The Politics of Stupidity
I was pleased to find this essay by the wonderful writer Luis Alberto Urrea in Sunday’s WaPo.
I was mesmerized by his trilogy on Tijuana and by his now classic account of the death of the “Yuma 14,” The Devil’s Highway. In his mind-searing narrative, he remarks on the so-called Season of Death — the period between May thru July when temperatures in the Arizona desert hit triple digits and so does the death toll of Mexicans desperate to cross:
It is then that lettuce, tomatoes, cu-cumbers, oranges, strawberries are all ready to be picked. Arkansas chickens are ready to be plucked. Cows are waiting in Iowa and Nebraska to be ground into hamburger, and grills are ready in McDonald’s and Burger King and Wendy’s and Taco Bell for the ground meat to be cooked. KFC is waiting for its Mexican-plucked, Mexican-slaughtered chickens to be fried by Mexicans. And the western desert is waiting, too—its temperatures soaring, a fryer in its own right.
My thinking on the border and the immigration issue has been greatly informed by Luis’ masterful works. And when I had a chance to meet and spend an evening with him last year I was even more impressed.
This latest essay in the WaPo comes at just the right time in the immigration debate. Not to say that anyone –high or low– much wants to hear his message. It’s one that understandably makes us uncomfortable because it reminds us that some things are just beyond our control.
I’ve argued this point many times before and have no problem re-stating it: trying to fully manage the human flow between one of the richest countries in the world and a very poor one is about as likely as legislating the tides.
That doesn’t mean you just throw your hands up in the air and do nothing. But in order to have at least a minimal effect, you have to recognize the base reality. When it comes to the U.S.-Mexican border that means recognizing that we are witnessing a biblical exodus from the South. Our laws, our policies, our measures merely more or less try to conform with or catch up with a much more powerful reality.
One of Luis’ secondary points, and therefore one he doesn’t give much emphasis to, nevertheless bears some repeating. He notes that for all the talk about “illegals” there’s scant knowledge of just what kind of law is being broken. In the case of “illegal immigrants,” they are mostly in violation of civil-administrative rather than criminal statutes. Which means that anyone who has received a traffic ticket has also been an illegal.
But why waste my breath? Just tell those folks to get back into line. Put in their position, we would never do what they are doing. Would we?
May 27th, 2007 at 9:09 pm
That “secondary” point — that working in America as a non-citizen without explicit permission is more a civil code breach than a criminal one — may be key to a more humane solution.
Let’s say, if only for the sake of argument, that nations have a compelling national interest in regulating cross-border labor flows. You could say that’s even true of Mexico — the temptations of corruption might be reduced if remittances were subject to above-board income taxes.
So why not just *fine* undocumented workers? At a rate determined, perhaps, by the number of months they’ve been working? Then let market forces do their thing: Some employers will cover the costs of the fines, and will rat out other, competing employers who are clearly evading the system. Reserve the harsher penalties (deportation for laborers, jail time for employers) for real crimes: perjury, destruction of evidence, failure to protect “illegal” workers the way they’d be required to protect U.S. citizens. Open the borders, but require that anyone crossing them sign papers saying they will report their residence every few months, and will not be working while in the U.S. Whatever fine-derived monies left over from covering the cost of enforcement might be kept in escrow, released to the Mexican government if it meets negotiated criteria on immigration issues.
I cinge and rail every time I hear a corporate executive talk about how we now live in a “truly borderless world”. What crap. We will always have borders. We probably should have them. But globe-trotting execs who get their visa paperwork done by staffers aren’t exposed to the gauntlet. Maybe if we swept up some of the bigger violators among employers hiring “illegals”, dropped them off from vans just south of Arizona in mid-summer, some Sunday night at 11pm, and told them, “be back at your desk before end of business day tomorrow”, they might learn a thing or two. The ones that survived, anyway. Yes, deport them — without documents. And let them *try* to get back to the U.S., negotiating the maze of this vaunted “truly borderless world.”
May 27th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
The Department of Defense has identified 3,432 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans on Saturday:
URUO, Iosiwo, 27, Sgt., Army; Agana Heights, Guam; Second Infantry Division.
ZYLMAN, Casey P., 22, Pfc., Army; Coleman, Mich.; 25th Infantry Division.
