“They are taking our jobs!” “How do you stop these people?” “We aren’t those types of immigrants.”
Last week, as we found ourselves on the 18th anniversary of 9/11, I couldn’t help but think of that day in 2001, one of the first occurrences in my lifetime that changed how Americans viewed freedom and security. As a child of immigrants, this day was the first time I was told I wasn’t “one of us,” but rather one of ‘them.’
I don’t remember much about that day, other than other than sitting in a circle (criss-cross applesauce of course) in my second-grade class, as our teacher explained some of what was happening. For us as sheltered midwestern second graders, the day went on without too much concern; we were too young and unaware of the details. The day after 9/11 is what I really remember. This was the day multiple classmates asked me: “Are you one of them?” “You aren’t Muslim, right?”
My 8-year-old self didn’t really think twice. I said, “No, you are so silly! I am not a terrorist!” confused about how they could think such a horrible thing. I was old enough to know that their accusations were false, but too young to understand what my classmates were asking. I did not know how to challenge these problematic sentiments and honestly, immigrant children should never have to. My classmates did not come up with these questions on their own: it was what they heard and interpreted at the dinner table on 9/11 – what their caregivers may have insinuated, consciously or not. Little did I know how much that day would shape anti-immigrant rhetoric, or that we would still be hearing it today, loud and clear.
I did not know how to challenge these problematic sentiments and honestly, immigrant children should never have to. Share on X18 years after 9/11, anti-immigrant comments continue to fill our screens and speakers, instilling fear among immigrant communities daily. From Islamophobia to Anti-Latinx prejudice, you can fill in the blank for who ‘they’ are. But what exactly classifies ‘them?’
Saying “America is a country of immigrants,” true as this may be, in some ways minimizes the differences and the targeted nature of xenophobic rhetoric. To be one of ‘them’ is to be, not just an immigrant, but specifically, one who doesn’t fit into the category of white, or the “worthy”-of-reaping-benefits-from-working-hard narrative that qualifies one, in the eyes of some, as one of “Us Americans.”
Whether these statements originate from social media – a gas-guzzler for hate fueled rhetoric – or the President of the United States, how can we successfully challenge them? Research from the University of Pennsylvania suggests the best way to combat anti-Muslim rhetoric is to show individuals the hypocrisy in their stance. Using this strategy, I’ve chosen the three statements above to unpack ways we can help move past polarization to understanding and appreciating the cultural differences present in our country of immigrants.
“How do you stop these people?”
You mean the hate-fueled gunmen responsible for the most mass shootings in the world? Nope. Sadly, this was one of many dangerous responses to Latinx migration expressed by Donald Trump. To make matters worse, the President’s rhetoric is constantly being echoed across social media, and the consequences have been no less than tragic. This rhetoric inspired the shooter in the recent El Paso Massacre, who wrote an essay filled with the same anti-Latinx rhetoric expressed from the White House.
Unfortunately, such statements are not exclusive to the mouths of the political extremists or white nationalists. We must unpack and acknowledge the contradictions in how we view danger in this country, immigrant or not. For example, the way we respond to perpetrators of mass shootings differs according to whether or not they are white men. What qualifies the few deadly crimes carried out by immigrants as terrorism, and the 54% of shootings carried out white men as not? The Boston Marathon Bombers from Kyrgyzstan were seen as terrorists, whereas the Las Vegas shooter was seen as a white man who was severely mentally ill and needed care. If the media are to be believed, The Sandy Hook Shooter was a tragic case of mistreated Sensory Information Disorder in youth, and the Columbine shooters were inspired by dangerous video games.
While addressing these failures in mental health treatment is very important, this idea also has been used to divert people in power from addressing the hypocrisy in these sentiments. In reality, a clear majority of mass shootings are conducted by white men. The idea of “domestic terrorism” has only recently been trending in news outlets, but as Professor Adam Malka explains, the history of white men vigilantism has been imperative to the xenophobia and othering of immigrant communities:
“The links these [white male] perpetrators have had to the police establishment have thus muddied our definition of legitimate force, allowing white men to continue to inflict violence on society.”
