Immigration has
always been an important political issue, but in recent times it has become
more important. After the 2012 election,
immigration came to the forefront of political debate, when Obama handily won the
Latinos’ vote (71% to Romney’s 27%), supporting the idea that there was a
mandate for the Democrats to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill. In June 2013, by a margin of 68-32, the
Senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill. However, immigration reform stalled in the House
of Representatives and has yet to be passed.
Although immigration reform has faded a bit out of the spotlight, it
will still be a major political issue that needs to be tackled. This is especially true in the wake of
President Obama’s new executive order on immigration. In support of immigration
reform, there have been numerous counter publics that have tried to influence
the way Americans and Congressmen or Congresswomen see immigrants. One thing that these groups have done is
fight the characterization of “illegal” immigrants and the language surrounding
them.
Many people may
not care about the language we use to describe immigrants, or they think that
it’s just another example of the “Political Correctness Police” patrolling their
vocabulary. However, Kenneth Burke, a
rhetorical theorist, thinks that words control the way we view reality. This comes in the form of a terministic
screen: “a screen composed of terms through which humans perceive the world,
and that direct attention away from some interpretations and toward others.” The book cites the example of the abortion
debate; pro-choice people call it a fetus, while pro-life people call it a
baby. Neither of these words are
neutral. The term “fetus” suggests the idea that it’s just a collection of
cells; meanwhile, the term “baby” holds the idea that it is a fully-living and
fully- functioning human baby.
Obviously, these terms change how people view the debate. Most people are not okay with killing a baby,
but many are okay with terminating a fetus (Textbook pages 39-41).
Just like words
can change how we view abortion, they also can change how we view immigrants. The
textbook mentions that pro-immigrant groups are trying to fight the usage of
the terms “illegal” and “illegal immigrants” for a multitude of reasons. In fact, a Fox News poll found that 50% of
Hispanic voters found those terms offensive.
Many people may be confused why
immigrants care about these terms; they care because it’s dehumanizing and
reduces them to one action. People don’t
refer to jaywalkers as illegal walkers, and people most certainly do not refer
to jaywalkers as “illegals”. This is why
news organizations like CNN, NBC, ABC, and even Fox News Latino have replaced
these terms with the term “undocumented immigrant”.
Beyond being
offensive, the terms “illegals” and “illegal immigrants” act as a terministic
screen. It makes it seem as if these
people have done an irreparable offense, because now the person is illegal
(instead of the action). This makes it
seem unthinkable to suggest that these people could get citizenship (often
referred to as “amnesty”, another terministic screen), because these people are
“illegal”. This terminology polarizes political
debate and makes us ignore the plight of these immigrants. The dehumanization inherent in the term “illegals”
makes it much harder to think of these people as human beings. This allows us to ignore their struggles and write
them off as lesser, sub-humans, which is wrong.
For example, it’s a lot easier to think about deporting immigrants,
splitting up families, and putting them in economic hardship when you think
about immigrants as “illegals” or criminals, instead of as living, breathing
human beings.
I’m
sure many of you would correct your friends if you heard them use gay as a
derogatory term, the r-word, or the n-word.
I’m also sure that many of you would let it slide if you heard them use
the I-word in this context. However, next time you hear a friend or relative
talk about immigrants and refer to them as “illegal”, you should correct
them. You’re not being the political
correctness police; you’re humanizing people and correcting language that
allows people to think of immigrants as non-human. Language controls the way people think about
many issues, including immigration. By changing
the words they use to describe immigrants, maybe you can change the way your
friends view immigrants.
For the background information
cited in the first paragraph: http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2012/11/2012_Latino_vote_exit_poll_analysis_final_11-07-12.pdf
For some of the arguments and facts
cited on the term “illegal”:
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/the-illegal-trap/?hp
No comments:
Post a Comment