Immigration Reform: From 'American Dream' to 'Latino Nightmare'
New America Media, Youth Commentary 
, Roy E. Hodgson, Posted: Jan 13, 2006
(4m 19s, mp3, 3.0MB) Download File
Editor's Note: A young man whose mother immigrated from Nicaragua looks at the immigration reform debate and finds frightening changes on the horizon.
SAN FRANCISCO--As a child of an immigrant woman turned U.S. citizen and as a Latino, I am keeping a close watch on all this talk about "immigration reform." In the past, politicians used to declare war on crime or drugs to get elected. Now they call for a crackdown on immigrants, and people I know could be in danger.
One absurd idea that has been thrown out there is denying U.S. citizenship to children born to illegal immigrants. I am proud to be a U.S. citizen, but I became a citizen by being born here. My mother had recently immigrated to this country thanks to the Reagan-backed Contra war in her country, Nicaragua. I believe that you should be a citizen of the country where you are born. If the United States, the leading country in the world, changes this policy, the rest of the world might follow suit. Citizenship would be denied to children who don't have any control of their parents' actions and whose parents are only seeking a better future for their children.
Another idea being talked about is building a high-tech fence to keep immigrants from entering the United States illegally. When I heard this I thought, "Are we in Israel?" In the Middle East there is constant violence and conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, so a wall was constructed to separate both peoples. But I have never read of any suicide bombings or attacks on American people by Mexican immigrants. The wall is being built simply to prevent people -- not just Mexicans but people from all over Latin America -- from entering this country. If it is built it will resemble the Berlin Wall, because on one side people will live in economic prosperity, and on the other, people will constantly try to cross.
Then there's the Sensenbrenner bill. This legislation would make it a felony to be an illegal alien and would make criminals of the people who support illegal aliens. I know several illegal aliens. Not all of them are saints, but not all of them are gang-bangers or thieves. But it wouldn't matter what kind of a person they are, because if they're illegal, then it will be illegal to kick it with them. Everyone should have the right to associate with whomever they choose. What are we supposed to do before we get to know someone -- ask them for their passport or green card?
If this bill become law, it's conceivable that the new INS, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, will raid Latin churches, seeking illegal aliens, or invade Taquerias or bars looking for foreigners. When 9/11 happened, people thought passing the "Patriot Act" was a good thing, but now look how far the U.S. government has abused this power. It's been recently discovered that they are tapping into international calls and e-mails.
What will happen if Sensenbrenner becomes law? How far will the government go to abuse this power? That's why I follow my mother's advice: "Think of the pros and cons before you act, because if you don't, you might make a decision you'll live to regret."
I have the good fortune to work for The Beat Within, a magazine of art and writing by young people incarcerated inside juvenile halls across the San Francisco Bay Area. Some youths write about their horrific journey just to come to this country. Many of these tales come from Honduran kids. They write about how, when they reach Mexico, they have to dodge gangs who rob them of their money and possessions. Women are raped by these gang members. They write about how many of their friends are crushed beneath freight trains on the way north. They write about how, when they reach the border, they've walked for days through the desert, sometimes without food or water.
If anything, they should be granted asylum for making such a death-defying trek just to come to a country where they are viewed as second-class and taken advantage of. This is the "Latino Nightmare" one has to endure before attempting to live the "American Dream."
If the United States would just stop interfering in other people's backyards, maybe these countries could prosper and people wouldn't have to leave their homelands. It's one thing for the United States to ensure democracy thrives in these countries, and another to force these countries' governments to conform to the United States' liking. I'm not a political scientist, but I know that a lot of Latin American countries are leaning to the left. They were already leaning to the left during the 1970s and '80s, before the United States crushed all these movements in the name of fighting "communism." To me, this new century's attempt to divert the leftist movement may be justified in the name of a new "ism": "terrorism."
The Statue of Liberty states: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" If this wall is built and these new laws passed, the Statue of Liberty should be sent back to France. It will be representing a lie.
Roy E. Hodgson, 20, works for The Beat Within, a writing program for incarcerated youth in the San Francisco Bay Area, and YO! Youth Outlook Multimedia. Both are PNS projects.
Page
1 of 1
|
User Comments
BE Brock on Jan 18, 2006 at 13:11:41 said:
"The Statue of Liberty states: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" If this wall is built and these new laws passed, the Statue of Liberty should be sent back to France. It will be representing a lie."
It's a silly little poem, not the intellectual product of our founding fathers for Chrissakes! Come to think of it, sending it back to France wouldn't be such a bad idea.
First, it would rile up the Muslims into more car burning and serve as a stark reminder about what happens when a nation lets its culture be numerically overwhelmed in the name of egalitarianism. Second, it would mean that the next generation of American kids wouldn't be served up that poem as some sort of basic, foundational tenet of Americanism. It isn't.
chuck curtis on Jan 17, 2006 at 11:02:32 said:
So, what's the solution? Unlimited immigration?
Latino Unido on Jan 16, 2006 at 03:12:44 said:
I agree with a lot of what the author said except with use of the Israeli Apartheid wall to distinguish situations. In contrast to what the writer alludes to, the Israeli Apartheid wall does indeed separate Palestinians from economic opportunity. Many of the Palestinian lands legally conferred post 1967 were cut off from Palestinian use with the barrier. In many ways we could say that this is reminiscent of the US imperialism in Mexico post 1848.
Jon David on Jan 15, 2006 at 03:20:48 said:
Majorities of IMMIGRANTS oppose illegal immigration. Being opposed to illegal immigration does not make one "anti-immigrant." Following Mr. Hodgson's logic, the United States should allow its meaning of citizenship and national sovereignty to be destroyed. Our rule of law should be erased. If the current trend of lawlessness continues, this country will look like Mexico and no immigrants will want to come here.
