In the article “The Framing of Immigration” the authors, George Lakoff and Sam Ferguson, claim that the United States of America has poor and inefficient discussions on immigration because when the nation frames immigration, this broad subject is inadequately simplified and therefore the debates and arguments are one sided and unfair. Lakoff and Ferguson further support this claim by using hard evidence to demonstrate that the nation is framing immigration by using the illegal frame, the security frame, and the economic frame.
The authors argue that when the nation uses the word “illegal immigrant”, the nation is framing immigrants as criminals. The authors begin by stating that the word illegal is a strong and unfair word because the people who are associated with the word illegal are criminals. This implies and frames all immigrants as criminals. Aside from this implication, the authors also demonstrate that the word illegal is unfair by placing the word illegal on other types of people. One example is that if a driver who got a speeding ticket were to be referred to as an “illegal driver” then that would be an extreme title just for a person who committed a minor offense (20). Another example is that if a businessman who didn’t pay his taxes on time were to be referred to as an “illegal businessmen” that would also be an extreme title just for a person who committed a minor offense (20). With these examples the authors make it clear why it is unfair for the nation to
In order to dehumanize a group of people, there must first be a clear separation between who is the “us” and “them.” The conservative documentary Border War: The Battle Over Illegal Immigration (2006), takes the viewer into the lives of several people who are impacted by the growing issue of undocumented Mexican immigrants crossing the The Mexico–United States border. This film creates a one-dimensional or single conception of undocumented immigrants through the use of language, such as “illegal” or “alien” and various other combinations. Another method is through the imagery it showed while there was dialogue being said. Most of the imagery in this film creates a narrative that undocumented Mexican immigrants are violent and a threat to Americans. Additionally, the sympathizers and protesters against border reform were portrayed as anti-American radicals. The production of this documentary was not only used to direct our view of undocumented immigrants to a single account, but also to establish false truths that turn undocumented immigrants into a “them.”
5) and has actually made concessions that play into the labeling of community members as good-immigrant and bad-immigrant. The labels of good and bad immigrant only helps to further normalize the criminalization and dehumanization of people based on their migrant status. “The logical consequence of adopting a good-immigrant and a bad-immigrant binary is agreement that the undocumented are criminals and thus the natural and race neutral solution must be to punish and deport the undocumented for their reputed transgression–not to challenge the underlying structural reason people migrate.” (Gonzales, p. 151) This leads to the fragmentation of the migrant population and often leads to the splitting of families. The short term victories in immigration reform with the onset of bills such as DACA (Deferred Action for Children Act) playing on the depiction of parents forcing illegal migration on their children and the institutional recognition of it not being the child’s fault that their parent were criminals continues to deny the larger societal structures that continue to only perpetuate deferred consequence under the guise of progress.
When immigration policy is discussed, typically, it is discussed within the confines of egalitarian notions and sentiments, and inside the boundaries and parameters set by generally Marxist-influenced social democracy. Characteristically, it is not discussed pertaining to the concept of a social order built on the rights of property owners, sharers, and contributors to and of the common stock- which at their discretion- may exclude bad apples, lazy contributors, rotten characters, trespassers, and terrorists. Once egalitarian sentiments and notions are rejected full-scale- (only giving credence to those that have empirical weight or logical consistency) more proper, more substantive interdisciplinary analyses may reveal that the current investigative techniques employed by current mainstream political theorists are- in the context of reality, incorrect, superficial and quite shallow.
But one prevalent issue that has continued to be the source of much controversy is immigration. Founded on immigration this issue is not new to this country. Although it’s an issue that has been around for many years the mixed sentiments directed at it have only continued to become more prevalent. This may be due to the various perspectives from which it is viewed. The way in which an issue is looked at is influenced by various factors which become evident when the issue of immigration is discussed.
The purpose of this essay is to point out that immigrants are a group that are discriminated against and that many of the allegations, in particular the allegation that immigrants avoid paying taxes, are false and misleading. The importance of this topic is to point out the erroneousness of these claims so that people will recognize the merits of immigrants that include honesty, diligence, and assistance to our economy and desist from scapegoating them. Stereotyping immigrants and unjustly accusing them only consequents in spreading lies and myths that can be harmful to our economy (as well as to the individuals involved) since we preclude ourselves form benefitting form their skills and we react in a distorted manner. The essay starts off by introducing the group, before reviewing historical attitude to the group, the unjustness of American attitude towards immigrants, correction of the myth that immigrants avoid paying taxes, and demonstration that immigrants are a resilient and hardworking group. Not only do immigrants even illegal immigrants pay their taxes (even though being ITIN holders they can escape
The subject of illegal immigration coupled with the concern of the growing number of illegal immigrants in the United States has been a long standing national debate. A single finite definition of the term “illegal immigrant” has proven difficult to specify. For the purposes of this paper, I will use the term “undocumented immigrant” defined as an individual who has “entered the United States illegally or violated the terms of their residency status” (Chan, Scott, Krishel, Bramwell, and Clark, 2006).
