What
You're Missing in our subscriber-only CounterPunch newsletter
Bush's Worst Appointment
Yet?
Read Jeffrey
St Clair's blazing expose of the new Interior Secretary nominee
, Dirk Kempthorne, and make up your own mind. Even in the dingy
history of Idaho's predators, Kempthorne stood proud as the dingiest
of them all. Now he's poised to seize his place in history. Will
he be the sleaziest Interior Secretary in history, sleazier than
Watt, fouler than Fall?
More on the great Israel Lobby debate! Norman Finkelstein blazes
a new path, asks "Are the Neo-Cons really committed Zionists?" "Bliss was it
in that dawn" Not in Michigan! Raymond Garcia describes
Dem governor's appalling plan to scapegoat youth and teachers. Plus the full print version of Virginia
Tilley's savage dissection on this website of the double-standard
onslaught on Hamas by the US and EU. CounterPunch Online is read by millions
of viewers each month! But remember, we are funded solely
by the subscribers to the print edition of CounterPunch. Please support this website by buying a subscription
to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you won't find
anywhere else, or by making a donation for the online edition. Remember contributions
are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now!
The recent wave of massive marches by
immigrant workers in US cities has the potential to redefine
the way the immigration debate proceeds in the US, if for no
other reason than it can no longer occur without input from immigrants.
No longer can the dialogue occur without an honest recognition
of the contribution immigrant workers make in this society. The
use of the word illegal' to describe immigrant workers who work
some of the lowest paying and least organized jobs will no longer
suffice to scare this group into passivity.
The word illegal' to describe
aliens' is designed to differentiate illegals' and citizens.
Thus pundits such as Mona Charen reacted to the recent spate
of huge demonstrations in support of immigrant workers,
"Most galling to many
Americans (both native-born and naturalized) is the attitude
of entitlement displayed by the illegals who thronged the streets
in recent weeks. To stage a demonstration demanding anything
when you are not in the country legally is an act of supreme
chutzpah."
And, just to show not only
nativist conservatives like Charen are up in arms, Hillary Clinton
has recently chimed in, "I am, you know, adamantly against
illegal immigrants." It is taken for granted that American
citizens have the right to be offended at those who benefit from
illegal acts in order to gain work. Should that be taken for
granted however? Are not many of the most angry anti-immigrant
rights activists beneficiaries of past violations of US law,
especially the constitution? Or put in a slightly different manner,
aren't they also descendants of immigrants who benefitted from
illegally constructed laws that conferred illegal entitlements
in labor markets through to the 1960's?
Consider the case of the arc
nativist media celebrity Lou Dobbs, who rails against illegals'
every evening on his CNN show. Dobbs hails from a family of European
immigrants and his working class parents raised him in a small
town in Idaho. An illegal' immigrant today who is stealing' jobs
could and should ask if Dobbs' parents and grandparents didn't
benefit from the Chinese Exclusion Acts. This massively and systemically
illegal violation of the US constitution enabled countless millions
of Americans from Europe to gain access to jobs, real estate,
and citizenship rights.
Talk about entitlements! If
one adds onto that the privileged access that Dobbs' parents
or grandparents had to land and political representation out
west and in the north that countless millions of African Americans
and other non-whites [e.g. Mexicans, Asians, etc.] were illegally
denied, the extent of entitlement' enjoyed by today's immigrant
"illegal" workers" crossing the Rio Grande looks
pretty lame. In fact, today's illegal' workers might wish they
could benefit from violations of the US constitution that facilitated
the social mobility enjoyed by descendants of legal' immigrants.
And they shouldn't be shy about
reminding today's anti-immigrant media celebrities and politicians
alike that they too are the products of past violations of US
laws that provided illegal entitlements to their immigrant ancestors.
Then at least honest discussion of illegal' immigration can begin
to take place in the US today.
Stephen Philion is an assistant professor of sociology
at St. Cloud State University in the Department of Sociology
and Anthropology, teaching social theory, sociology of race,
and China and Globalization. His writings can be found at his
website. He
can be reached at: stephen_philion@yahoo.com
Now
Available
from CounterPunch Books!
The Case
Against Israel
By Michael Neumann
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.