Social Justice and Illegal Immigration
Social Justice is a very broad term and covers a wide range of issues and topics. In my book, What is Wrong with Social Justice, I primarily focused on economic issues, or so-called Economic Justice. Here I want to expand on an area I only briefly mention: Illegal immigration, or as it is sometimes called Immigrant Justice, or Immigration Justice.
One of the many problems of Social Justice is the way it conflates things, and it is no different here. While speaking of Immigrant Justice, the majority of the effort is focused primarily on those who are here illegally. Yet many supporters of Immigration Justice do not even accept the concept of illegal immigration. In fact for some, there is not even a concept of immigration. They call on us to “be the people who break down the arbitrary barriers that divide us from them.”
It is more than just a source of confusion, where one side is focused on illegal immigration, and the other sees all immigration as the same. It feeds into another error with so much of Social Justice. Supporters do not believe in the arbitrary barriers called borders because “We are one, and love and hope will guide us.” This might sound nice, and may even be a worthy goal, but as is so often the case, supporters of Immigrant Justice often not only disregard their opponents’ desire for law & order and national sovereignty, they instead cast them into the worse possible light. Efforts to control illegal immigration are, in their eyes, “encouraging hatred and bigotry.”
However desirable the goal of one world where people are able to move about freely in peace and harmony might be, the simple fact is that we are not there yet. It probably will not be for quite some time. While supporters focus solely on those here illegally, pointing to how much better their lives would be if they could stay, that is not the entire picture. The simple fact is that there is a great deal of harm being done.
A country’s first duty is to its citizens, and illegal immigration negatively impacts US citizens in several ways. First let me be clear: It is not all negative. Illegal immigration has some positives as well as negatives. For example, by providing a cheap source of labor they keep prices down (a positive), but they also keep wages down and take jobs that otherwise could go to US Citizens.
Some argue that US Citizens will not do these jobs, but that is hardly true. Perhaps they will not do them at the wages offered. But that is an argument that the wages should go up. At best it would be an argument for increased legal immigration, or perhaps a guest worker program in the case of seasonal work.
There is also the cost to the taxpayer. Again it is true that illegal immigrants pay taxes, but they get some benefits as well. According to a study by the Heritage Foundation, when you take the taxes they pay in and subtract the total benefits and serviced received you “have an aggregate annual deficit of around $54.5 billion.”
Another factor is crime. Again, let me be clear most people here illegally, except for their immigration status, are law abiding. Yet the cover and protection given to illegal immigration also provides cover for illegals who are criminals. In addition criminal elements play a strong role in the process of illegal immigration. According to the Justice Department, the majority of violent crimes and drugs come from gangs, most of whose members are here illegally.
The border has become so dangerous that the government has posted signs in some places warning that travel is not recommend because of the proximity to the border.
Then there is the harm to the illegal immigrants themselves. The openness of the border and our lax enforcement of immigration laws encourage people to try and cross the border. But this frequently involves placing oneself into the hands of criminals, and while often they just smuggle their human cargo across the border, this is not always the case. Thus in 2010, a drug gang captured people and forced them to work for the gang. Seventy-two refused and were executed. Others are held for ransom once they reach the US, and others are forced into sex trafficking. Even without the criminal element, crossing the desert on the southern border is dangerous, and hundreds die each year in the attempt, and those are only the ones whose bodies were found. Even once here illegal immigrants are largely outside of the normal protections and much more subject to exploitation and abuse.
Finally there is one more group harmed by illegal immigration: those who are trying to immigrate here legally. To be against illegal immigration is not to be against all immigration. But when the country is straining under the burden of illegal immigration it is difficult to get any movement on legal immigration.
Now supporters of illegal immigration will agree with part of this critique, particularly the part concerning the hardships faced by illegal Immigrants. This is why they want all borders abolished. Unfortunately, that is politically impossible, and even if it did happen would put such a burden on an already exploding federal budget as to bring about fiscal collapse. Simply refusing to enforce the law encourages a breakdown of the law; after all if you can just ignore immigration law, why not just ignore other laws? It also perpetuates the current system with all its problems. Allowing all of this harm, while holding out for the impossible, is not compassion. Neither is Immigrant Justice, Justice for Immigrants.
