Friday, July 06, 2007
On the Immigration Debate, pt. 2
Peace and blessings,
As promised, I wanted to follow up on my previous post regarding the immigration debate. What's interesting to me is that we have a long history in this country of engaging in or allowing certain things to happen as long as those things benefit us economically. However, once these things become a burden on us, we want to do away with them completely. The way I see it, the current immigration debate is no different.
In addition to contributing to the social and cultural fabric of the U.S., most would agree that immigrants (legal and illegal) have contributed most signifcantly to the U.S. economy. Furthermore, economic prosperity (better jobs, wages, schools) is one of the main reasons that people come to the U.S. The argument that the amount of illegal immigrants in the U.S. is becoming "problematic" because they are using services that are intended for U.S. citizens holds weight, but viewing this argument, and the whole debate through a historical lens may shed some light on what should be done to address this issue.
This country was founded on, and is maintained by, capitalism. In other words, America came to be as a result of a minority of people exploiting and gettting wealthy on the backs of the majority. The very first manifestation of this was slavery, which was the most extreme form of capitalism. In contemporary society, capitalism generally refers to the idea of maximizing profit from cheap labor. Slavery was an extreme form of this because slaves (especially those working in the fields) did not get paid anything.
It is my belief that this capitalist mentality, or this notion that there's nothing morally wrong with a few getting extremely wealthy off of the backs of those who are barely making enough for themselves to survive, let alone their families, that is mostly responsible for the large numbers of immigrants (legal and illegal) in the U.S. In other words, the "promise" of jobs and the fact that capitalism requires increasingly cheap labor to increase profits and remain competitive contributed to this widely held belief that America is the place to be if you are looking for a job. As a result, people from other countries, expecially those from countries where they are oppressed and in dire poverty, come to America to seek employment and a better life for themselves and/or their families.
For instance, not to sound stereotypical (and I apologize to my readers if this statement is interpreted as such), but most would agree that there are certain sectors and jobs that appear to be primarily occupied by immigrants. It seems like allowing immigrants to come to America and employing them to work for cheap is "cool" with major corporations and the government (they are actually one in the same) as long as the primary "consequences" of this decision are increased profits, maintenance of vital institutions, and the perpetuation of the capitalist ethos. A "consequence" that America did not expect, however, was the realization that immigrants are not just workers but human beings, and that they felt entitled, citizen or not, to utilize the services of the country that is prospering from their labor.
Now i'm not saying that nothing should be done about immigration in America because there should be. What I am saying is that in order to fully address the issue in a way that values the humanity of each immigrant and of all those involved, America must take a hard look at the cultural ethos which helped create the situation that Americans are complaining about now. Trying to address this issue by only focusing on what to do with the illegal immigrants in this country and prevent more from entering the country will not suffice. Capitalist ideas are a huge part of the problem, and thus addressing these ideas are an integral part of the solution. It's not just a political and economic issue, but a moral one.....
What do you think? What role (if any) do you think America's promotion of capitalism plays in the massive flow of immigration the country has seen in the past 20 or so years? Weigh in and speekonit...
As promised, I wanted to follow up on my previous post regarding the immigration debate. What's interesting to me is that we have a long history in this country of engaging in or allowing certain things to happen as long as those things benefit us economically. However, once these things become a burden on us, we want to do away with them completely. The way I see it, the current immigration debate is no different.
In addition to contributing to the social and cultural fabric of the U.S., most would agree that immigrants (legal and illegal) have contributed most signifcantly to the U.S. economy. Furthermore, economic prosperity (better jobs, wages, schools) is one of the main reasons that people come to the U.S. The argument that the amount of illegal immigrants in the U.S. is becoming "problematic" because they are using services that are intended for U.S. citizens holds weight, but viewing this argument, and the whole debate through a historical lens may shed some light on what should be done to address this issue.
This country was founded on, and is maintained by, capitalism. In other words, America came to be as a result of a minority of people exploiting and gettting wealthy on the backs of the majority. The very first manifestation of this was slavery, which was the most extreme form of capitalism. In contemporary society, capitalism generally refers to the idea of maximizing profit from cheap labor. Slavery was an extreme form of this because slaves (especially those working in the fields) did not get paid anything.
