Return to Video

Our immigration conversation is broken -- here's how to have a better one

  • 0:00 - 0:05
    We often hear these days
    that the immigration system is broken.
  • 0:05 - 0:10
    I want to make the case today that
    our immigration conversation is broken
  • 0:10 - 0:14
    and to suggest some ways that, together,
    we might build a better one.
  • 0:15 - 0:18
    In order to do that, I'm going
    to propose some new questions
  • 0:18 - 0:19
    about immigration,
  • 0:19 - 0:20
    the United States
  • 0:20 - 0:22
    and the world,
  • 0:22 - 0:27
    questions that might move the borders
    of the immigration debate.
  • 0:27 - 0:32
    I'm not going to begin with the feverish
    argument that we're currently having,
  • 0:32 - 0:36
    even as the lives and well-being
    of immigrants are being put at risk
  • 0:36 - 0:39
    at the US border and far beyond it.
  • 0:40 - 0:42
    Instead, I'm going to begin
    with me in graduate school
  • 0:42 - 0:46
    in New Jersey in the mid-1990s,
    earnestly studying US history,
  • 0:46 - 0:49
    which is what I currently teach
    as a professor at Vanderbilt University
  • 0:49 - 0:51
    in Nashville, Tennessee.
  • 0:52 - 0:53
    And when I wasn't studying,
  • 0:53 - 0:55
    sometimes to avoid
    writing my dissertation,
  • 0:55 - 0:58
    my friends and I would go into town
  • 0:58 - 1:03
    to hand out neon-colored flyers,
    protesting legislation
  • 1:03 - 1:07
    that was threatening to take away
    immigrants' rights.
  • 1:07 - 1:10
    Our flyers were sincere,
    they were well-meaning,
  • 1:10 - 1:13
    they were factually accurate ...
  • 1:13 - 1:15
    But I realize now, they were also
    kind of a problem.
  • 1:16 - 1:17
    Here's what they said:
  • 1:17 - 1:21
    "Don't take away immigrant rights
    to public education,
  • 1:21 - 1:24
    to medical services,
    to the social safety net.
  • 1:24 - 1:26
    They work hard.
  • 1:26 - 1:28
    They pay taxes.
  • 1:28 - 1:29
    They're law-abiding.
  • 1:29 - 1:32
    They use social services
    less than Americans do.
  • 1:33 - 1:35
    They're eager to learn English,
  • 1:35 - 1:40
    and their children serve
    in the US military all over the world."
  • 1:40 - 1:44
    Now, these are, of course, arguments
    that we hear every day.
  • 1:44 - 1:47
    Immigrants and their advocates use them
  • 1:47 - 1:51
    as they confront those who would
    deny immigrants their rights
  • 1:51 - 1:54
    or even exclude them from society.
  • 1:54 - 1:57
    And up to a certain point,
    it makes perfect sense
  • 1:57 - 2:02
    that these would be the kinds of claims
    that immigrants' defenders would turn to.
  • 2:03 - 2:06
    But in the long term,
    and maybe even in the short term,
  • 2:06 - 2:09
    I think these arguments
    can be counterproductive.
  • 2:10 - 2:12
    Why?
  • 2:12 - 2:14
    Because it's always an uphill battle
  • 2:14 - 2:17
    to defend yourself
    on your opponent's terrain.
  • 2:18 - 2:22
    And, unwittingly, the handouts
    my friends and I were handing out
  • 2:22 - 2:25
    and the versions of these arguments
    that we hear today
  • 2:25 - 2:28
    were actually playing
    the anti-immigrants game.
  • 2:29 - 2:31
    We were playing that game
    in part by envisioning
  • 2:31 - 2:34
    that immigrants were outsiders,
  • 2:34 - 2:37
    rather than, as I'm hoping
    to suggest in a few minutes,
  • 2:37 - 2:41
    people that are already,
    in important ways, on the inside.
  • 2:42 - 2:46
    It's those who are hostile
    to immigrants, the nativists,
  • 2:46 - 2:49
    who have succeeded
    in framing the immigration debate
  • 2:49 - 2:51
    around three main questions.
  • 2:52 - 2:57
    First, there's the question of whether
    immigrants can be useful tools.
  • 2:57 - 3:01
    How can we use immigrants?
  • 3:01 - 3:05
    Will they make us richer and stronger?
