Someone interested in immigration issues sent this notice out. It looks like it should be very interesting. How about a “homework” assignment 🙂 We all watch and share our thoughts afterwards! No one will be graded on their remarks, promise!
PROJECT IMMIGRATION: MELTING POT MELTDOWN
An In-Depth Look at All Sides of the Immigration DebateOn Sunday, June 8th at 7:00 PM, ABC 7/WJLA-TV News Anchor Leon Harris and Special Projects Reporter Andrea McCarren will host a one-hour special on immigration and its profound impact on the Washington area. The show provides a rare look at the personal stories of illegal immigrants and those who oppose them. “This special reflects WJLA’s ongoing commitment to covering the contentious topic of Immigration,” said Bill Lord, WJLA-TV’s VP of News. “It has become one of the most difficult and divisive issues facing our local governments today.”
Harris, McCarren and Photographer Dave Webb recently traveled to Central America to show viewers where the pursuit of the American dream often begins. The team also documents the pipeline of money earned in the U.S. and sent to countries like El Salvador. Additionally, the ABC 7 news team reports on how immigration affects our schools, healthcare facilities and law enforcement. Beth Mausteller is the Executive Producer of the special. Michael Wright is the editor.
“The United States is being invaded,” the executive director of the Maryland Minutemen tells ABC 7. “And if we don’t do something about it, we’re going to lose our country.” In contrast, a day laborer who came to this country illegally told our crew, “We come to the United States looking for a dignified job… and I think that is not a crime.”
87 Thoughts to “Watch Immigration Special, Channel 7, Sunday Evening, June 8th!”
Comments are closed.
In contrast, a day laborer who came to this country illegally told our crew, “We come to the United States looking for a dignified job… and I think that is not a crime.”
by posting this story you completely show your real position of this blog, you dont want a solution you want to give everyone a pass. that is not justice.
I’m all for people wanting the american dream, but wouldnt it be that much sweeter if it was had legally? Does a piece of pie you steal from the supermarket taste the same as one you purchase legally? I say the one purchased legally tastes far better, at least for someone who has a conscience and respects the law.
the united states is being invaded, it’s just that now we have decided to look around and realized that it’s been happening for a good long while. this blog isnt going to change it, 9500 liberty for sure isnt going to change it, the only thing that will change it is putting someone with sense in the white house. unfortuneately we do not have any of those people on the ballots. guess we have to wait another 4 years….
Could someone please record this and post it to google video? I would love to watch it but I’m campaigning right now until late tonight for my candidate for VA’s 11th congressional district Doug Denneny!
http://www.dougforcongress.com
It’s not being invaded, it’s being betrayed from within, by america-haters like the minuteboys who are in effect al queda’s little helpers since they are the single biggest obstacle to securing the border.
“by posting this story you completely show your real position of this blog”
They posted views from both sides of the debate. That’s as objective as it gets.
elvis: May I ask what is justice? One can view justice as requiring anyone who kills somebody to serve life in prison. Alternatively, in the name of justice, one can make an exception if that killing was in defense of life, and to a lesser extent, property.
I’d be interested in your views on this topic. Is justice completely blind or does justice require consideration of circumstance?
Here’s an idea. Let’s give them ALL a sedative and tell them to CALM DOWN! These people must be nervous wrecks worrying about “invasion” all the time. Aren’t there other things they should be worrying about?? Sheesh.
jus·tice Audio Help /ˈdʒʌstɪs/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[juhs-tis] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness: to uphold the justice of a cause.
2. rightfulness or lawfulness, as of a claim or title; justness of ground or reason: to complain with justice.
3. the moral principle determining just conduct.
4. conformity to this principle, as manifested in conduct; just conduct, dealing, or treatment.
5. the administering of deserved punishment or reward.
6. the maintenance or administration of what is just by law, as by judicial or other proceedings: a court of justice.
7. judgment of persons or causes by judicial process: to administer justice in a community.
8. a judicial officer; a judge or magistrate.
9. (initial capital letter) Also called Justice Department. the Department of Justice.
—Idioms10. bring to justice, to cause to come before a court for trial or to receive punishment for one’s misdeeds: The murderer was brought to justice.
11. do justice, a. to act or treat justly or fairly.
b. to appreciate properly: We must see this play again to do it justice.
c. to acquit in accordance with one’s abilities or potentialities: He finally got a role in which he could do himself justice as an actor.
As you can see, morality and law are horribly intertwined in this definition. I don’t think we can talk just about “law” when talking about “justice.” But “morality” has become so subjective, how do we judge fairly>? Surely there must be a balance.
kgotthardt: Your dictionary definition suggests that justice doesn’t require blind adherence to the law. I don’t think morality is the same as justice.
