Illegal immigrants and the Land of Immigrants... Part II

I thought I would respond to the comments left on my initial post of the same topic here. The comment can be found at the bottom of the post itself, and I've reproduced them below. My comments follow the quote.

"I should slap you for this post. You have taken the view of a happy American trying to control immigration without considering the point of view of the immigrant himself.

Before you claim that you are an immigrant: you we're, but you did not emigrate by choice. Your parents made that choice.

Thus, consider the point of view of the immigrant himself. The adult who decides that he needs to leave his country to: escape war, escape political opression, escape poverty, escape social inequity, etc. Many will come over to work 2,3, even 4 jobs to try to start a new life as an unskilled laborer. Do they have time to jump through all these hoops that you have identified?

Also, how do you propose that #1 be accomplished? Should the U.S. build a great wall to seperate U.S./Mexico? There are tons of illegal immigrants that come in through other ports of entry and not just the land borders. How many people immigrate to the U.S. through an international airport with a 90 day visa, then just never leave?"

I don't think that my status as an immigrant is necessarily altered by whether I made a decision to be one or had that decision made on my behalf; I'm an immigrant all the same. I think the point you are trying to make is one of whether I can truly claim to have the viewpoint of an immigrant having grown up in this country. This is a more difficult question, and one that I cannot answer objectively. However, I don't think the validity of my opinions mentioned in this
post acquire or lose any legitimacy based on the answer to this question, so I'll forego further discussion of it.

I have difficulty in understanding how it can be argued that I am not considering the viewpoint of the immigrant in my comments. I make the point that we definitely need many of the immigrants that are currently in this country illegally. I also make the point that I want those that legitimately are needed/welcome here, to come without harassment and in safety.

Though I do not discuss the need that some may have for leaving their country to attempt the difficult journey to come to the us, the ones you mentioned are certainly examples: war, oppression, poverty, social inequality etc. These problems ought not to be ignored, but letting
everybody just flood into the US can hardly be the answer. Its not really good for them, and in the long term its unsustainable for us.

Are you suggesting we just open our borders to whoever wants to come? We can't do that for a number of reasons, here a couple of big ones.

First, it proposes a security risk. I read in the magazine Foreign Affairs the other day that the "Bush administration is spending more every three days on the Iraq war than it has in three years on the security of all US commercial seaports (Oct 2004 p. 20)." We don't have to build a wall, but we could certainly direct resources to make the border patrol more effective. You're right. We will never be able to stop everyone (ie. 90 day visa violators and the like), but what's the alternative? To not try at all?

Secondly, we can only take so many people, before the social infrastructure of this country begins to deteriorate adversely affecting those who are legal citizens. Believe it or not, the US is not a charity. If it became one, it would not be able to sustain being one for long before it would need charity itself. You know what they say about charity: it starts at home; we need to be able to take care of our citizens first. This is not being selfish, it is the basic duty of a nation.

In summary, solutions to the problems you mentioned cannot be solved simply by opening up borders; they require a sustained holistic development effort as suggested by J. Sachs or A. Sen, among others. In the mean time, we can help by increasing foreign aid in its various forms: money, food, medicine etc.

Pondering what makes "news," news...

This is going to be my second shot at CNN in as many weeks, but my criticism may as well be directed to news networks in general. CNN just happens to be the station of choice at my gym. I should also say this is as much a request for more input as it is a rant. Anyway, to cut to the chase, I watched CNN for about an hour and a half this evening (Paula Zahn was on) and I didn't get anything during that hour that to me amounted to "news." All I got was this story on some courthouse shootings in Atlanta and Michael Jackson's trial. To their credit maybe there was some two minute spot on how the markets did today.

Not to be insensitive to the families of the shooting victims, but why is this news? Why does the average American care? Should they care? In all fairness millions of people are dying every day, they don't get air time on CNN. Maybe you could say that the lack of security in the Atlanta courtroom was terrible, and attention needs to be paid to the situation so our judges are kept safe. No doubt this is important, but I don't hear much about this issue amongst all the "news" about how the hostage believed in Jesus, and convinced the shooter into surrendering.

Why is this guy(?!) news?

As for the king of pop, I can't think of a single reason why the average American would give a damn about him! Why is his alleged child molestation adventures news? If you ask me, its pure sensationalism, not news. Has CNN become the television version of the National Enquirer tabloid; entertainment disguised as news? Or am I just missing something here?

I guess I'm left wondering what makes "news" news. According to the dictionary, its defined as

1 a : a report of recent events b : previously unknown information (I've got news for you)
2 a : material reported in a newspaper or news periodical or on a newscast b : matter that is newsworthy."

