Racism or a Nation’s Reality ? ? ?
Crooks and Liars has a post up on it’s site here: Wingnut Cartoonist At Indy Star Gets His (Gary Varvel) Cartoon Yanked Claiming the cartoon was overtly racist, the Indianapolis Star eventually yanked it after initially removing the mustache off of the man coming through the window claiming the mustache created an image too ethic. For all I know and being of Italian descent, the man could have been Italian.
One emotion portrayed by this cartoon (and missed by many) is the overall tenor of America’s attitude towards legal and illegal immigrants coming from south of the US border. Without knowing Gary’s thoughts and approach towards immigration and about the people he depicts in his cartoon, one could take the opposite view of the cartoon in how it portrays White America. We have changed again from a nation asking for other countries to:
“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.” Emma Lazarus
to a nation of:
Send us your technically qualified and those who can get an H-1B and are willing work for less wages. Doctors are most welcome! We will take advantage of you; but if you qualify, you can sup at our nation’s table of economic reward and pay taxes. All others need not apply even if you live under the threat of violence and poverty.
I do not know Gary and his ideas or political beliefs. Maybe Gary’s cartoon was drawn upon a foundation of racism; but, it does demonstrate one clear fact. The politics of this nation and the character of its people has changed over the last decade or so and we have become a nation of fear. We are afraid of different hues, cultures, and religions so much so we ban them altogether from our borders, our neighborhoods, and our homes. Our nation’s politicians of recent are doing nothing to foster any change in these attitudes and are actively fanning the flames of fear of immigrants and a president who took action.
Thinking of the upcoming Thanksgiving Holiday, when was the last time you have celebrated it with strangers from outside of your family?
I think that the main drivers of this shift are fear and insecurity. As real wages have stagnated and the potential damage done to the family by unemployment, especially long term unemployment has increased anything anyone can blame for these problems will be resented.
“One emotion portrayed by this cartoon is the overall tenor of a nation’s attitude towards legal and illegal immigrants coming from south of the US border.”
In my opinion, the current great wringing of hands has not been concerned with legal immigration. Perhaps you could point me to some sources of agitation against legal immigration?
Jim:
Certainly, our politicians make every effort to play immigration up when it is to their advantage to stir the pot.
“It’s just obvious you can’t have free immigration and a welfare state” – Milton Friedman
Then abolish capitalism. That would stop immigration cold.
Thanks for the link.
Tom Tancredo is a discredited retired politician, I certainly assign him no credibility. And Peter Schragg paints with a very broad brush. His addition of the “the “dirty Japs” of 1942, or the Central Americans of today” to the historical citations is a stretch, to say the least.
It would take a very long search to find a population which did not demonize their adversaries in a full blown war. It is difficult to get soldiers to kill those who they view the way they view themselves. And as our recent past has shown, killing almost 3,000 Americans will cause great ill will. And besides that, history is the past not the present.
I see no problems with our current legal immigration system, and I never have. And the issues today are larger than simply legalizing the latest wave of illegal immigrants:
1. One question is whether we have any need for policed border crossings? Why?
2. Why not just issue a Social Security card to anyone who crosses any US border?
3. Why do we force some immigrants to comply with our visa laws when others just move into the country?
4. Should all Americans be able to pick and choose which laws to obey and receive amnesty later? Why not?
5. And last but not least, this system is discriminating against other immigrants who are certainly just as deserving. Shouldn’t 12 million poor Africans be given the same right of immigration. How about 12 million South Americans who endure poverty that most Americans cannot even imagine? How about 12 million Chinese who are oppressed by their government and left poor. Surely there must be 12 million Russians who would like a fresh start here and would pay their own passage. Why is this discrimination acceptable?
There were about 3 million illegal immigrants given amnesty in the late 1980s. In 2014 we have 12 million illegal immigrants. At this rate of increase, 25 years from now we will have 48 million illegal immigrants.
I would have thought that 12 million illegal immigrants was a preposterous prediction 25 years ago. Every time that we do this, we speak loudly and clearly to the populations of poorer countries. They are not stupid, only poor.
In colonial times immigrants were such a great benefit that headright land grants were given to those who brought them. In the 1800s unclaimed federal arable land was still plentiful. By the early 1900s unclaimed federal arable land was no longer plentiful but industrialization required more and more labor. In 1924 we got the Immigration Act which set a permanent numerical limit on immigration for the first time. Times change and we had to change too.