  • 3:06 - 3:09
    The nativist answer
    to this question is no,
  • 3:09 - 3:11
    immigrants have little
    or nothing to offer.
  • 3:13 - 3:17
    The second question is whether
    immigrants are others.
  • 3:18 - 3:22
    Can immigrants become more like us?
  • 3:23 - 3:25
    Are they capable of becoming more like us?
  • 3:25 - 3:27
    Are they capable of assimilating?
  • 3:27 - 3:29
    Are they willing to assimilate?
  • 3:29 - 3:32
    Here, again, the nativist answer is no,
  • 3:32 - 3:36
    immigrants are permanently
    different from us and inferior to us.
  • 3:37 - 3:42
    And the third question is whether
    immigrants are parasites.
  • 3:43 - 3:46
    Are they dangerous to us?
    And will they drain our resources?
  • 3:47 - 3:51
    Here, the nativist answer is yes and yes,
  • 3:51 - 3:54
    immigrants pose a threat
    and they sap our wealth.
  • 3:56 - 4:00
    I would suggest that these three questions
    and the nativist animus behind them
  • 4:00 - 4:04
    have succeeded in framing the larger
    contours of the immigration debate.
  • 4:04 - 4:09
    These questions are anti-immigrant
    and nativist at their core,
  • 4:09 - 4:15
    built around a kind of hierarchical
    division of insiders and outsiders,
  • 4:15 - 4:16
    us and them,
  • 4:16 - 4:19
    in which only we matter,
  • 4:19 - 4:20
    and they don't.
  • 4:21 - 4:25
    And what gives these questions
    traction and power
  • 4:25 - 4:27
    beyond the circle of committed nativists
  • 4:27 - 4:31
    is the way they tap into an everyday,
    seemingly harmless sense
  • 4:32 - 4:33
    of national belonging
  • 4:33 - 4:36
    and activate it, heighten it
  • 4:36 - 4:38
    and inflame it.
  • 4:39 - 4:43
    Nativists commit themselves
    to making stark distinctions
  • 4:43 - 4:46
    between insiders and outsiders.
  • 4:46 - 4:50
    But the distinction itself is at the heart
    of the way nations define themselves.
  • 4:51 - 4:54
    The fissures between inside and outside,
  • 4:54 - 4:59
    which often run deepest
    along lines of race and religion,
  • 4:59 - 5:02
    are always there to be
    deepened and exploited.
  • 5:03 - 5:07
    And that potentially
    gives nativist approaches resonance
  • 5:08 - 5:11
    far beyond those who consider
    themselves anti-immigrant,
  • 5:11 - 5:16
    and remarkably, even among some
    who consider themselves pro-immigrant.
  • 5:16 - 5:21
    So, for example,
    when Immigrants Act allies
  • 5:21 - 5:24
    answer these questions
    the nativists are posing,
  • 5:24 - 5:25
    they take them seriously.
  • 5:25 - 5:28
    They legitimate those questions
    and, to some extent,
  • 5:29 - 5:32
    the anti-immigrant assumptions
    that are behind them.
  • 5:32 - 5:36
    When we take these questions seriously
    without even knowing it,
  • 5:36 - 5:40
    we're reinforcing the closed,
    exclusionary borders
  • 5:40 - 5:42
    of the immigration conversation.
  • 5:43 - 5:45
    So how did we get here?
  • 5:45 - 5:49
    How did these become the leading ways
    that we talk about immigration?
  • 5:50 - 5:51
    Here, we need some backstory,
  • 5:51 - 5:53
    which is where my history
    training comes in.
  • 5:53 - 6:00
    During the first century of the US's
    status as an independent nation,
  • 6:00 - 6:03
    it did very little to restrict
    immigration at the national level.
  • 6:03 - 6:06
    In fact, many policymakers
    and employers worked hard
  • 6:06 - 6:08
    to recruit immigrants
  • 6:08 - 6:10
    to build up industry
  • 6:10 - 6:14
    and to serve as settlers,
    to seize the continent.
  • 6:15 - 6:18
    But after the Civil War,
  • 6:18 - 6:23
    nativist voices rose
    in volume and in power.
  • 6:23 - 6:28
    The Asian, Latin American,
    Caribbean and European immigrants
  • 6:28 - 6:31
    who dug Americans' canals,
  • 6:31 - 6:33
    cooked their dinners,
  • 6:33 - 6:35
    fought their wars
  • 6:35 - 6:37
    and put their children to bed at night
  • 6:37 - 6:40
    were met with a new
    and intense xenophobia,
  • 6:40 - 6:44
    which cast immigrants
    as permanent outsiders
  • 6:44 - 6:47
    who should never be allowed
    to become insiders.