But Mr. Hodgson plays right into the interests of Big Business and their continuous push for cheap, exploitable, slave-like labor. Instead of offering better wages and improved working conditions to attract LEGAL immigrants and U.S. citizens, Mr. Hodgson wants companies to have access to the world's poverty so that wages can continue to drop while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Thankfully, overwhelming majorities of Californians (of all racial backgrounds) couldn't disagree more with Mr. Hodgson's illogical drivel.
Carlos Sanchez on Jan 15, 2006 at 01:58:33 said:
commenting on the latino nightmare. I am a latino but US citizen first. I think there is times in life when we have to make very tough decisions such as immigration reform. As a latino and sorrounded my mostly caucasian friends, I know how we are viewed as a group. It is the 60/40 rule . However, we have to face the facts as far as Mexico's problem which has recently become our problem. I love my neighbors but I'll de damn if I have to pay his bills due to his financial irresponsibility. I i were his true friend, I would get him to face reality if he is ever going to have a chance to fix and change his shortcomings. We need to do the same to Mexico so they can do their own economic reform which is so desperately needed. We also need to make it clear and I''ll write it in spanish so the right audience can understand. America es un pais de migracion LEGAL no Illegal. America tiene leyes que se tienen que respetar 100%. If these were not true, we would not have 60% of Mexico's population consider coming to the USA at some point in their future. What I don't understand is, why don't they think or envisioned having the same if they get working on an needed economic as well as social reform ?
Judy McLaughlin on Jan 14, 2006 at 23:59:39 said:
As the child of an illegal alien I'm sure you see things differently than those of us whose parents and grandparents immigrated here legally, as mine did. I do agree that it is way past time for the United States to stop "meddling" in Latin America and let these countries develop on their own. No more aid, no more sustaining their bottom line with money sent to their countries by the citizens they force to leave to find work and propserity here, no more ignoring illegal immigration or the drug trade that keeps their elite rich. No more listening to racist organizations like LaRaza and MECha degrade the very people who give them a platform to disperse their misshapen view of history and contribution. There are many ways to wage terror against a country, Mr. Hodgson, and the unchecked invasion of this country by our neighbors to the South is certainly one of them by destroying our children's educational opportunitities, turning our neighborhoods into slums filled with violence and poverty and demanding that we adopt the language of Third World countries to accommodate them. The beautiful words on the Statue of Liberty and the meanings behind them were never meant to ignore our laws. I do agree that the "wall" is not the answer. I do believe that legal action against employers and deportation of those here illegal would help to stop the invasion. Actions have consequences, Mr. Hodgson, and unfortunately the removal of "citizenship by default" might be just another way to discourage those who depend on this blessed rule to legalize their illegal acts. It is way past time for the other countries on this continent to take responsiblity for their own citizens and stop demanding that the United States accommodate them!
Allisio Rex on Jan 14, 2006 at 23:26:20 said:
My friend, what you don't understand is that the massive presence of people of the " Ibero-America" who you erroneously call "Latino", has caused the downfall of our civilization.
Therefore, we have asked our representatives in govermnent to pass laws to protect our future and the future of our future generations and finally the are acting on our behalf.
There is nothing wrong with this. It's up to us,Whites, to decide who comes here in the USA and who doesn't and not up to you.
Leon Donahue on Jan 14, 2006 at 14:21:52 said:
I get sick and tired of people who support illegal aliens, saying they are just looking for a better life. If these liberals want illegal aliens to have a better life, why don't they go to Mexico or the many other foreign countries that are run by dictators and do something to make changes there instead of thinking that all people in the world must end up in America to get a better life. Also, stupid politicians as well as some stupid Americans, say they don't do anything illegal. Hell they broke the law to get here, In my books that is doing something illegal.
Ms. Liberty on Jan 14, 2006 at 12:46:50 said:
You are quoting a poem from Emma Lazarus.
The Statue of Liberty states: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" If this wall is built and these new laws passed, the Statue of Liberty should be sent back to France. It will be representing a lie.
However you fail to site: That in Lazarus' meaning of the above poem was "Liberty also meant freedom to come to the United States and create a new life without religious and ethnic persecution. "
The ethnic persecution is the Mexicans who believe they are above the law.
The Statue of Liberty was never ment to fuel one Nation to invade America by the onsloath of Anchor Babies in order to over populate America for just One Race, as La Raza and other Hispanic Organizations pander to, in order to facilitate the illegal entry and station in America.
Carlos Rodriguez on Jan 14, 2006 at 08:00:19 said:
As a fellow American Citizen and Hispanic, I differ from Mr. Hodgson's views which show his tender young age. I would assume that his mother arrived into our country legally and thus his nationality would not have anything in common with that tainted product from the forbidden tree that is bestowed upon children of illegal aliens.
-->The Sensebrenner bill is a lamentable development made nedessary by the widespread trampling of our borders, laws and sovereignity by illegal aliens of all origins. Due to circumstances, Mexico makes up the lion's share of illegal immgration delinquents and is thus the most miffed at the erection of the "tortilla" wall. Were it not for the perceived lack of detterrence of our immigration laws, the reluctance of our elected officials to enforce the same and the avariciouys greed of employers who use illegal alien labor to exploit legitimate employees, maybe the Sensebrenner bill would not be perceived as a necessary measure to put a halt to the bald-faced abuses commited by foreign countries who seek to transfer their socioeconomic liabilities in the form of their human cast-offs to serve as ballast in our society and economy.
Should Mr. Hodgson wish our country to resemble that of his ancestors, then I could recomend a number of locales where nepotism, patronage, corruption and near-anarchy are the order of the day. I'm sure he'll miss our country dearly.