“I don’t think morality is the same as justice.” Neither do I! What I am saying is that justice is based on a notion of morality we have arrived at via our Constitution and law. However, this justice acknowledges that laws are often faulty and require change. Hence, we have a three-pronged system (the three branches of government) designed to uphold the highest order of what we consider justice. Do you see what I am saying? This isn’t the same kind of morality that a church might teach, but there is an element of that in our government and justice system.
Elvis,
You and others seem mighty focused on defining what this blog is and isn’t. Considering some of the major players who have spoken out openly, why are you surprised? I don’t think you are. I think you are trying to define the blog.
That’s a big challenge considering who some of the regular contributors are here. I would say that it would be very difficult to find a common denominator.
kgotthardt, I don’t believe morality is “morality we have arrived at via our Constitution and law.” Rather our Constitution and law is based on our morality. You can legislate anything; moral or not. Law is absolute; morality and justice aren’t.
IOW, “rule of law” requires unyielding obeyence. Justice and morality require more.
Elvis,
How was posting this special, prior to ANYONE viewing, showing bias? I, along with everyone else here, had no idea what it would, or would not be. If you feel it was biased, maybe that is because you are looking for a black and white solutions, void of humanity, to fit your world view. I don’t claim to know the anwser, but I do know what it is not. And people like Greg, Steve Thomas, and Robert Duecaster are the what ” I don’t want” in any solution.
I remember, when we were building our house, we couldn’t even get contractors to take the time to give us estimates they were so busy, but that was when there was more work than people could handle. Now economics has set in, and there is not enough work for all now. That is the ebb and flow.
Actually, the piece was an attempt to provide a balanced unbiased view, but from my perspective tilted more towards those like Elvis who are obsessed with “the invasion”. Prince William was profiled, and even Greg and Elena (I think that was Elena) appeared for a few seconds, but not named.
I particularly “liked” the guy from Manassas who said his kid was doing so much better in school now that the Hispanics have left. Any other kids suddenly become geniuses in the last few months?
There were plenty of interviews with people who outlined the negative consequences of illegal immigration, but they also visited El Salvador to profile the families and communities that were left behind. I thought that was very important in providing the human face to the issue. There were also interviews with day laborers here that provided their perspective. I’m sure it will make the Elvises of the world cheer that it is very difficult for those immigrants to survive now, many want to return home, and they are telling others not to come.
But it is clear that the key to stopping illegal immigration from Latin America requires a comprehensive approach, and the forces that drive people to leave their homes must be addressed. Just kicking people out is shortsighted. Yes, I believe it is our responsibility to help.
One interesting segment mentioned that some international companies such as Dell have opened customer service call centers in El Salvador because they value the bilingual skills that deportees bring back with them. What a great idea, since outsourcing happens anyway.
The dependence on remittances was mentioned, and that is a problem. But their economy is intertwined with ours, and we have a responsibility to recognize and address that.
The final segment featured a couple in Maryland who raise money on their own for poor schools in El Salvador, so that the children of today will become better educated and not think of leaving El Salvador. To me, those people are heroes.
Firedancer,
Yes, that was me 🙂
I agree with your assessment. I have, and will continue to say, that until we truly become vested in helping build up our southern border neighbors, we will continue to struggle with illegal immigration. Who could not be affected by a mother who left her children behind, so that she could provide a standard of living that we would consider far below poverty level in this country. I was moved and touched by so many only striving to provide for their families.
I was hoping against hope that it would not be about day laborers because I’m sure that they are a very small fraction of the total undocumented population.
It did show the humanistic aspect fairly well but we realize that we can not allow everybody into the United States otherwise we could conceivably ‘kill the goose that lays the golden egg.’
I did not know that it costs a month’s salary to fill out the visa application with no guarantee of approval was informative. And that Dell and other companies are hiring the deportees for their language abilities was very interesting as well. Also, the video of the man with the Help Save Manassas sticker rushing the crowd at the McCoart building was sickening.
They really just touched the tip of the iceberg. They could do a weekly show about this issue from now until Novemeber and still not do the topic justice. What I would like to see is a show about all the success stories of previously undocumented immigrants and their lives and professions today.
What did this man do? Did he actually attack the crowd?
Mackie,
I am trying to find the show online. If anyone want to help do the search on wjla.com, that would be great!
I’m unclear what his problem was. But he and at least one other man deliberately walked from the HSM section down a good distance and into the crowd where a scuffle erupted and the police extracted the man and told him to leave. I’m unsure if he believed a flag had been treated improperly or what the problem exactly was. Maybe someone else has more information?
kgotthardt, I don’t believe morality is “morality we have arrived at via our Constitution and law.” I don’t think I said this clearly, Frazil. What I meant was our national concept of morality is intertiwined with personal beliefs on morality, and we see this in the product of our Constitution and Law…meaning, our founding fathers did incorporate their belief systems into our government systems (which can’t be helped in some ways because notions of morality are so much a part of people). We vote based on our morals to some extent. Does that make more sense?