May 28th, 2007 at 9:26 am
Marc: This is one of those problems we let fester because the Congress on both sides has a vested re-elective interest in the status quo. That having been said, it cannot continue unaddressed. It is becoming chaotic, awakening the deep genetic strain of virulent racism that lurks deep in the American soul. The solution may be complex but without a heavy punitive element for the kleptocrats and oligarchs of Mexico, nothing will work.
This problem, like the drug wars, is one of incentives and disincentives. I would rather see the exploitive Mexican components be addressed before the American employers because, in the end, the former will show no need for the latter. We cannot continue to be a dumpster for the failures of other governments. The people who commit the desperate journey are not only attrracted to better conditions, the are being driven out away from home and family by bastards who will not share the great wealth of Mexico.
May 28th, 2007 at 9:30 am
Jobs will be created in Mexico, the wealth will be shared and the border pressure will be eased when we confiscate Mexican Government assets in the U.S. in proportion to the stream of misery that flows north.
May 28th, 2007 at 10:17 am
It’s curious that the issue of population size has fallen off the radar screen. If we don’t want the U.S. to grow to a population of half a billion over this century then we have to reduce the level of total immigration, because it is driving the increase. This is one of those inconvenient truths — like the damage to ionospheric ozone due to CFC’s — that is independent of political ideology but uncomfortable to some of our interest groups. Quoting the inscription on the Statue of Liberty or calling the U.S. a land of opportunity is merely to hang on to an old paradigm that has long since been lost to the reality of the tripling of our population and the end of cheap oil. I say this as a traditional liberal who is also a scientic rationalist.
May 28th, 2007 at 11:38 am
Bob G:
With respect, you sound more like a Malthusian than a scientific rationalist. the idea that environmental degradation can be halted by stopping migration is such tendentious bullshit that I don’t even knwo where to start.
Overpopulation is a myth. Sprawl and over-urbanization are facts that can be dealt with through global wealth redistribution, which would stop the US from having half a billion, but the notion that too many people in the US (as oppsoed to too many people in urban areas in general) contributes to environmental degradation is Malthusian and disturbing…rooted in teh ideas that called for sterilization, etc.
May 28th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
There is so much to ‘like’ in this post of Marc’s one hardly knows where to begin. There’s enough grist for the mind-mill that a body could think itself around in circles until fully immobilized and catatonic. If the sheer magnitude of the disconnects between policy and reality weren’t enough, Marc inserts John Rawls’ veil of ignorance into the mix. [Ref, "Put in their position, we would never do what they are doing. Would we?"] So, now, we have not just a political conundrum, a social conundrum, and an economic conundrum, we have an explicit appeal to a philosophical conundrum. Still, was it not Einstein that said you cannot solve a problem on the same level it was created. So, if political science can’t do it. And, economics can’t do it. And, sociology can’t do it. Let’s appeal to philosophy? [Bang head here.]
Unfortunately, John Rawls was talking about a citizens’ need for social justice. So, while it might be appealing to approach Rawls as an avenue towards a solution, the folks entering across our southern border aren’t citizens. Yet. Enter the Nativist Yahoos, stage right. And, Open Borders Activists, stage left. Are we ready to go Round 7? Or, is it Round 8?
I’m with Hank on this. We’re fuckwitted if we don’t enjoin the Mexican government towards finding a solution and begin to impose penalties on the Mexican government. Given it appears the US is not ready to ‘erase’ its southern border, we have got to find a way to cope. I am becoming increasingly concerned about the irrational bent nativist instincts are beginning to take in my little patch of the US. And, they are threatening to boil over.
Not too long ago, one of our illustrious state senators made a case for an ICE office in a nearby community, and got tentative approval. The locals fully expect ICE to go door to door, and start hauling ‘illegals’ off beginning today. Recently, the mayor of that same community went to Washington DC to plead with our government to begin rationalizing our immigration policy. The locals took it as a sign that their mayor was advocating on *behalf* of the illegals. Want to bet on the odds of that mayor being re-elected? The message board to the newspaper lit up like a freakin’ Christmas tree. [And, what part of ILLEGAL don't YOU understand.]
That message board bore all of the earmarks of a mob, complete with a mob’s mentality. What happens if these hot heads actually decide to assemble? I genuinely fear vigilantism isn’t all that far away.
