I’m going to reference the issue currently occurring in the south in regards to illegal immigration. The scenario is that the state of Arizona has passed a law that allows law enforcement to stop people they believe to be Mexican illegal aliens on site and ask them to show papers or proof of American citizenship. The problem or major conflict is that this is considered racial profiling.
From amnesty international, racial profiling is defined as: “Racial profiling occurs when race is used by law enforcement or private security officials, to any degree, as a basis for criminal suspicion in non-suspect specific investigations. Discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, nationality or on any other particular identity undermines the basic human rights and freedoms to which every person is entitled.”
If you have ever been down in Texas, Arizona, or New Mexico, you will understand the amount of Mexican-American’s in that area. These are American citizens and they will be subject to this law, which will discriminate based on the color of their skin. Any process that specifically uses the color or ones skin can’t be seen as anything other than racism. An additional problem is that other states are actually considering enacting similar laws. I understand the need to address issues, real issues, surrounding illegal immigration but promoting racism is not the way to do it.
The cultural conflict styles most prevalent in this issue are value and goal conflict. The value conflict arises because of the difference in Americans views on illegal immigration and how to deal with it. Some Americans understand the effects, both now and for our future, of allowing a law like this to be supported and or instituted state wide. Others are viewing this as the only way to deal with illegal immigration and they buy into the propaganda about illegal immigrants and their negative effects on the US economy, they are so emotional over this that they cannot or don’t wish to see the positive effects. Decisions and judgments based on ignorance are very dangerous.
The other type of conflict is goal conflict. People are disagreeing over this law that has been passed in Arizona. They disagree that this is the way to deal with illegal immigration; some obviously don’t consider it racist in the least and are more focused on their desired end result than the logic of what they are doing.
I believe it’s difficult for societies to resolve differences when they are in an emotional state of fear. The US economy is weak, jobs are at a loss, crime is rising, budgets are being cut to me this makes Americans fearful. When in fear they react emotionally and without thought of the true consequences of their actions. Throughout time there has always had to be a scapegoat, I think the government encourages it to take the focus away from their inability or lack of desire to deal with the most pressing issues of today. People also are unwilling to accept accountability for the state of affairs and therefore need to find someone else to pin it on. In this case it’s Mexicans. If they persist in using racially based laws to deal with this, or any issue no this will not be resolved. They must find a more humane solution to the issue and not target a group by their skin color.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that this law is racist and is not the right solution to the problem of illegal immigration. Employers can and should check for proof of American citizenship from everyone before hiring people; however, police should not have the right to ask for this based on ethnicity alone. This law reminds me of the old Soviet Union, where people had to carry papers and permits to travel through the country. What's next, checkpoints along the roads where police check your papers? This law definitely seems unconstitutional and I hope it doesn't spread.
ReplyDeleteI did not know such a law exists. It is true that many Mexican illigal immigrants come to the U.S. and it is a big problem. However, I think it is not an enough reason to treat all Mexican as offenders. To protect the citizens from unemployment(because employers prefer illigal immingants workers because of cheap costs), this law is effective. However, from ethical point of view, it must not admit. It is a very difficult.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the fears are more morally induced. But the fact that you actually defined the scapegoats to be the people that get blamed for all the job losses, and crime being on the rise. I focused on the value and goal aspect of my conflict example also. This was and excellent read. If more and more people don't read like this the oppressive actions that both Arizona and Texas enacted will spread and destroy the structure we need to make America work. But even thinking like this shows some fear on my spot. But I think the tool for this requires the potential sedative of the power of thought.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, they made this law to take people's eyes away from the broken economy and the job loss. It is sad that this law is the result of this. This is making America look even worse. We have a history of discriminating against color and now we are doing it again.
ReplyDeleteIllegal immigration is an issue that the United States needs to address, however enacting laws that encourage racial profiling is not the answer. I feel that, in a reasonable situation where law enforcement feels there is something sketchy they should have the right to ask for citizenship. I do not however believe that law enforcement should be allowed to stop someone based on the color of their skin/ethnicity. I am not sure of the details in the law, but from the way you described it sounds morally wrong to me.
ReplyDelete