‘IOW, “rule of law” requires unyielding obeyence. Justice and morality require more.’
YES! VERY well stated. Wish I had thought of it. LOL!
“Who could not be affected by a mother who left her children behind, so that she could provide a standard of living that we would consider far below poverty level in this country.”
Obviously and sadly, GL!
This is a bit off topic, but I want to express my thought before I forget it.
When we are arguing about immigration in general, some individuals (and this is in the nationwide argument, not exculsivly about this site)…anyway, there are some individuals who point out that “all the other immigrant groups have been able to learn our language and assimulate into our culture.”
If this is true then the blame (if you can even call it that) should be shared with the Chinese, I mean everytime I visit Chinatown I can’t read half the signs. There are still some people in Chinatown who don’t speak English. Would this be a sign that they are not fully assimulated into the U.S.? I mean I thought we were working on making English the National Language? Sarcaism aside, Many Major cities have “China Town’s” some of them have been there for well more than a Hundred years, founded after Chinese workers came to make their fortunes working on the Railroads…you know the ones that united this country and were the lifeblood of America’s Industrial Revolution.
This “overlooked” culteral preservation is not limited to the Chinese either…
Baltimore Is one of the most the most culterally diverse cities in the region. They have parts called little Italy, little knossos and little Poland. Some places have signs that are in Greek and well as English.
Ultra Orthodox and Hassidic Jewish neighborhoods in New York and New Jeresy have Signs in Hebrew and English, residents still can do business in Yiddish. Sirens can be heard in some streets on Friday evening warning people that the Sabbath is approaching and to head home.
There are many little places all over the United States that are little Embassies of world culture. Most of these places were riled against by the Citizens, as being factories of crime and disease, but eventually they became accecpted entities. So I suspect will be the case with a lot of the Hispanic immigrants, legal and illegal alike. Currently they are running through the very tiresome gauntlet of accecptance from people, many of who’s ancestors ran the same gauntlet…but this is the 21st century, this is supposed to be the bright future where we remember our misconceptions of the past and learn to be more accecpting.
Unlike a few who still have the misconception that Hispanics in General are a culture that cannot assimulate anywhere but their own country (as was said fro every singal culteral minority who immigrated to these shores) I believe the Hispanics who want to be a part of our society will assimulate in their own way and likewise we will learn to accecpt the diffrences.
If you still question this, then please explain how the Amish, a minority group from Germany whom dress in the same ways they did over a hundred years ago and who speak German at home and do not fly American flags on Indpendence Day can be considered as “American as Apple Pie” while the other diverse groups are considered invading colonialist hordes?
(I have nothing against the Amish, I’m only using them as an ironic example. I feel they have as much right to live their lifestyle as any other group)
2cents-Rod
Good Points, Rod2155
Elena,
I have searched everywhere on WJLA’s site to find the video. I am anxious to see it. I was at my grandson’s graduation party last night and like a dummy forgot to set my DVR to record the show. I will keep looking. Maybe I will contact WJLA and see if they will put the broadcast online.
Rod,
That was a really wonderful thoughtful(as in full of thought) post. Your points are extremely well written. Thank you!
Hi Rod, I would agree with most of your post. My wife is Korean and there are definitely pockets here and there all over VA with Korean populations. In these pockets the store names are sometimes in Korean and most of the people only speak Korean. I have no problem with that just like I don’t have a problem with Hispanic populations around where I live (rt. 1 in Woodbridge). However, I do think that if your in the country illegally you should be deported which is why I’m for the resolution. For me it’s not really an issue of Hispanics not willing to assimilate, it’s just an issue of breaking the law. I think it’s great that they are proud of their culture just as my wife is of hers.
Hi Hello,
I’m for comprehensive Immigration Reform as well, I believe that Illegal Alien criminal elements should definatly A: be punished for their as decided by our laws and B: on top of that be deported after serving their sentence.
-however-
I still can’t bring myself to have families deported that came into this country Illegally yet worked hard to make a life, raise a family and paid taxes. I do recognize that this is unfair to those currently being hassled by our broken system to become citizens.
This is why I support the deninization of these hard working illegal immigrants based on merit on a county by county level in the state of Virginia as is provided in our constitution.
I don’t call it Amnesty because a denizen is meerly a guest of the state who is granted individual Liberties minus the right to vote or hold elective office. In order for them to do that, they would have to apply for full citizenship.
I also support better working relationships with our neighboors to the North and South to help promote better economies in both and allowing temporary workers to flow more easily. In some since I’m personally involved, because I’m applying for work in Doha, Qatar, I plan to work there for 5 or 10 years and send the money back here as well as work to advance the field of Education (and hopefully inaugurate the return of hand Drawn animation.)