It is my belief that this capitalist mentality, or this notion that there's nothing morally wrong with a few getting extremely wealthy off of the backs of those who are barely making enough for themselves to survive, let alone their families, that is mostly responsible for the large numbers of immigrants (legal and illegal) in the U.S. In other words, the "promise" of jobs and the fact that capitalism requires increasingly cheap labor to increase profits and remain competitive contributed to this widely held belief that America is the place to be if you are looking for a job. As a result, people from other countries, expecially those from countries where they are oppressed and in dire poverty, come to America to seek employment and a better life for themselves and/or their families.
For instance, not to sound stereotypical (and I apologize to my readers if this statement is interpreted as such), but most would agree that there are certain sectors and jobs that appear to be primarily occupied by immigrants. It seems like allowing immigrants to come to America and employing them to work for cheap is "cool" with major corporations and the government (they are actually one in the same) as long as the primary "consequences" of this decision are increased profits, maintenance of vital institutions, and the perpetuation of the capitalist ethos. A "consequence" that America did not expect, however, was the realization that immigrants are not just workers but human beings, and that they felt entitled, citizen or not, to utilize the services of the country that is prospering from their labor.
Now i'm not saying that nothing should be done about immigration in America because there should be. What I am saying is that in order to fully address the issue in a way that values the humanity of each immigrant and of all those involved, America must take a hard look at the cultural ethos which helped create the situation that Americans are complaining about now. Trying to address this issue by only focusing on what to do with the illegal immigrants in this country and prevent more from entering the country will not suffice. Capitalist ideas are a huge part of the problem, and thus addressing these ideas are an integral part of the solution. It's not just a political and economic issue, but a moral one.....
What do you think? What role (if any) do you think America's promotion of capitalism plays in the massive flow of immigration the country has seen in the past 20 or so years? Weigh in and speekonit...
Labels: America, capitalist, citizens, cultural, debate, economic, employment, government, humanity, illegal, immigration, institutions, legal, minority, moral, political, slavery, social, U.S.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Everyone playing their part?
Peace and blessings,
First off, I must apologize for the long hiatus, but this past month has been hectic with graduations and moving and all. But as always, I'm back like I left something. The focus of today's entry is something that has been on my mind for a little over a month during a course I was taking. In one of the required readings, Michael Resnick (1996) argues that people tend to view things from a centralized mindset, namely that massive or large-scale events/phenomena are caused by a "central" source. Common examples of this type of thinking include the belief that the productivity of hundreds of worker ants and bees is the result of their respective queens. He further contends that this way of thinking is misguided, because these and other phenomena are not the result of a central source, but of the combined choices and actions of individual agents. To illustrate this idea, Resnick (1996) and colleagues developed a computer program called StarLogo, which allows people to experience various ways in which individual agents work to create unintended phenomena. For example, high school students were able to alter the rules of different StarLogo environments (e.g. cars in traffic, turtles moving in particular directions, and termites picking up wood chips) and see how a series of individual actions can create massive results. To the students' surprise, they found that without a "central" cause, cars eventually formed a traffic jam, the turtles still organized in clusters, and termites still stacked wood chips in a pile. Although these activities may not seem that important, it is the idea behind these activities that we must consider: Individual choices and actions are important, and collectively they are powerful.
Once this idea was made clear to me, I started to think about a movie I recently saw, V for Vendetta. In a nutshell, the movie was about a man who sought to achieve justice on behalf of all the people who lost their lives in the past and are currently being deceived, due to the lives and cover ups of a corrupt government. Sounds familiar? Examples of such lies and cover-ups addressed in the movie include immoral medical experiments resulting in the deaths of many people, and government-fueled ideologies that elicit fear and compliance. Again, sound familiar? I don't know about you, but the syphilis experiments in Tuskegee and the "war on terror" comes to mind for me. Although the movie included good action scenes and the main character was very fascinating, the most significant scenes in the movie came not from the main character, but from the actions of the "community." by 'community" I am referring to the everyday citizens who realized they were being deceived and collectively did something about it non-violently. After discovering "the truth" about their government, huge multitudes of people marched to a central location (for the specific reason of the march and location, go peep the movie) and the government powers nor law enforcement could stop the because it too many people on one accord for a righteous cause. The most memorable line in the movie for me was the statement: "the people should not be afraid of their government, the government should be afraid of its people." While most of us would agree with the first part, we rarely focus on the second part. Governments should "govern" its citizens in a way that reflects not so much fear in terms of being scared of its citizens, but fear in the sense that the government respects its citizens enough to the point where it is afraid to deceive and disappoint them. There's all this propaganda and focus on how much love citizens don't have, have, or should have for their country (i.e. patriotism), but I pray that the hearts and minds of all governmental officials are oriented towards showing love, devotion, and allegiance to its citizens.
