Immigration and the politics of Freedom

"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



The rivers of hypocrisy run deep in these United States and lest I be accused of sharing in this all-too-common malady, I freely acknowledge that, as descendant of Spanish immigrants, first generation American, I am thankful to all those that invited my parents to this great country. My father, a man of science, was recognized to be an important asset to the chemical industry and secured his green card through legitimate channels.

That said, I confess that in pondering the immigration question, that despite the legal nature of my parents' arrival, I question: By what right may one person be admitted to this country while another is denied admission? By what right does the government have to impede the free migration of those that seek a better life?

If one is to be consistent in defending the ideals of freedom, without falling into the snares of hypocrisy and contradiction, then as surely as the Statue of Liberty still stands and as long as she represents ideals central to our cultural identity, then I must stand firm in defending the right of any decent human being to make his way here and call this land his new home.

Admittedly, this viewpoint is not the prevailing one, but that reflects the huge chasm that exists between American ideals on one side and the corrupted, protectionistic, statist, racist, nationalistic and otherwise hypocritical positions on the other. Oftentimes, the rhetoric of freedom is used, twisted and manipulated by the so-called patriot in such a way that it appears that he is on the side of Americanism, as I would call American ideals rooted in Liberty. But the true test is not whether he claims to defend freedom, but whether he in fact advances the cause of freedom or tries to diminish it.

The immigration question reveals the true nature of the false patriot. Some have called for a huge wall to be raised to stop the migration. The very definition of freedom is unimpeded action, so how does the building of a barricade advance the cause of freedom? Clearly, freedom, as a concept, is not a consideration to the wall builder. His motivation is protectionism - he may be worried about protecting from an attack by terrorists or he may believe he might be protecting jobs, but the last thing on his mind is defending freedom in the purist sense of the word.

The great wall of America is a bad idea for several reasons, not the least being that it is anti-freedom and therefore anti-American, as I have suggested. Should the motivation be to protect from another terrorist attack, then a wiser and less costly move would be to open our borders so that those who wish to seek legitimate work or travel could enter through normal routes of entry and thereby be screened by Immigration officers for suspicious characters. Given the choice of freely taking the public highway or crossing the treacherous desert, I suggest that any person in their right mind would take the safer path of least resistance and cross at the checkpoint. That leaves anyone trying to cross through the desert or taking the wet route extremely suspect - What is he up to? Could he be a smuggler or a terrorist? This option would effectively neutralize the terrorist threat while maintaining a consistently American ethos of liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

As to protecting jobs, the reality of the global marketplace is finally hitting home. For too long, Americans have enjoyed relatively high wages because of geographic isolation, but today that no longer is the case. Americans are now finding that they must compete with Chinese and other laborers that earn far less. That is the reality of the modern global economy and no amount of protectionism can make that harsh reality go away. In the last decade or more we have seen many US companies move operations overseas or south of the border to try to remain competitive. Would not it have served American interests if, instead, these manufacturing plants had remained at home and simply hired the willing labor of immigrants?

Consider the growing record US trade deficit: Had US manufacturing companies stepped up production in this country, hiring those immigrants seeking employment here, then we could have gone head-to-head with any country. Why would we buy a Chinese made product when we could have made the same product for a competitive price right here at home? You might argue that that would be impossible, given our minimum wage, and given the pitiful Chinese wage, and that would be true, should maintaining a minimum wage be a priority and not creating jobs. But should the good-intentioned, but wrong-headed minimum wage be set aside and should we let the market decide what the minimum wage should be, then we would find we have a huge, untapped source of manpower available in this hemisphere alone.

Those of socialistic leanings would decry such a policy, but it is a policy of pure Americanism, of pure liberty and the pursuit of a better life for millions. Consider the effect to our economy if instead of a record trade deficit, we had a record trade surplus. What if the US could be on top of the manufacturing world once again? Where would all those millions of workers spend their hard-earned money?

