By Steven J. Grisafi, PhD.
Although I have repeatedly urged the termination of all immigration into the United States, I am not actually opposed to a path toward citizenship for those persons who have already arrived. However, the difficulty that I see in any proposal offering a path to citizenship for those who have come to the United States illegally lay in the principle of proportionality. Often I see written on the Internet the opinion Europeans have of America. They refer to it as “Brutal America.” In a way, I agree. The laws in America are harsh. While one may have the perception that the Beautiful People, the Rich and Famous in America, pass through the Justice System unscathed, prosecutors use the Law in the United States to bludgeon ordinary Americans. Any altercation one has with the Law brings with it a long laundry list of charges that is destructive of even the most modest career, with the consequent result that one is reduced to poverty. Then, because of the prevalent neo-liberal tendencies within the United States, such persons, having been reduced to poverty, essentially become wards of the State dependent upon the taxpayers” largess for their survival. Any proposal to offer amnesty, and citizenship(!), to those who disregard our laws ought to take into consideration the consequences for Americans who flaunt our laws.
Often I read the argument of proponents of amnesty, and citizenship, for illegal aliens within the United States that it is ridiculous to even consider deporting the estimated approximately eleven million illegal aliens believed to be already here. No one proposes any such thing. The most potent deterrent to anyone thinking of entering the United States illegally, with the intention of settling here, is the knowledge that they will live their entire lives in the shadow of the Law. They will be forever marked as Fugitives from Justice until they go to their graves. They would live their lives in fear that at any time somebody may uncover their secret then expose them and their family to the Law. Such is a horrible existence, far worse than the poverty they would suffer in their own country. Then, to know that any altercation with the Law in the United States reduces a person to poverty, they should choose to remain in their native country with the hope to improve it.
So, why then do we hear in America the incessant clamor to grant the rights of citizenship to those who desecrate its meaning? Some say it is for political expediency, to acquire the votes of such persons who would be expected to support the politicians who have absolved them. While this may motivate the politicians, what motivates the proponents of amnesty who do not seek political favors? The answer to this question lay in the obvious recognition that immigration, on such a large scale that the United States suffers on its southern border with Mexico, transforms a nation. Those who are displeased with the current national identity would seek to transform it into something else more suitable to their liking. Rather than seek to transform the United States into something else more suitable, perhaps it would be better to strive to improve one’s native country.