U.S. propaganda suppresses immigrants’ rights

Elian Gonzalez’s face has dominated the front-page news
for months. Anti-Castro forces claim that we must do everything in
our power to “save” this child from the dictatorship in
Cuba. While most of the American public agrees that Elian should be
with his father, they regret that he must be sent back to a
poverty-stricken country with supposed human rights violations.

Let’s face it: Elian Gonzalez’s story blew up as it
did because he is from a socialist country. But the fact is that
thousands of Elians come to the United States every day from
Mexico, and are either deported or hired to work in deplorable
conditions. They are not wearing a new Pokemon backpack or being
taken to Disneyland. Why? Because they are not from a nation
resisting America’s capitalist system. Because their use as a
cheap labor force is necessary for the prosperity of American
companies. And ultimately, because our own deep-seated racism and
ignorance allow for the existence of a labor force composed of
suffering immigrants.

The United States maintains a hypocritical attitude toward
Mexican immigration, with increasingly restrictive controls of
“illegal” immigration set against the relaxation of
constraints in cross-border economic activity. When it is in the
best interests of U.S. businesses, Mexican immigrants are recruited
to boost our economy and discipline American labor. When Mexican
workers organize and pose a threat, or when a scapegoat is needed,
they are blamed for economic and social problems, and consequently
deported.

The game of Mexican immigration is one dominated by U.S.
interests. The rules are set by the U.S. government, which taps
into Mexico’s vast source of cheap labor when it’s
convenient and fuels racism and xenophobia when it’s
necessary. The United States has grown fat from the social and
economic starvation of Mexican workers. Illegal immigrants are
appealing to employers because they are paid less, they are
reliable and they cannot complain about working conditions. If
workers attempt to agitate, they can be fired immediately.

Since the 1986 Immigration Reform Act, employers have become
agents of the Immigration Naturalization Service. While they are
not supposed to hire “illegal” immigrants, employers
instead continue to use this cheap labor force, only firing
undocumented workers when they begin to organize for change.

According to The Washington Post, the chances of a company
getting fined by the INS for hiring “illegal” workers
is less than .2 percent. Thus, the INS system has been set up in a
way that allows companies to continue exploiting workers while
maintaining the power to deport those attempting to fight for their
basic rights.

Look at President Clinton’s “Operation
Vanguard.” In this enforcement operation, the INS
investigates meat-packing and processing plants that have been
accused of using undocumented workers. The INS subpoenas employees,
interviews them and cross checks the information to determine if
they are legal workers. According to the American Immigration
Lawyers Association, a similar operation in 1998 in Washington
state’s apple industry resulted in thousands of workers being
terminated and employers facing losses in harvesting and packing
the apple crop. At one meat-packing plant, 60 percent of the
persons named on the INS list had left the company before
interviews could take place.

Behind the veil of law enforcement, “Operation
Vanguard” makes it easier for companies to exploit workers.
Those who are fired or quit out of fear simply move on to the next
low-paying job. This abundance of workers makes it possible for
companies to further threaten their employees, pointing to the line
of undocumented immigrants waiting to take their place. Plans such
as “Operation Vanguard” point to “illegal”
immigrants as the problem. In fact, it is the American need for
cheap labor, combined with America’s hand in the Mexican
economy, that drives immigrants from their homes. This can be seen
with the commercialization of agriculture in Mexico. The United
States encouraged much of the communal land in Mexico to be bought
or confiscated by government bureaucrats and merchants. This move
kicked the communal farmers off of their own land and sent them
north to look for jobs in this country.

The United States also benefited from Mexico’s need for
tractors, irrigation and money to help build railroads to export
goods. Mexico had no choice but to buy these products and borrow
money from the United States, only compounding their debt. Thus,
Mexico was left with a labor force detached from the land and in
desperate need of survivable wages.

The United States was able to benefit both from the
commercialization of agriculture and this cheap, displaced labor
force that it generated. Under the guise of aid and economic
development, America has been able to “build” the
Mexican economy in a way that best fits U.S. business interests.
Consequently, Mexico’s human rights violations are not
trumpeted as Cuba’s have been during the Elian case because
our own government is partially at fault.

Those who continue to see “illegal” immigrants as
the problem must ask themselves why anyone would want to leave
their homeland to come here and work in deplorable conditions. The
fact that so many Americans fall for xenophobic propaganda reveals
an underlying racism that we must actively combat. By sending the
message that Mexican workers take American jobs and reap social
benefits, U.S. businesses succeed in swaying public opinion to
their advantage. As long as immigrants can be blamed for
society’s problems, the American people won’t hold
their own government accountable.

According to Rita Simon and Jay Lynch’s article in
1999’s International Migration Review, the scapegoating of
Mexican immigrants has been an unfortunate success. An August 1997
poll found that 63 percent of Americans feel that “immigrants
take jobs away from Americans and lead to increased conflict
between racial and ethnic groups.”

Immigrants are not the cause of such conflict; deep-seated
racism is. As the National Research Council declared in 1997,
“Far from being a burden, immigrants add as much as $10
billion a year to our economy.” We must examine our
underlying racist ideologies regarding all immigrants. We must
educate ourselves about the history of U.S. exploitation of people
who seek a better life by immigrating to the United States. In
doing so, it is crucial to look at America’s role in making
their native country a place from which they are forced to emigrate
in the first place.

As a people, we must recognize scapegoating when it occurs and
we must not allow our opinions to be so easily swayed, especially
when they are being bent against fellow human beings. As Americans,
it is our responsibility to recognize that while in disguised form,
slavery continues today.

“Illegal” immigrants do not have a voice in the
United States, but we do. We must ensure that the rights we pride
ourselves on as Americans extend to those whose sweat and tears
have built this country into what it is today.