  • 6:48 - 6:51
    By the mid-1920s, the nativists had won,
  • 6:51 - 6:53
    erecting racist laws
  • 6:53 - 6:58
    that closed out untold numbers
    of vulnerable immigrants and refugees.
  • 6:59 - 7:02
    Immigrants and their allies
    did their best to fight back,
  • 7:02 - 7:05
    but they found themselves
    on the defensive,
  • 7:05 - 7:08
    caught in some ways
    in the nativists' frames.
  • 7:09 - 7:14
    When nativists said
    that immigrants weren't useful,
  • 7:14 - 7:16
    their allies said yes, they are.
  • 7:17 - 7:22
    When nativists accused
    immigrants of being others,
  • 7:22 - 7:24
    their allies promised
    that they would assimilate.
  • 7:26 - 7:32
    When nativists charged that immigrants
    were dangerous parasites,
  • 7:32 - 7:35
    their allies emphasized
    their loyalty, their obedience,
  • 7:35 - 7:37
    their hard work and their thrift.
  • 7:38 - 7:42
    Even as advocates welcomed immigrants,
  • 7:42 - 7:48
    many still regarded immigrants
    as outsiders to be pitied, to be rescued,
  • 7:48 - 7:50
    to be uplifted
  • 7:50 - 7:52
    and to be tolerated,
  • 7:52 - 7:58
    but never fully brought inside
    as equals in rights and respect.
  • 7:59 - 8:06
    After World War II, and especially
    from the mid-1960s until really recently,
  • 8:06 - 8:08
    immigrants and their allies
    turned the tide,
  • 8:08 - 8:12
    overthrowing mid-20th century restriction
  • 8:12 - 8:16
    and winning instead a new system
    that prioritized family reunification,
  • 8:16 - 8:18
    the admission of refugees
  • 8:18 - 8:21
    and the admission of those
    with special skills.
  • 8:22 - 8:23
    But even then,
  • 8:23 - 8:27
    they didn't succeed in fundamentally
    changing the terms of the debate,
  • 8:27 - 8:30
    and so that framework endured,
  • 8:30 - 8:35
    ready to be taken up again
    in our own convulsive moment.
  • 8:36 - 8:38
    That conversation is broken.
  • 8:39 - 8:43
    The old questions
    are harmful and divisive.
  • 8:43 - 8:46
    So how do we get from that conversation
  • 8:46 - 8:51
    to one that's more likely to get us
    closer to a world that is fairer,
  • 8:51 - 8:52
    that is more just,
  • 8:52 - 8:54
    that's more secure?
  • 8:55 - 8:57
    I want to suggest that what we have to do
  • 8:57 - 9:01
    is one of the hardest things
    that any society can do:
  • 9:01 - 9:05
    to redraw the boundaries of who counts,
  • 9:05 - 9:08
    of whose life, whose rights
  • 9:08 - 9:11
    and whose thriving matters.
  • 9:11 - 9:14
    We need to redraw the boundaries.
  • 9:14 - 9:18
    We need to redraw the borders of us.
  • 9:19 - 9:25
    In order to do that, we need to first
    take on a worldview that's widely held
  • 9:25 - 9:27
    but also seriously flawed.
  • 9:27 - 9:29
    According to that worldview,
  • 9:29 - 9:33
    there's the inside of the national
    boundaries, inside the nation,
  • 9:33 - 9:37
    which is where we live, work
    and mind our own business.
  • 9:38 - 9:41
    And then there's the outside;
    there's everywhere else.
  • 9:42 - 9:45
    According to this worldview,
    when immigrants cross into the nation,
  • 9:45 - 9:48
    they're moving from
    the outside to the inside,
  • 9:48 - 9:51
    but they remain outsiders.
  • 9:51 - 9:55
    Any power or resources they receive
  • 9:55 - 9:59
    are gifts from us rather than rights.
  • 9:59 - 10:04
    Now, it's not hard to see why
    this is such a commonly held worldview.
  • 10:04 - 10:08
    It's reinforced in everyday ways
    that we talk and act and behave,
  • 10:08 - 10:11
    down to the bordered maps
    that we hang up in our schoolrooms.
