I wanted to link to this site’s post about the illegal immigration opposition and their desire to quite often use hate to motivate crowds. Joe Budzinski, who is against illegal immigration, seems to understand that using hate group tactics is a big problem for the anti-illegal immigrant movement. I’ll say I have to agree as this is what this blog is about. I don’t believe in open borders, but I refuse to listen to the anti-immigrant ralliest without giving a response.
Opposing illegal immigration – without ‘hate’? – Full Post
June 12, 2006
Bottom line: The commenter, Zimzo, makes a case that ‘the rhetoric of anti-immigration groups does share characteristics with the the rhetoric of racist groups’ and also implies there is more to it than rhetoric. He says it’s really a matter of narrow-minded thinking. Hate.
He discounts my contention that illegal immigration has a negative effect on American communities and questions the factual basis of my argument. He goes on to say my arguments – and by extension those of anyone else who opposes illegal immigration – derive from a Republican effort to distract attention from the Iraq war.
If anyone is so inclined, it would be nice to get some input in Comments on the following topics brought up in this thread:
* Is it possible to be ‘anti-illegal’ and not be racist? Don’t Help Save Herndon, the Minutemen and others use the same language as the white supremecists?
* Is the ‘Reconquista’ ideology something we should even pay attention to?
* Is this whole idea of overcrowded houses, zoning violations, and degraded schools a reality, or is it just a myth? Does anyone have any evidence?
* Those people on the border who express ‘extremist’ views about illegal immigrants who may be criminals: Are they crazy?
* The numbers of people coming across our southern border are negligable, right? Just the occasional peasant family seeking a better life?
* Any comments on other topics brought up in the messages below?