I guess I have a wierd perspective because in a sense I’m applying to be a forigne guest worker in another country because my home country does not have many oppertunities for people in my profession.
When your job field gets outsourced, somtimes you must prepare to outsource with it…at least in terms of QUALITY (keyword) Childrens educational animation.
Great point Rod (or do you prefer Rod2155?)… It is extremely sad that sometimes families get caught up in this and sometimes get broken up. I hate the fact that it does happen but at the same time the parents knew what they were doing was wrong by coming here. Does that make it any less sad, no, it’s still heartbreaking. However, if a member of the family breaks the law (and gets arrested) if they are found to be here illegally I do think that they should be deported. It sucks but how else do you deal with it… Your denizen idea does sound interesting, I’m going to have to do some research on it.
Childrens educational animation, that sounds like fun! Good luck with your work, it sounds like your doing a pretty great thing. I hate seeing my little cousins watching “cartoons” that are computer generated.
Feeling a little down about the future? Take a moment and look at the
2008 Youth Salute pages in the MJM/PN — today features Freedom High School
– a gifted, talented and diverse group.
I totaly agree with both of you….But….Im a little upset and less forgiving on how we got to this point. I can’t put full blame on all illegals but I can blame my Government for not enforcing our laws and not protecting its citizens. I truly believe that a big part of this Counties (PWC) economic meltdown is partially due to this very subject which really angers me to think it possibly could of been avoided in our town had the local Government got involved earlier. With that said now we are faced with “what to do”..
I agree with Rod and Hello that is…Sorry
hello, 9. June 2008, 12:48
“However, if a member of the family breaks the law (and gets arrested) if they are found to be here illegally I do think that they should be deported.”
-This is where we reach compromise because I totally have no problem with this statement…
Deninization is not perfect, it is a hold over from English Common Law and was on our books before the constitutional convention. It has never been overturned by our government nor the supreme court and was even endorsed by Blackwell in commentary.
Like any program that limits rights, there is the potential for abuse, but it is a tool the the Commonwealth has at it’s disposal which could be implemented today if nessiscary. I’m not an expert in it, My father is, but When i tried playing devil’s advocate with him about it, It sounds pretty stable. Evidently it is written in such a way that even an incorporated city or county could Deninize a Forigne Citizen providing they serve the good of the State. The canidate must be endorsed by a person of stanting within the community. of course there will be a high risk of the case being taken to court, but it would buy time for any forigne alien in the State of VA. whom serves the cause of the Commonwealth, but could be deported according to Federal Law. Federal Law however has no provision to forcefully remove a State Recognized Denizen, unless the motion is determined in the U.S. or State Supreme Courts.
As far as I can recall Kentucky and VA are the only states with provisions for Denizens written into the State constitutions.
If we decided to go that route we would need to update the rules of Deninization for the 21st century.
Rod2155,
I want to thank you for your thoughtful, informative posts. You always make good and valid points.
Thanks!!!!!
“Great point Rod (or do you prefer Rod2155?)… ”
You can call me Rod, You can even learn a little about who I am by clicking on my name, I have it hotlinked to my YouTube home page where I keep my Animations. But on this forum, please just address me as Rod.
Thanks everyone
Rod,
Yiddish is actually a dying language, there has been a recent upsurge in teaching Yiddish along with Hebrew. My stepmother emmigrated from Russia almost thirty years ago. When she was finally able to bring her mother over, the only other person she could communicate with was my grandmother…in Yiddish! They both had learned Yiddish as children. “Assimilation” is one thing, but completely losing your heritage is another. That is what is so unique abour America, we believe in the idea that we can be American and still hold onto your family traditions. How many times have you been asked, “where is your family ancestry ? ” I know I get that question alot. We all have rich history, no need to pretend like we can’t or shouldn’t, celebrate our diversity!
Rod2155,
Very good argument and enlightening point about the differences in “recreational and entertainment culture” never going away, and I agree it causes very little harm and provides wonderful and diverse entertainment and recreation.
“Rod2155: If this is true then the blame (if you can even call it that) should be shared with the Chinese, I mean everytime I visit Chinatown I can’t read half the signs. There are still some people in Chinatown who don’t speak English. Would this be a sign that they are not fully assimulated into the U.S.? I mean I thought we were working on making English the National Language? Sarcaism aside, Many Major cities have “China Town’s” some of them have been there for well more than a Hundred years, founded after Chinese workers came to make their fortunes working on the Railroads…you know the ones that united this country and were the lifeblood of America’s Industrial Revolution.