So the next time you engage in a discussion on Mass violence or terrorism, pose this question: Would you not consider the white American men behind the numerous mass shootings of innocent people dangerous enough to be terrorists? If no, then why not?
Would you not consider the white American men behind the numerous mass shootings of innocent people dangerous enough to be terrorists? If no, then why not? Share on X“They are taking our jobs!”
Unfortunately, the infamous, satirical “They took our jobs” SouthPark episode still resonates, years later. People may not always express this sentiment verbatim, but the dialogue around how immigrants are to blame for the economic struggles of other Americans prevails. The increased globalization of our economy and exponential increase in the cost of education have made it extremely difficult for middle class Americans in particular, to increase their wealth in ways previous generations were able to. The idea that immigrants have “taken” Americans’ jobs is not just flawed; the economic argument against immigrants is essentially non-existent. Economic experts assert that immigrants boost the economy and are one of the larger groups of fiscal contributors.
The economic argument against immigrants is essentially non-existent. Economic experts assert that immigrants boost the economy and are one of the larger groups of fiscal contributors. Share on XSo why does this rhetoric still exist? A meta-analysis of anti-immigration studies shows that the underlying reasons for these sentiments isn’t about financial security, but rather emotional security – the fear that some entity (in this case, new immigrants) are jeopardizing the image and values of this country. Instead of viewing differences in culture as additive, it is seen as taking away. So, if you hear some variation of “they are taking our jobs,” ask, “Why do you feel you should get this job compared to someone with the same qualifications? What makes this competition for a job different from others? If it is simply that the applicant pool includes people from backgrounds that weren’t in your worldview until recently, reflect on why you find that upsetting.”
Finally, I want to address anti-immigrant rhetoric that is more complex: rhetoric that comes from immigrants themselves.
“We aren’t those types of immigrants.”
Progress in celebrating and respecting immigrant lives and contributions is often undermined by the internalization of problematic comments like those discussed above. As a result, to avoid being classified as one of “them,” immigrants who had the ability to settle into life in the U.S. through government documentation sometimes emphasize having come to this country “fair and square,” abiding by the rules, etc. We speak in self-defense, but really, we are hurting our ourselves.
Immigration is not as easy as standing in a line for your driver’s license, waiting to get your name called. As recent immigrants and children of immigrants, it is important for us to recognize our privileges within the immigrant experience. Regardless of how closely you may identify with immigration, it is vital to recognize the diversity within the immigrant experience. “Those types” of immigrants are the ones who did not have privileges such as educational status, a relative in the country, or ways to prove their need for asylum, to receive documentation.
As recent immigrants and children of immigrants, it is important for us to recognize our privileges within the immigrant experience. Regardless of how closely you may identify with immigration, it is vital to recognize the… Share on XInstead of distancing yourself from the issue, think of how you can raise the voices of inequity that are putting prospective immigrants and their children in dangerous conditions. Challenging this sentiment requires inverting the immigration process: “Why would anyone go through such an arduous and often malicious process if this wasn’t their only choice for a better life? How would you feel if the country you believed would provide you opportunity doubted your intentions for coming in the first place?”
Finally, I will ask: what will happen if dangerous rhetoric about immigrants doesn’t get challenged? Christopher Columbus, a white man who sought economic gain in unknown territory, is seen as brave, courageous, a trailblazer, and a hero in history books and American culture. We shove under the rug Columbus’ displacement of and violence against indigenous tribes. He gets an American holiday; meanwhile people seeking opportunity to better the lives of their children, with no malintent, face scrutiny for even thinking they are worthy of the “American Dream.” The consequences of anti-immigrant rhetoric can truly be life or death. Thus, I empower you to redefine “us,” and challenge anti-immigrant conversations, attitudes, and opinions with your families, friends, and colleagues.
We shove under the rug Columbus’ displacement of and violence against indigenous tribes. He gets an American holiday; meanwhile, people seeking opportunity to better the lives of their children face scrutiny for even thinking they… Share on X