May 28th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
jcummings-you’re right to a point. What’s degrading the social contract is a combination of converging facts. 1. The influx from Mexico creates a class crisis of previously unexperienced proportions since the depression. Democracies are bad at assmilitaion of the poor classes, especially when tied to race.
2. The people who come here, if from the middle class of Mexico, would enrich our society, providing economic stability while sharing a rich culture.
3. With the corporate and globilization pressure already eroding the American Middle class, an influx of the poor from Mexico further suffocates the middle class since the race to the bottom of economic equity accelerates.
4. Income disparity here is now worse that its been since slavery. Pressure from below aggravates the condition.
5. New economists have discovered that the GNP is a fairly finite number. Massive stress on the number not only dilutes it, but removes productivity incentives in the long run.
6. For the first time also since the depression, third-world mini-economies are taking root across America. History provides a sharp reminder of what happens to social stability when large pockets of economic anger are left to increase and contaminate natural market forces.
May 28th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
“trying to fully manage the human flow between one of the richest countries in the world and a very poor one is about as likely as legislating the tides.”
This metaphor needs some work: the Netherlands does a pretty good job keeping out the tides by using walls…
I’d also say that Mexican corruption which results in the general populace seeing little of what capital Mexico does generate ($25 billion last year in oil revenue, for example) is a major factor that needs to be addressed before Mexico can start preaching to the U.S. about border policy. They need to put their house in order.
May 28th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
One thing that does disturb me is the lack of effort on behalf of the powers that be in Mexico to improve the lives of their citizens.
When the presidential election was taking place last year, I remember Calderon was aping Fox’s desire to implement a guest worker program and ease immigration restrictions. AMLO made the point that it’s a tragedy for so many of Mexico’s citizens to uproot themselves and their families (or sometimes leaving family behind) to have a subsistence existence elsewhere.
May 28th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
FYI: Mexico’s Gross Domestic Product $1.1 Trillion.
Mexico’s Gross National Product $578 Billion
Mexico’s current Population: 108 Million
Mexico Poverty Rate: 62.7%
With those ratios it is obvious that economic parity nowhere nears the weatlth. If the ratios of distribution were similar to the U.S., virtually no Mexican would need, let alone want, to leave his/her family for exploitation in the North.
EACH AMERICAN TAXPAYER SUBSIDIZES THE MEXICAN OLIGARCHS AND KLEPTOCRATS TO THE TUNE OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INCOME DISTRIBUTION RATIOS IN MEXICO AND THE U.S.!
And we can’t find it in our hearts to recapture those massive subsidies with a little confiscatory
equilibrium? WTF!
May 28th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Thanks for flagging the Urrea essay, Marc. I’d have missed it.
Last quarter I had all my Lit J students read “The Devil’s Highway”—because it’s such a terrific example of gorgeous writing paired with top notch reporting. They LOVED it—and got educated regarding the issue along the way.
May 29th, 2007 at 8:38 am
Great post and great essay. Thanks.
May 29th, 2007 at 9:37 am
We’ve argued this one to a mind-numbing fare-the-well, changing few minds, I suspect, but here’s a thought experiment:
If you transport drugs in your car or cook them in your house, the Gummint will confiscate your wheels or your digs. Suppose they confiscated and auctioned off businesses that make a practice of hiring illegal immigrants?
I suspect legal scholars would promptly discover that civil confiscation violates due process, the number of businesses hiring illegals would decline rapidly, and the clandestine economy would grow . . . Whether border-crossing would decline, ¿Quién sabe?
Like I say, just a thought experiment, like Schrödinger’s cat.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:07 pm
I also enjoyed the post. If you will forgive me, when you called Mexico a “very poor country,” that’s, well, not true. Mexico has a GDP in excess of $1 trillion — one of the 13 highest in the world. Its per capita GDP is similar to Russia’s, except that Mexico is less dependent on oil and mineral prices than Russia is.
My point is that much of what is said and believed about Mexico during the immigration debates is inaccurate and sometimes just plain untrue. Yes, Mexico has a corruption problem but it’s not exceptionally corrupt. Transparency International puts it on a par with China and far ahead of Russia. That’s not good but to listen to the debate, you would think that Mexico is uniquely corrupt.
What is unique is the disparity combined with the complicated history between the countries. (As Porfirio Diaz put it, “poor Mexico: so far from God, so close to the United States.”)
August 28th, 2010 at 3:45 pm
gr8 bro resrch …