While reading through Lou Dobbs’ latest rant against illegal immigration, I noticed something was missing from his article, “A peculiar day of immigration rallies.” As most people know, these nationwide rallies were done mostly in support of the rights of illegal Latino immigrants. Here in Los Angeles, home to the embarrassing situation involving police and protesters, a lot of people went with their families – as a way of showing support for an issue that affects many of them personally – and most of those families were Latino. Read through the Lou Dobbs piece, however, and you might never know that. Dobbs somehow manages to write an entire “commentary” on the rallies without once mentioning Latinos, Hispanics, Chicanos, Mexico, Central America, or Spanish. He does, however, offer this sparkling summary of what he thinks thes e “illegal immigrants” and their supporters oppose:
“If yesterday’s demonstrators and their supporters in Congress and corporate America are serious about their deep desire for American citizenship, why don’t we hear any of them clearly say they’re willing to give up dual citizenship? Or that they’re willing to learn English and surrender demands of bilingual education? Or declare they embrace English as our official national language? Or demand that illegal employers of illegal aliens pay for the social, educational and medical costs now borne by the taxpayers?”
What troubles me about the way Lou Dobbs frames his assertions is that he pretends to be the new voice of reason at CNN. He has both conservative and moderate points of view, and he expresses them clearly and with a well-conceived mask of reason. Underlying that mask, however, is the very same kind of Manichaeism that feeds far too many dangerous assertions about “our” country and “our” people. Take a look at these two paragraphs from Dobbs:
“I couldn’t help but wonder as I watched monitors bringing images of the marches and demonstrations from all across the country, who should really be protesting on May Day. What about the millions of legal residents who followed the long, drawn-out process to secure a visa to enter the United States lawfully? Maybe they should be protesting. What about the seven-figure backlog at the Citizenship and Immigration Services agency of people who are following the rules. Should they demonstrate?
What about all of our fellow Americans who are being marginalized by the massive importation of illegal, low-cost and mostly uneducated labor into this country? Perhaps those citizens should take to the streets. And what about the more than 250 million Americans who make up our middle class and those who aspire to it whose wages have stagnated and who are paying for the social, medical and economic costs of illegal immigration? That’s a big march.”
In the first paragraph, Dobbs seems to forget that many of the people who waited and got their residency status legally might also be related to people that arrived illegally. His empty rhetorical questions do little more than try to set up illegal immigrants as the bogey men for so many of the ills visiting our nation (in particular the middle class). Look at that second sentence – isn’t it nice for naive racists to know that a powerful media figure like none other than Lou Dobbs also thinks they’re marginalized by “illegal, low-cost and mostly uneducated labor”. Remarkable that Dobbs can clump so many people into such a profoundly negative collective. He doesn’t stop there. Dobbs goes on to claim that illegal immigration is the main culprit behind the struggles of “more than 250 million Americans who make up our middle class.” Apparently, it’s illegal immigrants who have forgotten about America’s middle class – not the super wealthy that have gotten wealthier, or the current administration – which has made it so easy for people to ruin themselves while aspiring to the dream of home ownership. Really, Mr. Dobbs, what are the “social, medical and economic costs of illegal immigration”? And why didn’t your rant include a single word about the actions of police in Los Angeles?