In sum, I wanted to draw-out a connection I made between the StarLogo program and "V for Vendetta." Although the former is a computer program and the latter a major motion picture, the common thread is that they both demonstrate the power of individual choices and actions. Further, they show how agents can create massive change by each playing their role in collective action. It doesn't happen often, but it puts a smile on my face when education and popular culture converge for a cause worth considering.
Source: Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(1), 1-22
First off, I must apologize for the long hiatus, but this past month has been hectic with graduations and moving and all. But as always, I'm back like I left something. The focus of today's entry is something that has been on my mind for a little over a month during a course I was taking. In one of the required readings, Michael Resnick (1996) argues that people tend to view things from a centralized mindset, namely that massive or large-scale events/phenomena are caused by a "central" source. Common examples of this type of thinking include the belief that the productivity of hundreds of worker ants and bees is the result of their respective queens. He further contends that this way of thinking is misguided, because these and other phenomena are not the result of a central source, but of the combined choices and actions of individual agents. To illustrate this idea, Resnick (1996) and colleagues developed a computer program called StarLogo, which allows people to experience various ways in which individual agents work to create unintended phenomena. For example, high school students were able to alter the rules of different StarLogo environments (e.g. cars in traffic, turtles moving in particular directions, and termites picking up wood chips) and see how a series of individual actions can create massive results. To the students' surprise, they found that without a "central" cause, cars eventually formed a traffic jam, the turtles still organized in clusters, and termites still stacked wood chips in a pile. Although these activities may not seem that important, it is the idea behind these activities that we must consider: Individual choices and actions are important, and collectively they are powerful.
Once this idea was made clear to me, I started to think about a movie I recently saw, V for Vendetta. In a nutshell, the movie was about a man who sought to achieve justice on behalf of all the people who lost their lives in the past and are currently being deceived, due to the lives and cover ups of a corrupt government. Sounds familiar? Examples of such lies and cover-ups addressed in the movie include immoral medical experiments resulting in the deaths of many people, and government-fueled ideologies that elicit fear and compliance. Again, sound familiar? I don't know about you, but the syphilis experiments in Tuskegee and the "war on terror" comes to mind for me. Although the movie included good action scenes and the main character was very fascinating, the most significant scenes in the movie came not from the main character, but from the actions of the "community." by 'community" I am referring to the everyday citizens who realized they were being deceived and collectively did something about it non-violently. After discovering "the truth" about their government, huge multitudes of people marched to a central location (for the specific reason of the march and location, go peep the movie) and the government powers nor law enforcement could stop the because it too many people on one accord for a righteous cause. The most memorable line in the movie for me was the statement: "the people should not be afraid of their government, the government should be afraid of its people." While most of us would agree with the first part, we rarely focus on the second part. Governments should "govern" its citizens in a way that reflects not so much fear in terms of being scared of its citizens, but fear in the sense that the government respects its citizens enough to the point where it is afraid to deceive and disappoint them. There's all this propaganda and focus on how much love citizens don't have, have, or should have for their country (i.e. patriotism), but I pray that the hearts and minds of all governmental officials are oriented towards showing love, devotion, and allegiance to its citizens.
In sum, I wanted to draw-out a connection I made between the StarLogo program and "V for Vendetta." Although the former is a computer program and the latter a major motion picture, the common thread is that they both demonstrate the power of individual choices and actions. Further, they show how agents can create massive change by each playing their role in collective action. It doesn't happen often, but it puts a smile on my face when education and popular culture converge for a cause worth considering.
Source: Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(1), 1-22
Labels: action, choices, community, government, movie, people, revolutionary, truth, unity, V for Vendetta
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