Jim:
There are other links which can be added to this one. I just snatched one which plays to the part of many Americans do not like immigrants, legal or otherwise. I believe Joel Garreau would tell you we need immigrants as we are an aging population. The 1st generation typically procreates at a greater rate than later generations. Today we occupy ~5% of the land mass of the US so there is room for more immigrants.
Your questions are good. Why not write something and I will see to it being posted with Dan.
Good point about 1924 being the first immigration act (exclusion). It was prompted by West Coast objections to Asian immigrants. More to the point, most of those who claim their ancestors immigrated legally conveniently forget that there weren’t any limitations on immigration when “their people” arrived.
My son’s father in law brought a neighbor to our Thanksgiving last year, his stove had failed, he is a Vietnam Vet and I especially appreciated his presence.
MJed,
Leave Uncle Milty out of this he was Reagan’s techie schill for the billionaires agenda, he wanted the army to be “not slaves” what he was selling was an army of useless contractors.
Racism and tribalism is the meat of the Merikan politics since 1620, might have been different if the Dutch paid for Plimouth!
“”””We have changed again from a nation asking for other countries to:
“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.” Emma Lazarus – ””’
“We” have never agreed to that.
That poem was written at the time when Elis Island was keeping out the tired, poor and sick while the US was cutting back on immigration. The poem itself was written as part of a contest and was not even put on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty until more then a 20 years later
Also the Statue of Liberty has nothing to do with immigration, it was given to the US in calibration of US independence and the right of Americans to run their own country and that would include who can move to the US.
DJF:
I did not see mention of the Statue in my post; perhaps, you can point it out to me? “We” being you and the mouse in your pocket? In any case, since you brought it up. On the Statue’s 50 year anniversary, then President Roosevelt gave a speech, “Address on the Occasion of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Statue of Liberty,” October 28, 1936. Roosevelt’s speech transformed the statue into an icon of immigration. Immigration was cast as a central part of the country’s past with emphasis on immigrant’s capacity for Americanization. What do you think he said?
Maybe if is not an executive order by President Roosevelt; however, he certainly gave the statue a purpose of hope for all coming to America and solidified the US as a place for immigrants to come to and find a destiny. Maybe this was not your agreement to accept immigrants? The President of the US certainly did agree to it.
Run75441,
Thanks for the offer but it turns out that I really don’t have much more to add. Those questions were more rhetorical in nature.
I can add these comments about legal immigration.
Immigrants to this country have often gone through rough patches but they assimilated. They manage that better here than in other countries. We shouldn’t lose sight of that.
You wrote: “I believe Joel Garreau would tell you we need immigrants as we are an aging population.”
We are aging a little, but our unemployment and underemployment rates are still high and our labor participation rate has been reduced. If more immigrants are needed in the future, then we can raise the legal immigration quotas at that time. We have never had any problems with attracting legal immigrants.
Some seem to believe that more immigration could help with our current economic problems. But allowing more immigrants into the US so that they can buy more cheap imports, doesn’t make sense to me. Reminds me of the old joke about a business losing money on every item that they sold but they hoped to make it up in volume.
You wrote: “Today we occupy ~5% of the land mass of the US so there is room for more immigrants.”
I wondered about that when I was younger. But that ‘room’ (land) that you mention is currently owned privately or by the government. Are we going to allow immigrants to take over some privately owned land? Are we going to convert government owned land to something for some use by immigrants? (Parks and National Forests) Why would we want to do that?
How would any new immigrants earn a living? We would just be dividing the income pie into smaller pieces.
Our primary concern should be our lagging economy and the harm being done to the middle class.
Jim:
You forget that private landowners often times develop the land they own. We are far from being over crowded which you might find in the Philippines, Thailand, China, or the closeness of a European country. We could take in more and hardly notice the difference. PR, U3, and U6 are definitely troublesome and it may be some time before they return to something reasonable. The product produced appears to be void of Labor and the greatest growth in profits has come from the Financial sector taking up 40% of the corporate profit in 2007/8 (BIS). These certainly are not bank tellers. Things are going to have to change with Labor gaining more of the productivity gains and investments being skewed to more Labor intensive ventures. There is another side to this also.
“How would any new immigrants earn a living? We would just be dividing the income pie into smaller pieces.”