Those of you that are workers and fear that someone will do what you do for less are working on borrowed time anyway. Consider the tens of thousands of auto workers that have recently lost their jobs. Consider it a far better alternative to have fellow Americans take over your job, even if they are recently arrived neighbors, while you figure out how best to profit from the boom times to come from the trade surplus. By what right does the unskilled worker claim a higher wage over another unskilled worker? In an environment where companies are profiting and growing the worker who has skills will always command a premium over those that do not, so that incentive will always exist to better oneself. In any event, better to have America as a microcosm of the global economy and keep jobs here than keep losing productivity to foreign countries, especially those decidedly antagonistic to the freedoms we profess to cherish.

What has happened in this country is that our leaders have failed to exploit the opportunities that exist in the global economy. While the word exploit has a negative connotation, I mean it in the sense of fully utilizing a potential. Trapped by a socialistic policy bent on saving the worker from himself, the immigrant would gladly work and be grateful for the work and the wage and leave the socialist to his theorizing. Immigrants do this every day, many working - of their own free will at very low wages, that to him represent a step up from where he came from.

Now, back to our false patriot, crying that we should jail all illegal aliens and those that hire them: How is freedom advanced by that notion? What could be more anti-freedom than to take away a person's liberty and imprison him? Is not that more akin to the Soviet police state than Jefferson's independent vision of America? Clearly his motivation is not freedom, but something else - subservience to the State.

How many times have we heard that the immigrant should be arrested for breaking the law? that they should respect the Rule of Law? that no one has the right to break the law? I say: Wrong on all three counts. If I was a most ignorant person, oblivious to the history of these United States and its record on laws, I might be in agreement with these sentiments. However, I happened to grow up during the Vietnam era, and I have seen too many wrong laws, such as the laws that created the draft, the laws that defended segregation and opposed civil rights. In fact, the entire history of this country from its inception is replete with wrong-headed, self-serving, malicious and just plain stupid laws. From the beginning when slavery was legally defended, to the foolishness of Prohibition, to today's equally damaging legislation and rulings, the rule of law in this country might be that today's illegality might be tomorrow's legality and vice versa.

So, I put myself in the mind of the "illegal" alien. Perhaps he does not possess the education of a learned man like my father, or have the backing of industry clout to get to America through legal channels. But he is hungry, maybe not starving, mind you, though he might be, but he sees that his life is going nowhere. For no fault of his own he was born in a country where the corrupt politicians and the power elite have created an environment of diminished opportunities. He dreams of a better life. I would not let a law, an artificial law, written by men, flawed men writing flawed laws, usurp my natural right to the pursuit of happiness. Would any of you? Are there any real red-blooded American men left in this country that can honestly defend America's most noble values?

And then there are the fools that decry the black market economy of the immigrant. They whine that the immigrant does not pay his taxes, as quick to put the yoke on this hard-worker as on himself. Where does the American ideal of Liberty stand on life-long involuntary servitude?

As it stands, should the suggestions of the false patriots be implemented the following would result: Billions upon billions will be spent building and defending a barricade hundreds of miles long. It might slow the tide, but there is not a wall high enough or a fence tough enough to conquer the spirit and will of a man willing to pass over, through, or under it. Should all illegal aliens be jailed and those that hire them, billions of dollars would be spent on new prisons and the growing police state. The so-called black-market economy that helps support the "legal" economy would shrink causing serious financial repercussions. The cost of living from removing this source of cheap labor would increase, especially reflected in higher food prices and other necessities.

This last measure might be the last straw to break this empire - a nation that has lost its ideological roots, replacing liberty for nationalistic shortsightedness. I dare say historians will write that they came so close, only to let it slip away...

We let manufacturing slip from our land, we squander billions in wasteful and unnecessary foreign aid and foreign wars, we let our trade deficit increase along with the national debt - owing money to our ideological enemies, and now we turn upon the hardest working element of our society and call them criminals. Is the American ideal dead?