In order to gain favor with the native masses, it seems that many politicians have used immigrants has scapegoats. More to the point, when trying to find a way to isolate a country’s problems whether it be unemployment or the economy, most politicians try to find a scapegoat to blame for the mishaps of the country’s well-being. For example, when the Marijuana tax act of 1937 was passed its sole purpose was to halt the immigration of people from Mexico. Moreover, many blamed the immigrants from Mexico for the usage of Marijuana. As the usage exponentially increased within the United States, the political solution was a blame on immigration. This is but one of the many reasons immigrants become targeted by politicians and the government. However,
The reforming of America?s immigration policy is something that can no longer be avoided and must be dealt with as soon as possible. Years of neglect by governmental agencies and policies makers have now made this issue one of the biggest in American politics. First of it must be understood that immigration does no only effect curtain areas of the country and curtain aspect of public life but rather all of American life. Both legal and illegal immigration affect major issues such as jobs availability for all citizens, wages, education in public schools system and in general, health care issues, and the homeland security.
Whether you fall in the left or right of the political spectrum, both can agree the current immigration system is broken. Decades upon decades upon decades the immigration system has failed millions of people. The issue of immigration has always been a political topic for various border states such as California, Texas, and Arizona. All states have different approaches on how to fix or minimize the fallacies of immigration. Immigration is now a bigger issue to tackle since then-candidate Trump decided to stop illegal immigration. Now as President, Trump rescinded DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) has led to immigration being the forefront of national priority.
In the article, “Media can Broaden the Immigration Debate by Putting a Human Face on Immigrant Experiences” by Richard Pineda not only simplifies immigration as a whole, but essentially lacks the sufficient amount of information that would effectively validate why the economic impact of immigration in America is so eminent. Because immigration is such a broad topic, authors like Pineda have essentially focused on only one aspect to examine and analyze; however, the evidence provided in this particular article does not clarify any of the existing ambiguity of the issue. In this case, Pineda asserts that, “the United States will always have economic enticements and global economic pressure requiring workforces to move into a place much more
According to Thompson, the language which is used to construct the representation of immigrants is describing people as “illegal” or “alien” versus describing them as “undocumented” or “unauthorized.” (p.491) However, politics has become more upset and the media organizations are trying to codify language to make it neutral. Somehow, the government are exasperating immigrants as a host of negative connotation, meaning labeling them as criminals. The language that is being justified as inequality and oppression is how people mistreat all people of color especially, Latinos, which she talks about the most in this article. For example, she mentions immigrants has been called wet backs, aliens and wet backs. Those words have a powerful meaning upon them. In other words, people claim they are only neutral. Based on the influences of perception about public
It seems unusual for people to consider immigrants criminals to this day. Although we are in the 21st century, most immigrants are frowned upon and known to bring their cultural tendencies to the United States and cause harm. In Bianca E Bersani and Alex R. Piquero’s essay “Immigrants don’t commit more crimes. Why does the myth persist?” it is shown through various ways that immigrants commit less crime than native-born peers. Bersani and Piquero’s intention when writing this article was to prove to the nation that people are committing the same mistake as they did when large numbers of Polish, Italians, and Irish migrated to the United States and were blamed for crime without probable crime. Bersani and Piquero show the respect and commitment that immigrants have towards the authorities, providing another example that would diminish the fact of them committing crime.
In recent times, illegal immigration has become a key political issue in the United States. A great deal of the debate on illegal immigration, centers on a workable path to United States citizenship. Immigration policy has been at the center of large public demonstrations and sustained political debate in the United States. This has resulted in a need for a better understanding of the politics of immigration policy. Immigration policy by its nature has several different aims, supporters and opponents vary based on types of immigration policy.1
Despite the radicalized economic, social, and political dimensions of US immigration, policymakers like President Obama continue to sustain a singular view of US immigration that I have argued is oriented around a white and European immigration experience. By revealing how Chinese, Japanese, Italian and German immigrants have faced economic, social, and political adversities, I have disproved President Obama’s claim that the United States has been “a beacon to the world” to these immigrant groups. President Obama’s claim is particularly problematic because it highlights how the paradox of immigration has diminished the severity and scope of United States’ exclusive immigration policies. As policymakers begin to address the current issues of the American immigration system, I argue that this objective is difficult to achieve.
There are many controversial issues related to political communication in the world today. In my opinion one of the most important issues is illegal immigration. Every year thousands of illegal immigrants sneak into the United States and take advantage of our government. Unfortunately, the under enforcement of U.S. immigration laws is a crisis, and several states are taking it upon themselves to enforce their own immigration laws. Illegal immigration has contributed to many problems including public policies, economic and labor markets, neoclassical models, trade laboralization, poverty, over population, and many more. The media evokes social debate over borders, boundaries, and citizens. The usage of politicians and