But, this seems pretty circular. If its on the news, then its news? So, some producer at CNN gets to decide what "news" is? What does newsworthy mean? Now the dictionary says its "interesting enough to the general public to warrant reporting." So here is a general take on what makes something newsworthy.

• Conflict: Basic good drama. Big guy vs. Little guy news is very popular.
• Prominence: Involves well-known people and/or business. (Example: Is a prominent member of the community joining your chapter?)
• Impact: How many people does the news affect? (Example: Is a CSI member involved in construction of a large building that affects many people, like a new office complex or shopping mall?)
• Timeliness: The news is happening right now; it’s current.
• Surprise: A departure from the norm. Something that doesn’t happen every day.
• Interesting People or Events: Situations that are tragic, humorous, mysterious or wacky.
• Something New: “Firsts” – buildings, projects, people. Example: Is a CSI member working on a well known new building in town?
• Trends: Surveys, changes, what will be the news next week.
• Something Useful: Answers the “How will this affect my life?” question. Example: Has a local member been instrumental in cutting-edge or evolutionary construction technology that results in safer or more energy-efficient buildings?
• Evidence, Solid Facts: Prominent Research
  
• Experts: Doctors, scientists, engineers, professors.Example: Can any of your members provide information to reporters on security upgrades at prominent local building?

Basically, it seems that the main objective is to present something that makes a person watching say "wow." Notice the use of the word popular in the first bullet point, and the appearance of "Something Useful" third from last. There also seems to be some difference between national and local news; this seems natural. Local would focus more on my local community which the national audience wouldn't care about, while national would focus on news that affected the whole country.

In fact, if I had it my way, there would only be news that affected me on television. The more I think about it, it seems to me that its not what's on the above list that bothers me, but rather in what proportion attention is given to each of the items on that list. I think "Interesting People or Events" that have no affect on my life other than to amuse me should be given much less attention to "Something Useful," which might.

In the end, I guess they show what they think people will watch. That way their ratings go up and advertisers pay to advertise on their news channel. Isn't that what its about? Serious journalism on one hand has to balance with money matters on the other. Its too bad they are in conflict, but I guess in a capitalistic society we vote with our dollars, and we get what we vote for. Enough people must be interested in Michael Jackson or shootings in Atlanta to focus CNN's attention upon it. That's just disappointing! In our 24 hour news cycle, maybe there isn't enough news to go around.

For those of you that would rather watch real news, fear not. There are a few places left for you to get Michael Jackson free news. Try News Hour with Jim Lehrer or BBC World News, but I make no promises.

Illegal immigrants and the Land of Immigrants...

I was staring at a CNN tv screen while I was running in the gym today. Lou Dobbs was on and going crazy about how all these illegal immigrants were crossing into the US through our unprotected border with Mexico. He was raving about how he couldn't believe that they administered the citizenship ceremony in Spanish sometimes, or that the Mexican government was asking the US government to make sure the new voluntary border patrol didn't abuse Mexicans caught crossing illegally. So much for Lady Liberty saying "give me your tired, poor, and huddled masses" and welcoming the world to a land of golden opportunities through Ellis Island.

"Immigrant X-ing?"

I caught myself chuckling because it was just ironic that the land of immigrants, the so called "melting pot" of the world, would be so concerned with other immigrants coming over. Being an immigrant myself (the legal kind!) I couldn't help but keep thinking about this. The more I thought about it though, it began to occur to me that it wasn't really funny, and that maybe this really was a big deal. I mean some two million immigrants try to cross over every year, and apparently the success rate is only about fifty percent. Not to mention that its not exactly like flying in on a 747, these people go through hell to come here. You always hear these horrendous stories of the abuses they suffer at the hands of smugglers or God knows what else. Don't believe me? Read this yourself!

Anyway, as I looked all this up, I figured that "illegal immigrant" thing deserved some more thought because it was way more complex than I could have imagined in my state of ignorance. I could see myself agreeing with both sides. For one thing, the US has a right to control its borders doesn't it? I mean, I don't want terrorists to have a fifty percent chance of slipping through the border either. There is also the idea that these immigrants are flooding the US market with cheap labor, and apparently these laborers save a lot of their money and send it back to their own countries in the form of remittances. I must admit I had heard of this before while doing my college thesis project in Guatemala. In fact, those communities are greatly impacted by the incoming cash and outgoing people. Anyway, the US could in essence, accuse the Mexicans of unfair trade practices.