Interivews for What is Wrong with Social Justice
I am doing a lot of interviews these days for my new book, What Is Wrong With Social Justice be sure to check out my Interviews page for upcoming interviews
A Review of What is Wrong with Soical Justice
Bob Larochelle, while a supporter of Social Justice, has written a very nice review of my new book, What is Wrong Social Justice. You can find his review, here.
Also my publisher, Energion, has setup a Google hangout between Bob and myself to discuss the book on October 28. I will provide more details as we get closer.
What is Wrong with Social Justice
This is to announce my new book, What is Wrong with Social Justice. The book will be released on Sept 16, but you can pre-order your copy from Amazon today.
Ferguson: Justice vs Social Justice
The recent unrest following the fatal shooting of Michael Brown by Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri has revealed how much work remains to be done in race relations in this country. Granted, the more lawless acts have had much more to do with opportunism than anything else. But even with many of the peaceful protests there is more going on than just different views of race. There is a different view of Justice, and this shows the stark difference between Justice and Social Justice.
If we view the Ferguson shooting in terms of Justice, the goal is pretty clear. The investigation needs to be complete and unbiased so as to determine to the best extent possible exactly what happened. The key question is whether or not Officer Wilson was justified in shooting Brown. If the officer was justified, then he should be cleared of any charges. If he was not justified to one degree or another then, he should be disciplined or prosecuted as the evidence indicates. It all depends on what the evidence shows.
Sifting through all the evidence may get messy as there are already conflicting reports, but the goal is to determine what happened and then make the best decision possible in as objective a fashion as possible. That is Justice and thus, at the moment, those wanting Justice must wait for the investigation to finish before they can reach any conclusion.
The protesters did not wait. They are not seeking Justice, but in many cases Social Justice. Unlike Justice, which is concerned only with the actions of the individuals involved, Social Justice is more focused on groups, white/black, rich/poor, powerful/powerless, etc. Thus for Social Justice, it is important that Wilson was not just a police officer but that he was a white police officer, and that Michael Brown was black. By doing this, Social Justice seeks to transform the event into something far beyond just Officer Wilson shooting Brown, something symbolic of a conflict between White America and Black America.
When viewed in this fashion, questions such as was Officer Wilson justified or not become not only irrelevant, but inconvenient. This is because Social Justice not only views people as groups, but it also takes sides. Thus, rather than seeing an incident between two individuals where the exact details are unknown, Social Justice imposes a framework that forces these events to fit a predetermined agenda. As Billy Michael Honor, of New Life Presbyterian Church, College Park, GA writes, “Michael Brown’s death has exposed our transgressions and our iniquities as a country and a culture.”
It takes the events out of the objective realm where determining exactly what happened is both paramount and a matter of evidence, preferably objective evidence. Instead, it moves them into the realm of the subjective where individual details are not as important as the overarching narrative imposed on the events. In fact, when details emerge that conflict with the desired narrative, they will be discounted or even rejected if possible, as the narrative is more important than what actually happened.
When video emerged of Brown stealing cigars from a convenience store, Honor responds, “But we will not know that from him [Brown], and it is hard for some of us to trust any report from those who have taken more than 4 days to give an account. Michael was crushed and bore the punishment for being black in the USA for us all.” On the other hand, others, such as Missouri Governor Jay Nixon criticized the police for releasing it so soon. The real problem was that it was released at all, because it conflicted with the narrative.
To be clear, the video tape from a convenience store does not exonerate the officer. It is not even clear if Officer Wilson knew of the robbery, and thus if it played any role in his actions. On the other hand, Brown did know what he had just done, and that may have influenced his actions. Bottom line, the video is just one of many pieces of evidence that must be considered.
An additional and serious problem with Social Justice is the potential for harm because, unlike justice, it is not connected to reality. It may line up with reality sometimes, but at other times it won’t and when that happens bad things can occur. Thus in this case, when all the facts are in, it could turn out that this was an unjustified shooting; that Brown did have his hands up and was surrendering and yet Officer Wilson shot him anyway. If this happens and Wilson is punished, both those who sought Justice and Social Justice will be satisfied. But if it turns out that the opposite is the case those who put Social Justice ahead of Justice will not be satisfied. That is hardly justice, but again this is the difference between Justice and Social Justice, and why they are so often in conflict.
