cities, each declaring irrelevant
certain federal laws that they find bothersome?
For every left-wing city that declares immigration statutes
inoperative, a right-wing counterpart might do the same with the Endangered
Species Act, gun registration laws, affirmative action or gay marriage. The
result would be chaos and anarchy, not compassion.
Controversy has arisen over the number of undocumented immigrants
who have committed felonies or serious misdemeanors, such as the Mexican
national -- a repeat felon and deportee -- recently charged with the fatal
shooting of a young woman in San Francisco. But the furor begs the question:
Why would any guest violate the rules of his host? And why is the data on such
violations so hard to come by and so prone to controversy?
Either the number of undocumented immigrants who commit crimes is
so vast that no one knows the extent of the problem, or there are political
hurdles in determining that number -- or drawing politically incorrect
conclusions from it.
We should not minimize criminality. Creating a false identity,
using a fraudulent Social Security number and knowingly filing inaccurate
federal forms are serious felonies for most Americans. They are neither minor
infractions nor simply the innocuous wages of living in the shadows, but
undermine the sinews of a society.
Numbers also count. When millions come to a country illegally,
integration breaks down and tribalism takes over. Do we really want permanent
Balkanized ethnic lobbies, frozen in amber -- another century of a monolithic
Asian, white or Latino vote? Are Americans to fragment even more, as they
collectively sigh, "If they vote predictably along ethnic lines, I guess I
should, too"?
President Obama talks grandly of "immigration reform."
But he apparently does not mean what most Americans would assume from that
faddish catchphrase.
Reform should first include strict enforcement of the border. A
new, ethnically blind immigration system would select from among applicants
based on skill sets and education, and consider candidates from all over the
world -- not on the basis of ethnic identity or proximity to the border.
Immediate and lasting deportation would ensue for those who
committed crimes or cynically chose to receive public assistance rather than
work while here illegally.
Many Americans are in favor of offering a path to legal residence
to those undocumented immigrants who have long lived and worked in the U.S. and
have crime-free records -- after they pay a fine for breaking federal law and
then wait patiently in line while the legal process plays out -- as long as the
border is sealed to prevent future illegal immigration.
If some newly legal residents wished to become full-fledged
citizens, then they could pass citizenship and English tests and assimilate
into the American body politic.
Somehow I doubt that this fair, reasonable process is what the
president really wants.