This “overlooked” culteral preservation is not limited to the Chinese either…
Baltimore Is one of the most the most culterally diverse cities in the region. They have parts called little Italy, little knossos and little Poland. Some places have signs that are in Greek and well as English.
Ultra Orthodox and Hassidic Jewish neighborhoods in New York and New Jeresy have Signs in Hebrew and English, residents still can do business in Yiddish. Sirens can be heard in some streets on Friday evening warning people that the Sabbath is approaching and to head home.
There are many little places all over the United States that are little Embassies of world culture. Most of these places were riled against by the Citizens, as being factories of crime and disease, but eventually they became accecpted entities. So I suspect will be the case with a lot of the Hispanic immigrants, legal and illegal alike. Currently they are running through the very tiresome gauntlet of accecptance from people, many of who’s ancestors ran the same gauntlet…but this is the 21st century, this is supposed to be the bright future where we remember our misconceptions of the past and learn to be more accecpting.
Unlike a few who still have the misconception that Hispanics in General are a culture that cannot assimulate anywhere but their own country (as was said fro every singal culteral minority who immigrated to these shores) I believe the Hispanics who want to be a part of our society will assimulate in their own way and likewise we will learn to accecpt the diffrences.
If you still question this, then please explain how the Amish, a minority group from Germany whom dress in the same ways they did over a hundred years ago and who speak German at home and do not fly American flags on Indpendence Day can be considered as “American as Apple Pie” while the other diverse groups are considered invading colonialist hordes?”
The issue you miss however is “nation destroying” political and legal differences, cannot be allowed to dominate without a consequence in “national stability, national unity and legal unity (“common rule of law”. Back on that wonderful thread discussing the differences between unifying “integration” and destructive “diversity”, I was able to glean and summarize the following that hopefully will lend credence to why your comment is both revealing and enlightening about the tendency for groups to demand “differences”, and fight common law and common culture, that actually fights common law and “nation-building” resulting in conflict and war instead of peace and stability between the others nations of the world that have conflict and war along these same ethnic, religious, gender, racial divisions in these small citi-state societies.
Michael on a previous thread wrote. “I think in this entire thread regarding “diversity” and “integration” conceptual differences, we have discovered two different social concepts argued by all on this thread.
1. Every individual in the world needs to belong to a “group” in order to advocate political concepts and laws that only benefit their own gender, race, ethnic, religious group. Whites should group into white groups, blacks into black groups, browns into brown groups, reds into red groups and yellows into yellow groups, and then advocate for special laws and privileges that benefit only that group, unless that group is a majority group and it tries to pass “majority” rules of law that benefit only that majority group. It is OK for any minority group to claim the majority is oppressive, because the “majority laws” are not the “minorities laws”. We can then have “white laws” and “black laws” and “brown laws” and “red laws” and “yellow laws” and “female laws” and “male laws” and “christian laws” and “muslim laws” and “hindu laws”, etc, etc. We will then all live separate and apart socially, ethnically, culturally, linguistically, legally and be a very prosperous “diversity” culture, that never disagrees or hates enough to have conflict or war or borders.
This is the social engineers naive dream of world peace.
2. We can all merge and “integrate” our cultures under a common national constitution and social construct of individual freedoms,and unite and integrate diverse laws under common law, accepting all languages, religions, and laws into a common law, common culture, common language, common religion and social laws applied equally to all as “individuals”. We can do as our constitution guides, create “one out of many”, instead of “many out of many”, and put the rights of the individuals and application of laws only on the “individual”. Our founding fathers separated “state” and “religion” for a reason, our bill of rights grants “individual rights” and not “group rights” based on gender, ethnic group, race, or religion for a reason.
The founding fathers knew that “factionist” groups aligned along religious, ethnic, racial, and gender “rights” when applied differently and un-equally to each based on religion association, gender association, ethnic association and racial association would lead to oppression and conflict by any of these groups that gained numerical superiority. Therefore regardless of numbers, apply all laws the same and not based on what gender, race, religion or ethnic group you associate and self-segregate into in order to gain dominant political power over all other groups, genders, races, or religions not like your own. I think that is the fundamental difference in opinion on the arguments of this thread. I personally choose “integration” over “diversity” and “common law” over “diverse law” any day, regardless if you understand what I am explaining to you or not.” We all seem to have a problem with “selective hearing”.
Some of you I think “got it” however as I read the threads, and that is encouraging.”
It is my opinion these small recreational culture groups are harmless, but not the political and legal groups aligned along gender, racial, religious and ethnic group advocacy lines. The recreational and entertainment cultures are surviving only because they are small and not noticeable, provide great entertainment and artistic interest and benefit to our society and as recreational and artristic cultures are not a serious threat to our political and national infrastructure. When they become a threat to a nation’s political stability and structure is when they become political, and legal (trying to write laws just for themselves), and then you will see conflict and war between these small isolated groups and a majority that follows a common law, common national unity, common language, and common national identity, that will grow into national wars with devisive boundaries if it is not stopped, either politically or with national force.