Ok, so I agree with the idea that the US is a sovereign nation that has the right to protect its borders and markets, but what about the fact that our economy vitally depends on these illegal aliens? There was this funny movie that came out not long ago about what would happen to California if all of the Latinos just disappeared one day. What would American farmers do without all the cheap labor that provided by migrant workers for example? Besides I wonder how many American's really want to do the jobs they complain about the illegal aliens taking from them. I'm sorry, but I don't see too many American's getting in line to be migrant farm workers, house maids, or do other menial jobs like cleaning hotel rooms!

So what's going on here? If we need them in our economy why go through all of this illegal business? It seems a little stupid I think. We need international students in our universities, but we don't make them sneak into the country first! Why the charade? I mean go ahead and shape up the border so that people who aren't supposed to get in don't. Do it well, so that people stop trying, and let do it with official personnel who can be held accountable to standards, not some random vigilantes! If its important enough fund the personnel.

But lets cut the crap and admit who we need and who we don't, and let the ones we really need come in minus the whole "smuggling in and living undocumented lives" part! If that means they have access to our schools and other public services so be it. If we need them then we should pay some benefits. All I'm saying is let's be above board about the whole thing cause its pretty underhanded how we're doing things now. We want to have our cake (their cheap labor) and eat it too (pretend they are parasites mooching off our country)! And that doesn't seem fair.

So what responsibilities do immigrants have though? Should they have to learn English? What about assimilation in general? Well people from other places came to America to be left alone when America was founded, and generally I think people should be left to do as they please... so long as they don't violate the laws of this nation. So assimilate our laws, but whether you buy into Monday Night football or not is up to you.

Most Americans are generally X-Americans who are proud of their X-heritage. ( Fill in Asian, Indian, African, or some other nationality for X) This is included in being American, that is, this mystical quality of being an American transcends where your grandparents, parents, or maybe you yourself, came from. If you can't define what an American is how can you assimilate to being one? And c'mon! From a practical standpoint this would be impossible to enforce without all sorts of civil liberties questions and big brother problems. So, assimilation to me is a mute point.

What about the language though? Should you have to learn English to be American? Well, are they going to accommodate my language if I go to some other country? Unlikely. I mean when I came to America I had to learn English. Maybe that's one definable characteristic of being American. How would you know what the laws were, or who to vote for, or which road to turn on if you didn't speak English in America. Its one of the main things that hold our diverse nation together. If you had to serve in the army, you'd have to know English. If you want to learn in school, you need to speak English. Hell, if you are arrested by border patrol, it'd probably be helpful to be able to speak English. So yeah, I think that its fair to ask somebody who is taking the oath of citizenship to do so in English. I mean we expect you to know who our first president was among so many other random facts, so is it really that unreasonable? I don't think so, but should we facilitate this process by making ESL (English as a second language) type classes easily available, or giving people enough time? Absolutely!

So that concludes my initial thoughts on illegal immigrants. I'm sure there is much to think about that I haven't considered, but so far I've determined the following:

1. The US should secure our border with US Govt. personnel who can be held accountable.
   
2. The US must admit that we need the cheap labor in our economy, and let the number of immigrants we need enter legally.
3. We as a society need to admit that there is no definable thing as an American, so we can't expect newcomers to become something we can even explain.
   
4. It is reasonable to require immigrants to this country seeking to become permanent residents or citizens to learn the English language, but we should help those seeking to learn.

The Motorcycle Diaries and a thought experiment...

I just watched the movie Motorcycle Diaries the other day, and it really made me think about a lot of things about life in general. So this movie is generally about two guys that travel across South America for no real reason other than to see it. If you want a more legit plot summary click here.

The movie had really beautiful panoramic views of South America, and it really made you feel free. Like you could just drop everything too and head out on your own grand adventure. Take some chances, and see what you get. See things that you don't expect, and be forever changed. I know, I know, probably a bit too idealistic, but honestly why not? It occurred to me while I was thinking about how attached I was to the coat I lost this weekend, that I was really attached to my life too, in general: the place I live in, the people I interact with, how things are, what I do. It represents the familiar and the comfortable. I guess there was a time not long ago, even this place was unfamiliar and basically that sucked... at first. The whole having to get used to a new area and meeting new people, but once you get used to it, you can't imagine not being here. That how it always is. Everybody seems to hate their first semester in college. You miss your high school friends and your home etc. Then look at the same people in their senior year of it. They are all depressed that they are going to graduate, and have to move on. Most people (I know, not everybody) is like this.

In all fairness, older people have families and responsibilities so they can't just get up and go explore a continent, but I think a lot of people could go and do something like that, but they are afraid. They think they have all of these responsibilities and everything, but they really don't. I mean, it would just require me to quit my job and go. I would have to finish out my lease and whatever other financial commitments I had, but so many of those bills would go away if I didn't live here. I mean you wouldn't have to pay for gas, if you weren't here to drive your car, etc. So really, think about it, what would it really take for you to just get up and go. Try it, even if you aren't planning to get up and go, it might be an interesting thought experiment.

