The alt-left narrative tells us that illegal immigrants are fine and wonderful people who have come to America seeking an opportunity to better themselves. Every day you can find a heart-wrenching story about a valedictorian “dreamer” who is terrified that he will be sent back to Central America.
The narrative was recently upset by an event that occurred in Rockville, Maryland. One of those fine young immigrant men, caught and released seven months ago by the Obama administration, joined with another illegal immigrant to rape a fourteen year old girl in the boys room at Rockville High School.
Suddenly, the meme of the tired and hungry refugee yearning to be free crashed on the shoals of reality. If immigrants are here to exploit the system and to abuse Americans the narrative shifts. The Obama administration never said so but it acted as thought the refugees were victims of American imperialism, that they had been oppressed by free enterprise capitalism and that they had a right to come her and take back what had been taken from them. Besides, they were likely to vote Democratic... which signaled their moral superiority.
You probably know that Rockville was about to make itself yet another sanctuary city. Now, that is in serious doubt. Some community do-gooders have just discovered that certain members of the immigrant population are not seeking sanctuary.
Those who believe in opening the doors to anyone, regardless, see these events as tests of their faith. Parents are rightly outraged, but those who see more votes for a waning Democratic Party retain their faith in the goodness of human nature and whatever else.
Of course, the Obama administration had chosen to ship illegals around the country, in order to distribute the pain equally across America. While it does not rise to the level of raping a child, the presence of large numbers of non-English speaking children in public schools effectively ruins everyone else's educational opportunity. If you were wondering why American children cannot compete against their peers in academic scores, you might ask how many of the American children do not speak English or are incapable of learning. If a third of the children in a class do not speak English no one is going to learn very much. If you have a school like Rockville High where children speak nineteen different languages there is not going to be very much education. Until the rape no one was paying attention to this fact.
One understands that the children are in these schools because the Supreme Court ruled that they had to be accepted into school. And yet, at what price for the other children? The pervasive of the problem was produced by an Obama administration policy that allowed a large number of illegals into the country, especially unaccompanied children, and then spread them out around the country.
One also understands that the current state of affairs will cause more and more parents either to send their children to private schools or to homeschool them. Sacrificing your child’s education to a malicious idea ought to be unacceptable.
As it happens very little of this problem will be solved by E-verify, but still, a New York Times editorial (via Maggie’s Farm) makes a salient point. Simply put, it argues that the Trump administration ought to spend some time and money cracking down on employers who are hiring illegal immigrants. Strangely, it says, the Trump budget spends next to nothing on E-verify while spending a ton of money on the wall. It suspects, probably with reason, that the business lobby prevailed on the administration not to take away its cheap labor.
To give the Times the podium:
His administration has been largely silent, however, about the strongest magnet that has drawn millions of immigrants, legal and not, to the United States for generations: jobs.
American employers continue to assume relatively little risk by hiring undocumented immigrants to perform menial, backbreaking work, often for little pay. Meanwhile, as Mr. Trump’s deportation crackdown accelerates, families are being ripped apart, and communities of hard-working immigrants with deep roots in this country are gripped by fear and uncertainty. As long as employers remain off the hook, a border wall and an expanded dragnet can only make temporary dents in the flows of undocumented immigrants.
Of course, the Times could not resist tugging at your heart and exploiting your well-developed capacity for empathy. But it is correct to point out that a strict E-verify system would limit the entries of those who are looking for work.
The idea would have no real effect on the unaccompanied minors, because they are not here to work. If the same policy had been implemented in Germany when Angela Merkel opened the country to over a million immigrants, it would not have worked either. According to the German government, as reported in this blog, the unemployment rate of the million or so refugees Merkel welcomed last year is around 97%. Either they do not want to work, do not care to work, do not know how to work or want to convert all Germans to Islam.
Moreover, the wall and the new enforcement posture make a statement. And perhaps the statement is as important as the physical barrier. The wall tells people that they are not welcome here. Clearly many prospective fence jumpers have gotten the message.
Evidently, this contrasts sharply with the open arms policy of Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau—or is it Justin Bieber—which has attracted migrants from America and from the Middle East. A recent poll, however, suggested that Canadians are beginning to turn against the policy.
Anyway, if employers adopt E-Verify it will certainly help the situation. It will not solve the problem, but something is better than nothing.
The Times does not want to say so, but some of the illegals are here for the benefits. They are in Germany and other European nations to live off of the welfare system. They also go there because they believe that they deserve to be sustained and supported by Western governments. They believe that the West is responsible for their misery and that the West owes them a living.
Now we read that some American illegals are not taking food stamps for fear that they will be deported. But if they are so hard working and contribute so much, why are they on food stamps. And ought we not to ask ourselves whether people who are working off the books and thus are not paying taxes are profiting from America’s welfare benefits… like food stamps.
Keep in mind that the Mexican government strongly supports illegal immigration—to America but certainly not to Mexico—because the funds that are sent back to Mexico sustain its own economy. Doubtless the same applies to other Central American nations. Apparently they are not investing in America or spending money in American malls.
One likes to think that people who come to America want to better themselves. But if they want to exploit America in order to support their home countries, doesn’t that change the narrative? And if they believe that they have a right to abuse Americans for forcing them to do menial labor, then perhaps we ought to consider our attitudes and to revise our narrative.