There are have been many occasions where I dread not being able to speak Celtic, which was the language of my ancestors from my Grandmother’s side of the family, but where I lacked in that, I made up by carefully tracking my ancestry and even returning to Krief, our ancesteral home in Scotland where we were able to visit our family castle. I had found out that our ancient ancestors migrated from Hungary to Scotland and were granted full clan status after aiding Robert the Bruce. They held many offices in the Scottish government throughout the years and like many Scots, bled at Coloden. After Coloden they were forced into exile in France then immigrated to America in apx the early 1800’s and settled in NW Pennsylvania, mostly around Punxsutawney (home of the Groundhog Day Groundhog) My grandmother grew up in Punxie and moved to Baltimore.
My Grandfather was a direct descendant of Francis Scott Key, he was at Yale while his cousin F. Scott Fitzgerald went to Harvard, they visited eachother from time to time.
My Mother grew up on a Farm near Poolesville Maryland that has been owned by our family for more than 300 years.
I converted to Islam 2 and a half years ago and expect to name my first son “Sala-a-din Key P*****”
Talk about a culteral cornicopia that is also deeply rooted in the History of this country. I have respect for my past before America, in building America, in fighting for America (Grandfather fought in WWI and II/ Father Vietnam) and I pray to God that I can work to preserve these memories for the future, that America will always be culterally diverse, yet equal in rights.
“Therefore regardless of numbers, apply all laws the same and not based on what gender, race, religion or ethnic group you associate and self-segregate into in order to gain dominant political power over all other groups, genders, races, or religions not like your own.”
Okay Michael, I see what you are saying. But here’s my question: what happens when a group has been picked on over and over again? How are we to protect them without focusing on the injustices that have been inflicted on them? Do you have a better solution?
Michael,
I think I always understood and agreed with most of what you have been saying, I just took issue with you defining “Minority Favoritism” as “Culteral Diversity” in your earlier arguments.
Also I believe that certian minority groups who are really oppressed because of thier race/creed/gender, (be it that their creed does not violate the laws of this country in it’s practice)Do have the right to organize and defend themselves. My Father, before serving in Vietnam, worked as a civil rights worker in Mississippi, registering African Americans to vote and singing at black curch ralleys. He was one of many Whites who stood up for rights that were being denied to blacks. It was a fight for equal rights, not racial privledge, which no one should have.
I equally detest Privleges that are given to one social group over everyone else because of their race/religion/gender.
The hard question for all of us is, are we working to change immigration policy to help out ALL those who wish to be citizens, or are we doing it with a bias in favor a particular social group??
This is why I split the issue into “Guest/Foreign worker policy”, “Immigration” and “Foreign Trade” reform. Three areas that need to be fixed and controlled by competent individuals. Otherwise we run the risk of utilizing a hidden slave labor force to foward the economy. And as I said these are my thoughts comming from the perspective of an American whom is seeking work in a Foreign Country in hopes of making some money and advancing the field of education in both our Nations. An Private Economic Diplomat if you will…
KG, I know we have had our differences of opinion, but I think we are close to understand each other. My view is that the law must be a common one if we are to treat everyone equally, fairly and without privilege or prejudice. The issue has always been, (woman’s rights, back rights, etc), where the law was not equally applied. It took political power to recognize that that law must be fair and equitable regardless of race, religion, gender, or ethnic group.
Having said that (I believe we can both agree with that concept),
But here’s my question: what happens when a group has been picked on over and over again? How are we to protect them without focusing on the injustices that have been inflicted on them? Do you have a better solution?
I think the problrem lies in defining what is “injustice”. It is injustice when the laws are not applied commonly, the same and blind to gender, religion, ethnic group, or race? yes, in my opinion, and the law must prevail applied to all the same.
Is it injustice when a certain “number” of people are “picked on” of one ethnic group, more than another (self-identifying) ethnic group? NO and that is the problem. The law if applied equally WILL affect members of each self-segregating in different numbers, and will “pick-on” different self-identifying “groups” in different “numbers”, because it depends on how many of those people as “individuals” are breaking the law. You cannot then claim a right to “balance” those numbers, just because it affected one racial, gender, religious, ethnic group’s “numbers” more than another, and you cannot use that measuring stick to define “discrimmination”, “privilege”, etc. You can only fairly determine if the law was applied the same to all “individuals” regardless of group association and affiliation.
I say the problem with the issue is the perception that “groups” have “numbers” that indentify the “injustice” rather than evaluating if the “standard” of the law was applied equally or not. You can do this without any study on ethnic, gender, religious, or racial group numbers, special “compensating” laws or any other concept of fairness, other than “was the law applied the same to all, i.e. common law.