I bet most people would find it too hard to just go. I say that because haven't we all felt the urge at some point to do this, but how many actually ever do it? I would say most people don't end up following through on their ambitious plans and dreams. Why not? Fear? The status quo bias aka inertia? People give in; they settle. The day to day becomes so consuming that the overall picture becomes less important. I wonder if the same will happen to me? Or maybe, its already happened? I can only hope not.. not just yet...

Maybe take this boat and head to Thailand?

The Lost Overcoat...

Nothing significant really. I went out last night with a group of friends to some bar/lounge. The place didn't have a coat check, and most people had left their coats in a pile on one of the couches. I added mine to the pile and went on with my night. The night ended and when I went to retrieve it from the pile.. ALAS... IT WAS GONE! I searched frantically with the help of my friends to no avail, but miraculously (at least to me) one of my friends was handed by some mysterious person they most valuable thing that was in my coat, my keys. I left the place with the one coat that was lying on the couch after all the others had gone; it looked very similar to mine, and had I been more drunk I might have walked out with it by mistake. I'm sure this has happened to many others; in fact, I know so. What could be more common than trying to stumble out at the end of the night and picking the wrong black overcoat out of fifteen other similar black overcoats. I called the place today to see if anyone has called about their coat. The girl on the other end said that no one had, but that their lost and found had many coats and that I should check. Well, I figured, its just a coat, and besides, (again, I still can't believe how) I got my keys.

That's the end of it right? I mean, what can I really do? I'll go check the lost and found, but what are the chances of it being there? For all intents and purposes the coat is gone. It wasn't super expensive or anything either. I can probably replace it with $100 to $150. No small sum, but nothing insurmountable or crippling. Replacing all the keys would have been much worse. Or on a really unlucky day I would have had my wallet and cell phone in there too. So yeah it sucks.. now I'm going to have to spend a hundred bucks on something that I already had, but honestly I've had the coat for 4 years or something, and it was getting time to replace it anyway. I mean the buttons kept falling off, and it was too "college-ey." So that's the end of it.. right? right? Why the hell would I write a post about it? Cause I have nothing else in my insignificant life to write about? Maybe, but if I can be existentialist about it, is there anything really significant? But lets not go there, and I ask you to give me the benefit of the doubt that that's not it. Cause I just want to annoy you? That could be it too, but again lets assume I have better things to do. So then why?

Because I miss it. Isn't that stupid; it was just a coat! But I miss it nonetheless. Its funny how human beings get attached to objects. They come to have "sentimental" value. Not coincidentally, I couldn't help thinking of Nikolai Gogol's famous short story titled The Overcoat.
In my mind, this coat was is associated with a very particular part of my life. I got it during the winter of my first year of college, and now I've lost it during the first year of life after college. It has been there for so many "important" events in my life. The person that bought it was very different than the person that lost it. I guess the college period is like that for everybody: you change.. a lot!

If I look through some pictures from college, I can point it out in hundreds. I didn't really like it initially. It was the quintessential coat that everybody at my college had. The standard woolen black pea-coat. The "now I'm in college, and I want to look sophisticated" coat. The "my ski jacked just isn't gonna cut it now that I'm an young adult" coat. Maybe it was just me. I called it my "fag jacket." [yes, I realize this is politically incorrect, but what in college was really politically correct? Rest assured that no offense is intended] I wore it when I needed to look preppy. As college wore on, I tended to wear it more and more. Then, when I started working, well, it was pretty much the standard look, so I wore it pretty regularly. I didn't realize that I had become so attached to it.

The Lost Overcoat

Ok so I'm exaggerating a bit too much here! I'm not like curled up in a ball crying about it or anything. I am just surprised how much it had meant to me. I'm sure I'll get a new one and forget all about this old one, but I wonder what other objects in my life I have a similar attachment to?... Anyway, I thought that if I said a proper goodbye to the coat in the form of this blog, it would make me feel better. Now that I've done that; I do feel better. The coat will be missed, but life will go on. Besides its not really gone. Some random person is probably wearing it right now, and I guess its just as well that it be passed on. Maybe they'll be writing about it to when sometime down the road they lose it to somebody else.

Born into Brothels...

