Librarian Arrested, Shackled; She's An Illegal From Mexico

epiphany · August 2, 2008, 7:44pm

“How many of you who think this young library worker should be jailed and then deported have had meaningful communication with undocumented aliens? Really talked to them, grasped their situations, understood their desperation?”

Renee, I can’t believe you’re asking this. Did you not read what I wrote earlier on this thread, and additionally on other threads? And yes, some States are severely & disproportionately affected by these new arrivals, & I’m tired of repeating the fact that those most affected are not those who can afford, like some of us, to pay $3/lb for bananas (or would choose to), but those legal residents who have no options to attend schools where English is the main language spoken in the classroom & on the playground. Have you any idea how many poor, native-born children are affected in some States? And what are their options? Often it is homeschooling, which means in their case an even further reduction in their economic status, if that’s possible.

Mini thinks he knows me. He does not. He only targets me because I am one of the few CC posters brave enough to call it like it is. He disrespects & mocks my positions (which incidentally he distorts, falsifies, & presumes inaccurately). His viewpoint is limited; I don’t care how much he thinks he knows. He is no advocate of poor people, unless they’ve immigrated here illegally. Further, I myself have railed on about corporate capitalism ad nauseam on CC. (He knows that.) He chooses to ignore that & instead to create an inaccurate representation of me. Here’s a clue, mini: I’m not your despicable, spoiled U.S. consumer whom you love to hate & stereotype on CC. And the sarcastic remarks about “not being tainted by immorality” are particularly offensive.

You see, mini doesn’t target the posters on CC who show open contempt for illegal workers/residents, & he knows very well that I don’t have such contempt. He’d rather go after people who have more cogent arguments than just the fact that someone “met hundreds of undocumented workers.” I don’t think one needs to meet “hundreds” to have some feel for the scope of the problem. But in order to have any moral vision whatsoever, one also needs to meet those affected by their arrival – WHOEVER (plural) has “caused” or produced that arrival. A one-sided morality is a hollow one with no credibility.

Quote:
“The current crop of immigrants are not people being pulled to the U.S. by the lure of opportunity, but pushed off their land and banished from their communities to make way for the lure of opportunity for big business.”

That’s just nonsense. It’s not either/or. It’s both/and. They leave because they’re desperate – lacking opportunities in their land. BEFORE NAFTA, they came, regardless of the additional percentage boost after NAFTA. They come because there are openings & the possibility of a better future. They’re not coming here for the hell of it.

ReneeV · August 2, 2008, 7:46pm

I’ll just post again rather than editing again…my point in telling about my encounter with my former student was that almost 10 years later he was pursuing education and contributing to the economy (like the library worker). I didn’t ask if he had a green card or SS number.

ReneeV · August 2, 2008, 7:47pm

Epiphany, the reason I asked the question you quote is because, as far as I can tell, you are the only one.

tango14 · August 2, 2008, 7:51pm

The sad stories and desperation of those here illegally are irrelevant. Have you ever listened to the sad stories/horror stories of those from countries where the problems are far worse than abject poverty and who are waiting to come here legally? The only difference is that they somehow by hook or crook got into the country.

A person who steals food or clothing because they can’t afford to pay for it is still punished for stealing. The circumstances might be taken into account during sentencing. The same should hold true here. This woman has stolen (whether she knew the SS# was someone else’s or not) and should be punished for this and she should suffer the same consequences as a legal immigrant or citizen who did the same.

epiphany · August 2, 2008, 7:59pm

I’m relieved, Renee.

The problem with your anecdotal story is that there are hundreds if not millions of such stories. I posted that elsewhere, probably on another thread about immigration in the Cafe. How can a human being not be moved by one story? (Even one) I repeat: It doesn’t matter to me – & possibly shouldn’t matter to many others – that a hardworking library employee here not of her own choice would, should she be a unique or rare case, be absorbed “above-ground,” so to speak. But we’re not talking about one case, nor about one consequence. We’re talking about consequences in many industries, to many services (including social services that are supposed also to serve desperate citizens not from Latin America, who rely on those services).

I think people who advocate for “just one more exception” (that’s really what this thread is about) are subconsciously arguing for open borders. There’s no other way to state it. Either you advocate & respect some finite limits, & the concept of enforcement, or there will always be one more very legitimate heart-tugging story. Always. Because there truly are. These are human beings, which is why many of us are moved to compassion. But compassion becomes sentiment without a moral context for that compassion, & without a measurement against the need for compassion for others, as well.