We protect them by ensuring the law is applied the same to all “individuals”, including the “individuals” the law was designed to “protect” from those who whould break it. That is why letting “individuals” or “groups” to get away with breaking the law, discrimminates against all “others” who ask for the law to be enforced as common law.
The problem with “diversity” and racial, ethnic, religious group political advocacy is the same problem we had with “white supremacy”, i.e individuals in the past, just like in the present are associating with racial, gender, religious, and ethnic groups demanding the law be applied to them differently, demanding they have their own laws (shariah, for example), demanding they have privileges and numerical advantages (diversity concepts), that give them the right to be treated differently under the law above all others.
These groups are not fighting “oppression”, because the law is no longer “oppressive”. They are fighting for numerical superiority and political superiority (leveraged way beyond their gender, racial, religious, ethnic group minority numbers, using diversity and protected class concepts ), in order to obtain financial, cultural, political superiority over the “majority” that does not reflect their own gender, racial, religious, ethnic groups political self -interests. They define anyone who opposes them as “unfair”, “picking on them”, racists, KKK, xenophobic, nazis, neo-politics, etc, etc, when in reality the law is the same, is just does not produce the politically advocating groups desired “numerical” outcomes. Case in point, number of racial group tallied “jobs” at an imaginary but standard desired “wage level”.
Elena – agree with you about Yiddish – which is actually an interesting language in and of itself. My mother speaks some Yiddish, and my grandmother was fluent in it. When I was young, and my mother and my grandmother didn’t want me and my siblings to know what they were saying, they’d switch to speaking in Yiddish! Of course some Yiddish terms have found their way into the English language for some speakers of it who aren’t Jewish – particularly in the northeastern USA. But you are right – it is a dying language and I’m sure there are a lot less people who can speak it than say 20 years ago or more (I’m just thinking of my grandmother and other relatives who spoke it – and when that generation of the family died off). My mother’s side of the family came from Austria by the way. My father’s side actually came from Latvia and Lithuania for the most part. However they arrived in the country much earlier than my mother’s side of the family – who arrived in the late 20’s.
Anyway, hadn’t thought of Yiddish for quite some time actually, and it has been even longer than I heard it spoken, other than for someone saying one of the Yiddish words that have found their way into the English language, in some parts of the country.
Okay, I completely agree, Michael that laws must be applied uniformly. But there is this question a lawyer asked me that I will never forget: “How much justice can you afford?”
That kind of says it all. I, for example, can’t afford anything more than I can argue with a cop! I suspect too many of us are in this situation, including the poor and immigrants. Furthermore, while we DO have the right to fight for immigration reform, “illegals” do not unless they get external help. I don’t think this is making them have more rights than we have (seems they arn’t being given any rights at the moment). I think it’s an attempt to even the justice scale, no matter how painful or controversial this process is.
Outside the immigration debate, there are still issues with women earning less than men, urban minorities in impoverished neighborhoods having less opportunity than others….again, the scales of justice need to be equalized somehow, and this is why we are having this discusison in the first place!
Rod2155:
You have to understand the origin of the term “diversity” and “inclusion” to see my point. “diversity” replaced “affirmative action”, when the supreme court determined affirmative action to be “illegal”, because it was forced numerical balancing along racial, gender, religious and ethnic group measurement quotas, that discrimminated against all others of a majority gender, racial, religious, and ethnic group affiliation because it was based on a standard that was not applied equally, i.e not on a standard of skill, apptitude, IQ, performance, abilities, etc.
The court ruled all “individuals”, not groups have equal opportunity, but the law cannot and will not guarantee equal outcomes. If it does it is applied unfairly and with prejudice toward minority groups numerical numbers advantages as “compensating policies” and 8A protected classes were put into place, “illegally” to numerically balance the outcomes. This concept discrimminates numerically against all others not in the protected class.
Diversity was the end run around this, as was inclusion, because as long as “equal numbers” could be pulled from “diverse” gender, religious, racial, ethnic group minority favoritism policy to numerically “balance” the representation to “one of each”
In order to still obtain a “numerical” advantage, “one of each” will numerically advantage any group that has a minority number over any majority group, leveraging the minority groups political and financial power. The problem is this discrimminates too against any “individual” not in the “minority” and again is not based on any “standard” or equally applied law based only on skill, talent, ability, IQ, performance or apptitude blind to race, gender, religion or ethnic group.
Diversity will maintain “differences” and divide “cultures” into conflicting and hateful factions as so evidenced by such discriminatory practices of creating different laws and different political groups around the world that fight wars based on gender, religion, racial or ethnic group association and “diverse” law.