  • 10:12 - 10:15
    The problem with this worldview
    is that it just doesn't correspond
  • 10:15 - 10:18
    to the way the world actually works,
  • 10:18 - 10:20
    and the way it has worked in the past.
  • 10:21 - 10:26
    Of course, American workers
    have built up wealth in society.
  • 10:26 - 10:28
    But so have immigrants,
  • 10:28 - 10:31
    particularly in parts of the American
    economy that are indispensable
  • 10:31 - 10:34
    and where few Americans work,
    like agriculture.
  • 10:35 - 10:36
    Since the nation's founding,
  • 10:36 - 10:41
    Americans have been inside
    the American workforce.
  • 10:42 - 10:47
    Of course, Americans have built up
    institutions in society
  • 10:47 - 10:49
    that guarantee rights.
  • 10:49 - 10:51
    But so have immigrants.
  • 10:51 - 10:54
    They've been there during
    every major social movement,
  • 10:54 - 10:57
    like civil rights and organized labor,
  • 10:57 - 11:00
    that have fought to expand
    rights in society for everyone.
  • 11:00 - 11:04
    So immigrants are already
    inside the struggle
  • 11:04 - 11:07
    for rights, democracy and freedom.
  • 11:08 - 11:12
    And finally, Americans
    and other citizens of the Global North
  • 11:12 - 11:15
    haven't minded their own business,
  • 11:15 - 11:17
    and they haven't stayed
    within their own borders.
  • 11:17 - 11:19
    They haven't respected
    other nations' borders.
  • 11:19 - 11:21
    They've gone out into the world
    with their armies,
  • 11:21 - 11:24
    they've taken over
    territories and resources,
  • 11:24 - 11:28
    and they've extracted enormous profits
    from many of the countries
  • 11:28 - 11:29
    that immigrants are from.
  • 11:30 - 11:36
    In this sense, many immigrants are
    actually already inside American power.
  • 11:37 - 11:42
    With this different map
    of inside and outside in mind,
  • 11:42 - 11:45
    the question isn't whether
    receiving countries
  • 11:45 - 11:47
    are going to let immigrants in.
  • 11:48 - 11:50
    They're already in.
  • 11:50 - 11:53
    The question is whether
    the United States and other countries
  • 11:53 - 11:57
    are going to give immigrants
    access to the rights and resources
  • 11:57 - 12:01
    that their work, their activism
    and their home countries
  • 12:01 - 12:05
    have already played
    a fundamental role in creating.
  • 12:06 - 12:09
    With this new map in mind,
  • 12:09 - 12:13
    we can turn to a set of tough,
    new, urgently needed questions,
  • 12:13 - 12:17
    radically different from the ones
    we've asked before --
  • 12:17 - 12:21
    questions that might change
    the borders of the immigration debate.
  • 12:23 - 12:27
    Our three questions are
    about workers' rights,
  • 12:27 - 12:28
    about responsibility
  • 12:28 - 12:30
    and about equality.
  • 12:33 - 12:36
    First, we need to be asking
    about workers' rights.
  • 12:36 - 12:41
    How do existing policies make it harder
    for immigrants to defend themselves
  • 12:41 - 12:43
    and easier for them to be exploited,
  • 12:43 - 12:46
    driving down wages, rights
    and protections for everyone?
  • 12:47 - 12:50
    When immigrants are threatened
    with roundups, detention and deportations,
  • 12:50 - 12:53
    their employers know
    that they can be abused,
  • 12:53 - 12:55
    that they can be told
    that if they fight back,
  • 12:55 - 12:57
    they'll be turned over to ICE.
  • 12:57 - 13:00
    When employers know
  • 13:00 - 13:03
    that they can terrorize an immigrant
    with his lack of papers,
  • 13:04 - 13:06
    it makes that worker hyper-exploitable,
  • 13:06 - 13:09
    and that has impacts
    not only for immigrant workers
  • 13:09 - 13:11
    but for all workers.
  • 13:12 - 13:15
    Second, we need to ask questions
    about responsibility.
  • 13:16 - 13:20
    What role have rich, powerful
    countries like the United States
  • 13:20 - 13:22
    played in making it hard or impossible
  • 13:22 - 13:26
    for immigrants to stay
    in their home countries?