I went and saw this documentary that won the Oscar for best documentary last night with a couple of friends. It was called Born into Brothels. By now, I'm sure many of you heard about it, but basically it was about the children of sex workers in the red light district of Calcutta (a city of some 14 or 15 million on the India Bangladesh border.) A white lady from UK who is a photographer goes to India and to this red light district to take pictures of the prostitutes. How she got this idea I don't know. Its pretty random if you think about it, but she studied theology and religion at Cambridge, so that might explain it. (I'll leave it purposefully ambiguous) Anyway, she goes down there, and its of course as horrendous as you might imagine a red light district in a third world country to be. Or more likely you can't imagine it. She gets attached to the kids, they are in turn duly fascinated with her and her camera, and then she gets the idea to teach them how to take pictures. I don't want to rehash it anymore than that, so if you want to find out more go to the website called Kids with Cameras.

Here are the Kids from the Documentary

Now, how I ended up going to see this particular film is not as coincidental as I might have made it seem. You see, I'm from Calcutta myself, or at least kind of. I spent the first 8 or 9 years of my life there before my parents emigrated to the States. I still have all of my extended family in and around the city. So this movie hit particularly close to home. I can still speak the language pretty well, so that made it even worse because I could directly understand what the kids were saying without having it filtered by the subtitles.

I have never been to the red light district so I can't say from personal experience, but I have been to Calcutta a number of times, and the film looked pretty accurate. The kids lived in general squalor, worked all day and night cooking and cleaning, were subject to all sorts of abuse (certainly mental and often physical), were not being educated in any way, and had no hope of ever really getting out of this situation. The girls could pretty much look to joining "the line" (that's what they called the sex worker because they line the sides of the streets in the district) and the guys could look forward to being pimps, doing drugs, or some other form of poverty driven delinquency. God, compared to our lives, these kids had an unbelievably horrible life, yet they still harbored hope. Why.. rather how?

Like anybody with a half a heart, you had to feel for these kids and their parents while you watched this movie. I felt pretty awful throughout (yeah, if you're looking for a nice relaxing movie to take date to or something, this isn't it) just like most people I'm sure did. AND THEN? That's the question. Then what?! I went home just like everybody else. I can't forget about it though. What are we supposed to do?

Maybe I can appease my conscience by donating some money to the fund, and then? Hey, I figure I've done my part, haven't I? Maybe I can tell a bunch of my friends about it, and maybe they'll donate some money too... and then? What difference will it make? What about all the kids in all the other red light districts in India or Africa. Why stop there? What about those in America and the rest of the world? I guess this is how people go crazy. There is no end to it I guess.

I head that a third of the world lives on less than $1 a day, and half live on less than $2. Is this my problem? Whose problem is this? What can I do? What should I do? It gets pretty philosophical from here, but its interesting, so I think I'll pick it up from here again next time.

In the mean time, I can't help but think of the story of the star fish. You know that one where a little kid goes to the beach with his mom. Its low tide, so there are like hundreds of star fish that got left on the shore. I guess starfish die when they aren't in water, so unless the tide comes back soon, they are going to die. I don't know how, but the kid knows this, and starts picking up starfish and throwing them into the ocean. He keeps this up for a while, and his mom (who's probably sitting underneath a beach umbrella reading some sappy romance novel cause she's a sentimentalist) asks him what the hell he is doing. He tells her. Mom then says, "well honey, there are hundreds of them all along the beach, you aren't gonna make a difference, so why don't you give it a rest, and go play in the water." The kid says, "maybe I can't make a difference to them all, but I bet I made a difference to this one," and throws another one back in. Ok, so I suck at telling stories, but if you wanna read the actual Starfish Story click here.

Go figure, the official story has a wise man in it. Anyway you get the point. Maybe we shouldn't worry about how messed up the entire world is, cause that doesn't solve anything, and only drives you crazy. If everybody did a little bit (even sending a hundred bucks to get some kid in Calcutta a camera) it would add up to something. Even if it didn't, it would be something at least that one kid. Maybe that's all we can hope for, and maybe that's enough.

Hello World!...

No spectacular big bang here. Just a notice that I'm here. Why? Well apparently I talk too much! Can you believe that? I guess my friends and family didn't have any trouble haha. Endearing to some of course, informative to some others, and no doubt, irritating to yet more. Either way, I figure, if its a matter of just getting it out of my system, why not subject you (aka the world or perhaps no one at all, it doesn't really matter to me) to it? why not indeed! Its basically just cathartic anyway right? Get your thoughts out and there are less to distractingly swirl around in your head. So.. here I am.

And now, off I go because I'm at work and more likely than not, my supervisor would'nt be too fond of finding out that I was busy writing to noone instead of doing whatever I'm supposed to be doing... (I'll have much more to say on this, I can already tell...)