The way out of this problem, is equal law, common law, common law enforcement, and “integration” of conflicting priviliege demanding cultures under a common constitution based only on individual rights and not group rights. A common law based on individuals and not “diverse laws” based on a group’s gender, racial, religious, or ethnic group’s political advocacy or association.
KG if you can “afford” more justice than others can, then the “law” is not being applied equally” The law is not the problem then, it is the discrimmination of the people seeking to buy privilege or calim unfairness because of their minority status only. That still does not protect all individuals the same, if you then change the law to “compensate”. Who are you going to “compensate” fairly and using what standard?
KG there-in lies you problem. ALL women are not earning less money than ALL men. If your target for fairness means that ALL women must earn more money than ALL men, you are discriminating entirely on gender. Or even if the “average” number or women is making the same money as the “average” number of all men. The laww if applied fairly and the same regardless of gender will nbot guarantee this “equal” outcome, it cannot and be fair to “individuals” of all genders, races, religions and ethnic groups that have different abilities regardless of “group association”. You cannot do this, you cannot balance the “numbers” without discriminating against others who deserve more money, but are not numerically superior or inferior in numbers. Your problem is you are using “numbers of women” to justify gender discrimination, and not applying a fairness standard based on something other than gender, race, religious, or ethnic group.
What will make you happy? When all women make more money because they are women?
You have just replaced the “hate group” of the past when you say that “all black people must make more money than White people”. And if you achieve that racist goal (or gender goal in the case of women), will you thyen think the law id fair and equitable when based only of “numerical” advantage and not a standard of ability, skill, talent, IQ, perfromance, etc?
This is why I am against the league of women voters, they will not stop advocating for “equality” until their “numbers” are numerically superior and their political power greater than the other “gender”, and are not advocating for and applying laws that are “gender neutral”. They pursue laws that are “gender favorable”.
I think what we want here, in terms of women’s rights, is gender EQUALITY. Right now, we don’t have it even when we have the same education and experience as others. No, this is not everyone but statistically, it’s too many even now. The same can be said for the poor. And yes, unfortunately, justice IS “bought” in too many cases, which as you agree is wrong.
I thought last nights show was fairly balanced and TOUCHED on some many things.
One thing that sticks out in my mind is that they said that there is a labor shortage in El Salvador and said it is because the families there are not doing the jobs ( sugar cane field as I believe they said) because they would rather sit back and wait for the money to come from family members working in the US thus promoting migrants from the countries below and around to come in and work.
This is why I say there has to be some sort of checks and balances.
I was very moved by the stories of separation and very sad to look at how they were living in tin or cardboard houses. So please do not mistake my statement of ONE thing that stands out in my mind. It was just interesting to note and has not been mentioned yet that I am aware of.
Also, where is the balance of the MC mansions and the tin houses on the same street?
They also said that it was causing conflict there between the people that have family sending back money and not.
Just my thoughts…
KG,
The issue of “illegal” has to be separated from the issue of “racial, gender, religious, ethnic group fairness in “numerical” balancing. The law is the law, applied equally to all, favored to none, regardless of race, religion, gender, ethnicity. If you try to ethnbically “balance” the “numbers” of arrests into racial, gender, ethnic, religious group quotas, you then allow “discrimmination” to determine “justice” and criminals of a minority group to go free, while criminals of a majority group are held to a higher standard because they do not have a minority advantage in receiving punishment and “numbers” of arrest quotas.
You simply have to be fair by ignoring race, gender, religion and ethnic group association and realize that “individuals” who commit crimes come from all different ethnic, gender, religious and ethnic groups in different numbers based on individual ethics only.
KG, gender EQUALITY comes only from LEGAL equality. Not “numerical” equality. You keep thinking that “numerical” equality equals “justice” and fairness. It does not.
KG, what LAW prevents you from achieving any salary you want today?
Okay but here’s the deal….if I get hired at a lower wage than a man who has the same credentials that I do, how am I going to fight for my legal rights? First, I make less money (there’s that old “affording justice” thing). Second, I need my job! So there are women out there living without justice because they have no access to it.
I don’t look at immigration as a particular race I look at it as a system gone to hell. It needs to be reformed, as most of us believe here. Social systems on the whole tend to get muddled simply because of their size, but when we ignore their maintenance for years, it becomes much worse, as we are seeing now. Look at our military. That system is constantly being revised, worked on, managed. Because of that, we have a strong military. But the same attention has not been given to other systems such as immigration (and one could argue many others like social security, education, etc.)
Would it help you to understand that “individuals” make a “choice” on what career they want to persue and the “salary” potential that career offers? Should we tell women to start choosing only the highest paying careers, would that help you get the “numbers” balanced and appear “fair” and “just” when the number of women making high salaries (whatever that is) is the “same” as any gender, race, ethnic or religious group making those salaries?