What borders do you place around immigration?

Session Leader: Michael Ramos

Mark Miloscia, Rev. Patrick Clark, Pat Higgins, Anahata __________

Very complex issue, suffers from a lack of clarity and sound information of causes and effects.  We need to be “open to what is right.”  Question is raised as to “why all the controversy over immigration, since we are all immigrants?”  Migration results from need in the majority of cases, there are unacknowledged global causes, and people are under tremendous pressure in complicated situations.

Immigrants are “used” by society as a source of labor, sometimes seriously exploitation and in a form of servitude.  Recent information of family separation, raids and conditions in detention centers causes a “state of shock” in some of us.

What is sought is a system of immigration that is fair and “human.”  The present system is broken, inadequate to the global and national situation.  We see “hard” and “soft” enforcement procedures in the face of unknown needs and motives for migration.  There is tremendous fear and suffering illustrated in the media.  Fear has very negative cultural implications; it can disintegrate cultural activity.

Regarding culture, we want to appreciate the cultural contributions of immigrants, in addition to their labor and economic benefit to the country.  We are a nation of immigrants, in one sense knitting a well-woven quilt, and thread of which, removed, threatens the integrity and “sustainability” of the overall culture.

The question of “borders” is somewhat vague.  Borders are legal constructions, whereas migration is a global, historical reality that continues as a socio-economic phenomenon.  It is interesting to remove the prefixes of im- and e- from migration and think of human movement as a global reality.  “No human being is illegal,’ is a catchphrase of some local immigration reform activist groups.  It brings a broader perspective to the discussion.

Constant change of all sorts is another aspect of this issue.  If this country is a quilt, a melting pot, a stew of many ingredients, etc., what will those ingredients be in 100 years?  Can we construct a system that acknowledges the global realities and humanizes our social response so that we become a pro-immigrant society?

On the other hand, there is real concern for the geographical integrity of the country, and “the rule of law.”  Can borders be disregarded?  For immigrants here and still to come, what is their commitment to the future of the U. S. A.?  There is vagueness here, too, in the midst of rapid demographical shifts.  Will it be a shift toward a collective unity or simply to increasing ethnic balkanization?

We need to prioritize our principles for guidance in the face of change.  First principle is “Do no harm,” adherence to basic human rights is foremost.  Commitment in this is essential, as special interests use divisive strategies and tactics to pit cultural groups against one another to achieve the particular goal.  If we are in an age of globalization and a world-wide economy, we must think and perceive as one human race, beyond divisions – a new paradigm.

The new paradigm requires internal, personal change in addition to systemic alterations.  To live through natural fears and the overwhelming influences and pressures of the times, we must develop strong strategies for not simply coping, rather for resisting and transforming.  Among many transformations, one that is immediately necessary to counteract the gross consumerist cultures developing around the world is that of seeking less, striving for equilibrium, and pursuing a “sufficient, sustainable livelihood for all.”

That egalitarian livelihood will require changes in policy.  The recent Congressional debates on immigration reform resulted in legislative proposals that did not meet the needs of the present situation.  Some portions of these bills were acceptable to some legislators, others to others, but none, it seems, garnered a quorum for support and passage.  The struggle continues.  The literal survival of human beings is at stake.  It is a human right to migrate in the face of survival pressures. No human being is illegal.

The present Sanctuary movement is one based on welcome and hospitality.  We seek to build a “house” (society) not of sandy instability, but one on strength, erected on the rock-firm foundation of acceptance, sharing of wealth and human familial unity.  “Send me your tired, your poor…”