I believe that conflict between
established and undocumented Americans in the southwestern United States has genocidal
potential. Genocide is by no means inevitable, nor does it seem imminent;
however, it would be a grave mistake to look the other way. After our readings
on the causes of genocide, the situation in the American Southwest should alarm
us.
In the Southwest, many ‘real Americans’ see immigrants as a threat to
their economic security. Especially in recent times of high unemployment,
Americans resent having to compete with immigrants for jobs. The fact that many
immigrants are paid ‘under the table’ too infuriates Americans, who complain
that immigrants benefit from public services such as education, emergency room
care, and law enforcement without paying their fair share of taxes. The
legitimacy of these allegations is highly suspect. When it comes to analyzing
genocidal potential, however, the veracity of the threat is unimportant.
According to Levene, genocide requires only the perception of a threat to “the integrity of [a state’s] agenda” by an
aggregate group. Alarmingly, the situation in the American Southwest fits this
model. Illegal immigrants, or those thought to be illegal immigrants, are
widely perceived as threatening to economic security in immigrant-heavy states.
Levene argued that in situations such as these, it is possible that genocide can
be rationalized as the ‘only way’ for a state to regain the power lost to the
threatening group.
Armed with a motive, the American Southwest could move forward to perpetrate genocide if its people unify against immigrants, moving to eliminate the ‘threat’ of the ‘alien other’ in their community. Mann argued that “organic” groups – those whose individual and collective interests are aligned – have the potential to commit genocide through majoritarian tyranny. In the southwestern United States, the passage of recent anti-immigration legislation indicates the potential organicism of several states. For example, in 2010, the Arizona state legislature passed the country’s most aggressive anti-immigrant policy – known as SB 1070 – which, among other things, required Arizonans to prove on demand that they were legal residents of the state. Though SB 1070 was initially controversial, opinion polls reveal that nearly 60% of Americans support key provisions of the law, and several states have passed similar laws in recent years. In effect, SB 1070 and similar ‘show me your papers’ laws are, like the yellow stars of World War II, a means to establish who belongs and who does not, so that outsiders may be ‘dealt with.’
Will Arizona and the rest of the southwest choose to ‘deal with’ illegal immigrants through genocide? It seems they would be capable of it; in fact, they’ve arguably already begun. Subtle but insidious destruction of immigrant – specifically Latino – culture is already underway in parts of the southwest. Hispanic and Latino history is under attack in numerous states. In Texas, for example, the State Board of Education made dramatic revisions to the state’s mandatory history curriculum in 2010, erasing practically any reference to Hispanic leaders. Arizona went one step further; in 2011, the state legislature prohibited the teaching of Mexican American studies in a high school curriculum. Immigrants have also been banned from using their native languages. For example, this year, a student was expelled from a school in San Diego for speaking Spanish outside of Spanish class. In some areas, even churches have become unsafe. In 2011, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement conducted raids on Catholic churches in the Latino communities of Las Vegas and other areas, interrogating parishioners during mass and arresting dozens on suspicion of unauthorized immigration. Though it is impossible to know if or when these cultural attacks will escalate to full-fledged genocide, their significance cannot be overstated. Cultural destruction is often just the beginning; it has been said that the burning of books is merely a precursor to the burning of bodies.
The Southwestern United States has become an illegal immigration battleground in recent years. A perceived economic threat has led legislators in states like Texas and Arizona to enact laws to identify and exclude immigrants. Some states have gone even further, attacking the Hispanic and Latino culture that is so closely associated with immigrant communities. In short, the situation in the Southwest resembles what Levene and Mann described as a pre-genocidal society. As frightening as it may be, it seems clear that even the “land of the free and the home of the brave” is ripe with genocidal potential.
The victimization of Hispanic immigrants is certainly disturbing, and some parallels with genocidal societies are recognizable. However, I feel that genocide is an unlikely outcome, and that these exclusionary policies and attitudes that Rayla describes constitute only the peak of a genocidal whimper. Attempts to exclude Hispanics are already costly, both from a material and political perspective, and the costs keep rising.
ReplyDeleteRayla describes how anti-Hispanic sentiment and laws reflect an organic conception of the people that excludes Hispanic immigrants. However, Hispanic immigrants are also part of a stratified society. In Mann's stratified conception of the people, groups are interdependent on each other, so conflict can't be solved simply by one group wiping out another. This interdependency is at the core of Hispanic immigration; many Hispanics have come to the United States seeking low wage work in order to support their families. Many businesses rely on these workers to fill their low wage jobs, and exclusionary policy can harm their interests. For instance, in 2011 Georgia passed a harsh anti-immigrant law, and it succeeded in driving thousands of immigrants out of Georgia; however, even in the midst of high unemployment, crops rotted in the fields because of the labor shortage.[1] The necessity of Hispanic labor serves as a check to genocidal impulses.
Additionally, Hispanics are gaining political power at a rapid pace. Hispanics have tripled as a percent of the presidential electorate over the last two decades (from 3% in 1988 to 9% in 2008),[2] and their vote share continues to rise. While once the Republican Party could leave the vast majority of Hispanic voters outside their coalition, this no longer remains possible, and will become even less so with each passing year. To be fair, this opened up the door to some exclusionary policies in the short term, such as voter ID laws; however, such policies can only do so much. To win nationally and in much of the southwest, Republicans have to win a large share of the Hispanic vote. Thus, the political price of exclusionary policies against Hispanics has become steep. Republicans have recognized this and tried to walk a fine line between appealing to their base, of which many would endorse an organic conception of the people, and appealing to Hispanics. For instance, when Obama issued an executive order halting the deportation of DREAM act eligible immigrants, Romney refused to take a stand against the substance of the policy, only criticizing the process. The political pressure to oppose exclusion will only become stronger over the next few years as more Hispanics vote. Due to the rising costs, the prospects of exclusionary policy escalating into genocide appear remote.
-----------------------
1. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/06/georgias-harsh-immigration-law-costs-millions-in-unharvested-crops/240774/
2. http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html