Bay · August 2, 2008, 8:00pm

tango14, you raise a very good point. SOME Mexicans may be poor, but they are not persecuted, so they are not given refugee status for U.S. immigration purposes. It is not America’s responsibility to raise Mexico’s standard of living to the equivalent of our own. That is Mexico’s responsibility. It is much easier for Mexico, however, to send their poor here.

mini · August 2, 2008, 9:38pm

It doesn’t matter. They are here. They aren’t going home, under either Dems or Reps. And they don’t have a home. So the moral issue is how we plan to live with them. Not with one or two of them. With 12,000,000 of them. They aren’t leaving, and we aren’t kicking them out. That’s already established. How do you deal with them, morally, knowing that they are going to be here for a very long time?

“I’m not your despicable, spoiled U.S. consumer whom you love to hate & stereotype on CC. And the sarcastic remarks about “not being tainted by immorality” are particularly offensive.”

Well, you can decide to personally benefit from the fruits (literally or figuratively) of what you consider to be immorality, or you cannot. It’s your choice, not mine. (I personally left my job because I was unable to get government to enforce housing-related laws and regulations, and I thought my position morally untenable. And I haven’t purchased a Washington cherry since. But those are my choices, and you are welcome to make different ones.)

“And my experience was like yours, Mini --starting in 1996-97, I had students who had never been in school before, straight from Oaxaca, and my written Spanish materials were useless.”

When you went into their trailers, or in their old cars, or wherever, my older Mexican acquaintances, from northern and central Mexico, almost always had pictures of family, their hometowns, their sweethearts, their parents with them. They would sing songs about their old country, and their old homes. They always had something they had left behind to talk about. In my limited (though substantial) experience, the NAFTA refugees had none of these. It was very, very striking.

And, the thing is, none of them had relatives or friends here. The lure of opportunity hadn’t drawn ANY of them. They may have had hard lives “back home”, but they had had homes, and had no intentions of leaving them. They came only after having been displaced en masse.

epiphany · August 2, 2008, 9:46pm

“Well, you can decide to personally benefit from the fruits (literally or figuratively) of what you consider to be immorality, or you cannot. It’s your choice, not mine.”

How true, and you wouldn’t know how much I do or do not “personally benefit.” I’ll take my chances that I know my conscience & my habits much better than you do, as well as which unfortunate groups I personally serve. You aren’t the universal standard for morality on CC, as much as you apparently like to imply that. Nor is every moral or immoral act an act of consumption. Consumption is one of many behaviors with moral consequences. I may in fact consume (anything) much less than you do, as may other posters on CC. For all you know, I grow my own vegetables. Why do you think you know the purchase habits of people on CC? (Why? Because you stereotype people - assuming those of the educated class have particular buying habits.)

In any case, I have no guilt about this topic. I know where my services have gone, including free services.

zoosermom · August 2, 2008, 9:57pm

I’ve spent thousands of hours over more than 20 years working as a literacy volunteer to people, most of whom are illegal immigrants… As I’ve posted on other threads, I have noticed in more recent years that the people I’ve encountered are folks who do not speak English and have no history of literacy in any language. I have also noticed that many don’t want to be here, never wanted to leave home and have no intention of assimilating. I also live next door to a big, beautiful Victorian home that the owner has turned into a boarding house for the illegal workers at his business. I see, speak to, deal with and help illegals on a daily basis. I still believe without qualification that our laws must be enforced.

epiphany · August 2, 2008, 10:00pm

“The lure of opportunity hadn’t drawn ANY of them.”

But we didn’t observe them traveling south, at least much. (They went to South America when they were “displaced”?) And if not, did it have a teeny tiny bit to do with the limited opportunities south of them as opposed to the abundant opportunities & free social services & unenforced immigration violations north of them? In the case of the NAFTA results, it was a simultaneous push and pull.

epiphany · August 2, 2008, 10:05pm

“I have also noticed that many don’t want to be here, never wanted to leave home and have no intention of assimilating.”

Being a fair debater, I will allow that such an observation would tend to support mini’s contentions. People who don’t volunteer to leave would not be inclined to embrace an outside culture. That I perfectly understand. But immigration policies must deal both with the causes of it and the results of it. Accounting for only one end of the spectrum is futile, and will not ensure any measure of control. And currently, neither the causes nor the results are being addressed rationally by the gov’t.

mini · August 2, 2008, 10:08pm

They weren’t coming here before NAFTA.