  • 13:26 - 13:30
    Picking up and moving from your country
    is difficult and dangerous,
  • 13:30 - 13:33
    but many immigrants simply do not have
    the option of staying home
  • 13:33 - 13:36
    if they want to survive.
  • 13:36 - 13:37
    Wars, trade agreements
  • 13:37 - 13:40
    and consumer habits
    rooted in the Global North
  • 13:40 - 13:45
    play a major and devastating role here.
  • 13:45 - 13:49
    What responsibilities
    do the United States,
  • 13:49 - 13:51
    the European Union and China --
  • 13:51 - 13:53
    the world's leading carbon emitters --
  • 13:53 - 13:58
    have to the millions of people
    already uprooted by global warming?
  • 14:00 - 14:03
    And third, we need to ask
    questions about equality.
  • 14:04 - 14:08
    Global inequality is a wrenching,
    intensifying problem.
  • 14:08 - 14:11
    Income and wealth gaps
    are widening around the world.
  • 14:12 - 14:15
    Increasingly, what determines
    whether you're rich or poor,
  • 14:15 - 14:16
    more than anything else,
  • 14:16 - 14:18
    is what country you're born in,
  • 14:18 - 14:21
    which might seem great
    if you're from a prosperous country.
  • 14:21 - 14:26
    But it actually means
    a profoundly unjust distribution
  • 14:26 - 14:31
    of the chances for a long,
    healthy, fulfilling life.
  • 14:31 - 14:34
    When immigrants send money
    or goods home to their family,
  • 14:34 - 14:37
    it plays a significant role
    in narrowing these gaps,
  • 14:37 - 14:39
    if a very incomplete one.
  • 14:40 - 14:43
    It does more than all
    of the foreign aid programs
  • 14:43 - 14:45
    in the world combined.
  • 14:47 - 14:49
    We began with the nativist questions,
  • 14:49 - 14:52
    about immigrants as tools,
  • 14:52 - 14:54
    as others
  • 14:54 - 14:55
    and as parasites.
  • 14:56 - 14:59
    Where might these new questions
    about worker rights,
  • 14:59 - 15:01
    about responsibility
  • 15:01 - 15:02
    and about equality
  • 15:02 - 15:04
    take us?
  • 15:04 - 15:09
    These questions reject pity,
    and they embrace justice.
  • 15:10 - 15:14
    These questions reject
    the nativist and nationalist division
  • 15:14 - 15:15
    of us versus them.
  • 15:15 - 15:18
    They're going to help prepare us
    for problems that are coming
  • 15:18 - 15:23
    and problems like global warming
    that are already upon us.
  • 15:23 - 15:27
    It's not going to be easy to turn away
    from the questions that we've been asking
  • 15:27 - 15:30
    towards this new set of questions.
  • 15:30 - 15:32
    It's no small challenge
  • 15:32 - 15:36
    to take on and broaden the borders of us.
  • 15:37 - 15:41
    It will take wit,
    inventiveness and courage.
  • 15:41 - 15:44
    The old questions have been
    with us for a long time,
  • 15:44 - 15:47
    and they're not going
    to give way on their own,
  • 15:47 - 15:49
    and they're not going
    to give way overnight.
  • 15:50 - 15:52
    And even if we manage
    to change the questions,
  • 15:52 - 15:54
    the answers are going to be complicated,
  • 15:54 - 15:57
    and they're going to require
    sacrifices and tradeoffs.
  • 15:58 - 16:02
    And in an unequal world, we're always
    going to have to pay attention
  • 16:02 - 16:05
    to the question of who has the power
    to join the conversation
  • 16:05 - 16:06
    and who doesn't.
  • 16:07 - 16:09
    But the borders of the immigration debate
  • 16:09 - 16:11
    can be moved.
  • 16:11 - 16:14
    It's up to all of us to move them.
  • 16:15 - 16:16
    Thank you.
  • 16:16 - 16:19
    (Applause)
Title:
Our immigration conversation is broken -- here's how to have a better one
Speaker:
Paul A. Kramer
Description:

How did the US immigration debate get to be so divisive? In this informative talk, historian and writer Paul A. Kramer shows how an "insider vs. outsider" framing has come to dominate the way people in the US talk about immigration -- and suggests a set of new questions that could reshape the conversation around whose life, rights and thriving matters.

more » « less
Video Language:
English
Team:
TED
Project:
TEDTalks
Duration:
16:31

English subtitles

Revisions Compare revisions