The same way they always have in the past.
Median Age in 1950 = 30. In 2010 =~37. In 2050 = 41. We are aging at a much faster pace.
“””””Roosevelt’s speech transformed the statue into an icon of immigration “””
In 1936 restrictions on immigration were at its highest and Roosvelt did nothing to change even though his party controlled Congress? And you seem to mistaken in the fact that a President is not a King and he can’t change immigration policy nor the meaning of a statue on his own.
We are a Republic made of laws and that is what the Statue of Liberty is suppose to represent no matter how many poems are written or Presidental proclamations declared
DJF:
Your prior statement:
“We” have never agreed to that.
My Reply:
Your latest reply:
Now my reply:
You appear to want to take this into a different dimension. In reply to your “In 1936” sentence; non sequitur DJF. No where did I talk about restrictions on immigration or Roosevelt doing anything to change immigration. What I did discuss, was Roosevelt associating the statue to immigration and I gave you a link to support the quote in case it was not enough for you.
In answer to your “We are a Republic;” you stated the statue was never associated with immigration and I simply pointed out that Roosevelt made the association to immigration. However, the association goes back even further with the inscription of the poem by Emma Lazarus on it pedestal in 1903 just 17 years after it was dedicated by President Cleveland.
The statue represents more than what you have stated it to be. The Spikes represent seven liberties’ civil, moral, national, natural, personnel, political and religious liberties. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1986-08-14/features/8602280882_1_religious-liberty-seven-spikes-natural-liberty The broken chain at her feet represents “The broken shackles of tyranny that are molded at the feet of Liberty spoke for themselves to generations of people fleeing tyranny.” there are does who also believe the broken shackles refer to the breaking of slavery. The tablet in her arm has the date of the nation on it and is in the shape of a keystone which gives credence to the law being the keystone holding this nation together. Her sandals represent freedom and moving forward and lighting the way to freedom through peace.
I could go on with more symbolism other than what you said; but, this is enough for now. Again, this was not the topic of the original post and you are definitely off of it. That you do not like immigrants is a problem and you have made it pretty obvious.
Looking to the future, they wisely choose that their children shall live in the new language and in the new customs of this new people.
oprima el número dos para espanol.
As JimH said: “Immigrants to this country have often gone through rough patches but they assimilated.” Desire and intent of immigrants to assimilate should not be overlooked as a factor in the national mood.
And it’s not just Spanish. National voter registrations are available in 11 languages. In California there are 10 languages to choose from. Chicago and NYC each with only six languages pale in comparison.
Jed:
So what is your point? Immigrants have a much easier time now than in the past?
I seriously doubt that most first generation Hispanic immigrants are going to speak fluent English. They will need to conduct important phone conversations in Spanish. This is not about desire.
Even if things go perfectly we are going to be hearing a lot of Spanish for many decades. This is not something I am concerned about.
I would be a little concerned if the second generation was not able to conduct phone conversations in English.
Recently there was a “Finding your roots” episode titled “Ancient Roots” on PBS about David Sedaris. His Greek grandmother had moved in with David’s family after her husband died. But she spoke almost no English, only Greek. I believe that this was much more common than we realize. Her husband probably spoke much more English because he was out in the public more.
I taught myself to speak a little Spanish while I was in the military. I constantly carried an English-Spanish dictionary. It was not easy.
We should be a little understanding of the magnitude of their problem.
“”Run75441 writes “In reply to your “In 1936″ sentence; non sequitur”””
How can 1936 be non sequitur when you quote the date in your reply to me
“”””No where did I talk about restrictions on immigration or Roosevelt doing anything to change immigration -””’
Of course you did not since it would show that even Roosevelt did not follow his own proclamation and his words had no effect on administration policy and certainly did not have any effect on the laws of the US
Politicians can spout off on any subject they want, what is important is what the laws are since that is the real “we the people’. And I have shown that the poem is not US government policy and never has been no matter how many people quote it.
run, my point is that FDR was talking about a single language and assimilated customs. And yes, our government accommodates immigrants now more readily than it has in the past.
DJF – don’t bother. Run is the type of person who will ask, “do you know what time it is?” and when you answer, “it’s half past noon” gets annoyed that you didn’t answer his question with a simple yes or no.
jed:
I have seen you hijack threads before (Maggie’s for sure). I expect you to stay on topic.