“I still believe without qualification that our laws must be enforced.”

Got it. I understand that, and accept it. But now that you know that 12,000,000 people aren’t going to be sent back, whatever your belief, how do you think, morally, we should deal with it? I think you already are, providing literacy services. Probably, if there is demand, do you think they should be increased? (After all, if they become literate, it is easier for them to hide - sounds like you don’t turn your students in.) Do you think providing more literacy services is a moral thing to do? (I imagine you do, as you volunteer.) I think so, too. But others might have a different take.

zoosermom · August 2, 2008, 10:43pm

Mini and Epiphany, I view this issue as incredibly complicated. I alo know that there is no good answer at all. I volunteer because I don’t believe anyone is ever harmed by becoming literate. That everyone benefits from that literacy. That I am a human being as are they and it is proper to lend a helping hand. I don’t think the government should provide literacy services, however I think people who can help should definitely do so. That said, I do think the laws should be enforced. I do not support large-scale deportation. This problem took decades to create and we can be patient in solving it. Attrition through enforcement has been working well. Let’s keep enforcing laws, particularly on employers. If people can’t get jobs, they won’t continue to come. The voluntary deportation program that I read about this week seems like a good idea. We need to put pressure upon and offer support to the native countries so that their most vulnerable citizens aren’t driven out and exploited.

Epiphany, I think Mini has a lot right about NAFTA and its consequences. Where we disagree is with what to do now. I think that encouraging unwilling immigrants to come where they don’t want to be and where they aren’t welcome is cruel. I have a major problem with the callous destruction of families. I don’t think allowing human beings who would prefer to remain in their homes and cultures to become second class citizens in America is appropriate.

mini · August 2, 2008, 11:01pm

“I think that encouraging unwilling immigrants to come where they don’t want to be and where they aren’t welcome is cruel. I have a major problem with the callous destruction of families. I don’t think allowing human beings who would prefer to remain in their homes and cultures to become second class citizens in America is appropriate.”

Well, I don’t disagree with this in the least. But by the time they reach the border, their homes, families, and communities are long gone. I guess what you are saying is that we should enforce the laws “selectively” (since you don’t support large-scale deportation.)

I don’t know what to think about the employer thing. Americans want inexpensive food, which requires inexpensive labor. I can tell that where I live, farms and packing plants beg for workers, but they aren’t showing up. We have pretty hefty unemployment in Spokane, Washington, even among young college graduates, but no one ever joins the cherry picking crews from there (and they can earn, if they are good, $20/hour, and sometimes more.) There isn’t a long list of folks applying to wash dishes in Chinese restaurants either, though this could change as the economy continues to go south. (I’ve seen that happen with local McD’s, etc. It used to be mostly youth labor - not so much anymore.)

As for NAFTA, the horse is out of the barn. I don’t see U.S. or multinational companies coughing up billions of dollars in “reparations” to make it possible for communities to rebuild. I’ve seen firsthand in my Indian experiences what happens when folks are kicked off their land and forced to travel hundreds of miles in search of work as migrant laborers (I’m supporting their kids in hostels, because they can’t take their kids with them.) They aren’t coming back. There isn’t a “back” to return to.

Meanwhile, bless you for your literacy work. We may disagree about what “should” happen, but it doesn’t matter, because for millions and millions, they simply aren’t going “back”. Literacy can only help them, and us, deal with that reality.

epiphany · August 2, 2008, 11:14pm

“Epiphany, I think Mini has a lot right about NAFTA and its consequences.”

So do I, zoos. But where he and I disagree is in the extent of those consequences, and the motivations. For example, he said, “They weren’t coming here before NAFTA.” Yes they were. Not in as great numbers, but they were.

Like you, I have both volunteered & earned legitimate money serving these people, to whom taxes additionally went supporting their attendance in public schools, and further-- their domination in public schools, in which poor black & poor southeast Asian students of legal status were “kicked off their [educational] land” by illegal arrivals usurping the system, rather than merely sharing in it. Mini may find this consequence a kind of rough justice or inconsequential, or an opportunity to make an other smart-aleck remark (to borrow from someone else here). I, OTOH, am not amused. They are the kinds of down-to-earth moral dichotomies mini refuses to reconcile, or even to acknowledge require reconciling within a cohesive framework.

