Illegration
Victor Davis Hanson at RCP attacks the critics of the opponents of the don’t-call-it-an-Amnesty Bill.
A(nother) word on language in this dispute.
Several years ago, under political pressure, the term “illegal alien” was deemed distasteful. “Illegal immigrant” and “undocumented worker” were pushed as non-pejorative alternatives, quickly picked up by the news media that tends largely to adopt the language and concepts of the left. Those terms are in the process of morphing, thanks to gullible pols and commentators, into “undocumented Americans.” These of course are highly desirable terms for advocates of illegal border crossing, as they suggest legitimacy only somewhat complicated by an easily remedied lack of papers.
This isn’t the first time I’ve made this point, but given the ongoing pressure to semanticize illegal border crossers into virtual citizenship, it’s worth re-examining.
It’s not clear to me why ”illegal alien” was considered pejorative. The “illegal” part of course has long been willfully overlooked or denied by those who believe successfully wading a river or overstaying one’s visa is sufficient vetting for resident status in the United States. “Alien,” well, I had to explain to my kids that didn’t mean they came from Mars, but presumably adults are smart enough to know better.
When my mother, my father, my brothers and my cousins immigrated to this country, prior to becoming United States citizens, they were considered by the United States government to be “resident aliens.” What’s the alternative? “Illegal alien.” One that has not gone through the legal process. It is not, as some may see it, a derogatory term applied by jackbooted thugs, but a long-accepted, accurate legal description used by agencies of the United States government.
Now, the “immigration” part. Immigration, in the context of the national debate on border control, is actually a specific legal process that involves standing in lines at government offices, filling out forms, being approved or denied, and in the former case, getting stamps in one’s passport. No part of that process … barring the periodic blanket amnesties voted by Congress every 20 years or so … involves being packed into an airless panel truck or jumping off a beached tramp steamer.
Getting away from the legal process, “immigration” also presumes to know the intent of the migrants … that they want to settle here in a civil fashion. But we know that some just want to work and send money home, with dreams of returning to their villages. We also know some of them cross with criminal intent, as members of groups such as MS13.
“Illegal migration” would be more accurate to describe what all of them are doing, and “illegal migrant” an acceptable alternative to the bureaucratic ”illegal alien,” should a writer feel it necessary. ”Illegal immigrant” is a distortion that only serves to confuse the legal status, activity and intent of those engaged in illegal activity, for reasons of not hurting their feelings, as well as to make their activity more politically palatable.
Inaccurate, politically motivated use of terms in the media is an old problem, and not an easy one to fix if the goal is unbiased news coverage, as everything means something. You’ll remember that “pro-choice” was widely used beside “anti-abortion.” Not “pro-abortion,” because that was deemed an overstatement of support for a necessary but distasteful process. But “pro-life” was unacceptable, because it suggested supporters of abortion were anti-life. A few years back, the media was called on it, and in some quarters an effort was made to depoliticize the terminology, so that you now find various awkward constructions such as “supporters of abortion rights,” and “opponents of abortion rights.” The Supreme Court to date has allowed abortion in some circumstances to stand as a right, so that’s fair enough, though it runs counter to the deeper philosophical and ongoing legislative dispute over whether abortion is a right or an abomination.
Topics: illegals
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:23 am on Thursday, June 14, 2007
2 Responses to “Illegration”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
June 14th, 2007 at 11:36 am
I like the word “illegration”, it’s just a perfect synthesis. What to call the perpetrators? Illegrants? Illegrators? I vote “illegrant” for the sneakers across the border, and “illegrators” for the boneheads who enable them.
June 14th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
2006.06.14 “No Illegal Left Behind” Roundup
See previous: 2006.06.13 No Illegal Left Behind Roundup Today’s must-reads: Who is Illiberal on Immigration? The Inside Story On What’s Happening With The Senate Immigration BillBush: How about $4.4 billion for border? By Jon Ward and Stephen Dinan P…