Mini didn’t address his question to me (naturally), but myself, I’ve already weighed in on whether they should be literate. Moreover, I think the eventual citizenship of any illegal arrival from any land, including anywhere in Latin America, should be accompanied by a literacy requirement, as illiterate people make less informed citizens & participants.

zoosermom · August 2, 2008, 11:18pm

Mini, I think the news makes clear that a lot of people are going home and if those happen to be people I’ve dealt with, then I consider that a gift. I’ve read a few (less than a handful) of articles about immigrants going home and using their new skills and abilities to make meaningful changes at home. I think that’s a good thing. As far as enforcing selectively, I guess I do support that. I cop to my own hypocrisy, ok? First, let’s send back anyone convicted of a crime other than the entrance. Actually, those are the only people who need to be deported. As far as everyone else, enforce universally and hard against employers. At the same time, let’s have a partnership between the US and the native countries to help them come or stay at home and be enforced. Let’s also not allow our country to be the escape valve for corrupt regimes. I don’t want to be part of that. If we send back criminals, some immigrants go back home because they can’t be employed here, and many more never come, then we can achieve some level of stability and decide how to proceed for those who remain. I’m a patient woman. One step at a time. The status quo is not ideal, but we don’t need to do anything drastic like deport millions of people or legalize them either.

mini · August 2, 2008, 11:33pm

I think “a lot” of people going “home” is rather like the “lot of people” returning to Iraq - 5,000,000 refugees (more each day), and fewer than 30,000 returning.

I’m no fonder of “criminals” than you are.

Hard enforcement against employers (criminals? where should we send them?) is a nice idea, and it isn’t going to happen - under either Democrats or Republicans.

I actually think “stability” will be reached, but for a very different reason. The number of healthy young men (and a very few women) from southern Mexico/northern Guatemala ready and able to escape is not infinite, and the difficulties (including the costs in actual dollar terms) are great. It becomes more and more difficult each year, as the few resources there are getting even scarcer.

I’m patient, too. We are going to legalize them eventually - the dynamics are such that it will be unavoidable, and we’ll end up in the long run with another population of hardworking, literate (thank you) Americans buying homes, starting businesses, sending their kids to college, and producing doctors, lawyers, engineers, and schoolteachers, much like happened after the last amnesty, and which you can actually visit if you want to come meet me in Wenatchee, Washington. (Some will even be bilingual; most will end up speaking only English.)

jacques · August 2, 2008, 11:55pm

Isn’t America the land of “political asylum?”

How many Russians are here since the end of the cold war? Do they want to go back? What is the population of Brighton Beach?

I recently met an Iraqui (Christian) who left Iraq 20 years ago - actually escaped, did a brief stint in Jordon, 20 years in Sweden, and has been in the US briefly and nothing will make him leave.

He left Iraq at 9. The refugees aren’t just current.

epiphany · August 3, 2008, 2:40am

mini, the true literacy and true bilingualism is not going to happen any time soon. At least not for the recent arrivals. They are caught up in a cycle of ongoing family illiteracy that is being reinforced by my local & regional & statewide school systems, & further reinforced by the critical mass of dominant populations in various large pockets & population centers. Do not generalize from your region into other States which are overwhelmed. The young people do not aspire to higher education, let alone lofty white-collar careers. Nor do they aspire to assimilation. The new arrivals are not “sending their kids to college.” And this will continue to happen until our gov’t & the educational system in my State begin to face the problem of a high rate of generational illiteracy in all poor populations, but particularly black & Hispanic. Your projections do not hold true for vast sections where illegal arrivals from Latin America are a dominant presence.

epiphany · August 3, 2008, 3:10am

And just to remind ourselves that there continue to be contradictions and injustices to those outside of the label “illegal,” this was just published today. I’m not surprised at the story. As the box to the right indicates, this is both an ongoing narrative & an ongoing history. What I find appalling is the dishonesty & double-talk. Again, if there is no standard for dealing with undocumented workers, if there is little concern for border enforcement, then adopt that as a policy; open the borders The federal gov’t performs a number of contradictory & cynical tricks; state & local gov’ts play their own deceptive games. Just say it: 'Despite what we say, everything we do supports open borders, the removal of consequences, & procedural chaos. (And yes, I know: the root of some of this double-talk is the unholy alliance of businesses exploiting the labor of the desperate + the mixed agendas of gov’t itself.)

[S.F</a>. fund aids teen felons who are illegals](<a href=“http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/02/MNJH120OUN.DTL&tsp=1]S.F”>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/02/MNJH120OUN.DTL&tsp=1)

Librarian Arrested, Shackled; She's An Illegal From Mexico

CONNECT WITH US