America – “A Nation of Immigrants” or “A Nation of Dissidents”?

Immigration reform has been one of the hottest political topics facing Americans for most of the first decade of the 21st century. There were two failed attempts to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” during the Bush Administrations and now the current administration doesn’t have the political guts to face the issue of illegal immigration head on and chooses instead to try to circumvent the law through bureaucratic slights of hand.

It appears that the impetus for most of the activity relating to this very important issue is the premise by those on the “left of the political spectrum” that we, as a Nation, should have “compassion” for immigrants since we are “a nation of immigrants”. Since all these “poor” masses who are pouring across our borders illegally are only trying to “better” their lot in life, and since we Americans are only qualified to reap the great bounty of America simply by right of being born in America, then we should extend all of the benefits that come with being a “natural born citizen” of this great nation, to all comers.

Of course there are others who, with motives driven primarily by greed, will support the premise that we are a “nation of immigrants” as well. Big business in general being one of the most obvious, because of cheap labor, but also many middle class homeowners who happen to be the largest single group who take advantages of cheap illegal immigrant labor. So there is plenty of blame to go around if that’s what we need to soothe our national conscious.

There are some questions that are burning a hole in my brain that I think need to be answered if we are to ever come to grips with the immigration issue in America once and for all time. I think I know the answers, but I’ll pose the questions here so that, hopefully, we can all find ourselves on the same page and put all the bickering behind us. Perhaps then we can finally get on with the business of establishing a sensible immigration policy that will protect the values and culture that most Americans appreciate and cherish.

This exercise will require some logical thinking, and further, clear definitions of the terms “Emigrants” as opposed to “Immigrants”. These two entirely different designations, when presented with the “spoken word” in the English language, sound the same, and therein, I believe, lies the basis for some of the disagreement among our citizens.

Please follow along with me here as I lay out the reasoning behind my conclusions.

Question 1 - How should we classify the early settlers of the “New World” and later, the British Colonies, and their offspring?

I think the answer might be that “most” of those who chose to emigrate to the Colonies and/or the continent that was historically referred to as “The New World”, would be “classified” as dissidents. There was no “organized country or government” at the destination they chose, and they were leaving a religious, political, or economic system that, to them, was unacceptable. They were “dissenters” in one way or another, and were willing to take the risks that came with the voyage and unforeseen hardships that they had to know lay ahead of them as they embarked to the “New World”.

Here is the definition of Dissident: disagreeing especially with an established religious or political system, organization, or belief. You can draw your own conclusion.

Question 2 - Were there any Immigrants in the British Colonies before Independence was won from the British?

I think it would be fair to say that, No, there weren’t any, simply because there was no ‘America’ into which anyone could be considered an “Immigrant” since there was no single organized government with an immigration policy. That being the case, those who came to the “New World” or later, to any of the Colonies would probably be considered as fleeing from a system with which they disagreed, so they would then be considered Émigré’s.

Here is the generally accepted definition of an Émigré, or Emigrant: (noun) one who emigrates; (adjective) departing or having departed from a country to settle elsewhere.

America: Transformation and Transition

As the “New World” was gradually transformed over time, from the wilderness that it was in the beginning, into townships, and eventually independent organized colonial governments, there also had to be a transition from being a “place” for an individual to flee to, to a “place” where individuals were invited to settle. I don’t know where one could draw the line and definitely say that it was “on this date” that such a transition was complete. Personally, I don’t think that time has actually come as yet. People from all over the world are still trying to get to America, the “land of opportunity” as they are attempting to escape from some form of oppression in their country of origin.

For the sake of argument however, let’s agree that the transition was probably complete at about the same time that the U. S. Federal Government, in its infancy, began trying to place some controls on “who” was coming to America in 1815. At that time a law was passed that required that the “passenger manifest” of ships be “noted” for the record.

From the earliest record of some form of “immigration” control in 1815 to the present time, there have been many other laws or rules applied to the “immigration policy” of the United States that attempted to restrict both the “quantity” and the “quality” of the “immigrant”.

The generally accepted definition of Immigrant is: a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence.

The Origination of American Ancestry

I doubt that there is a way to truly establish the “real number” of legitimate citizens of the United States considering the latest massive influx of illegal aliens of all nationalities, and the inability of our Federal Bureaucrats to regulate the temporary visas that are regularly abused by many others who are allowed to enter our country legally, then refuse to follow the rules that would have them return to their country of origin. Without this type of information it would be very difficult for any one on either side of the issue of comprehensive immigration reform to speak with certainty as to the percentages of the American population that came to the “new world” or the “British Colonies” prior to the establishment of the United States of America and those who chose to “emigrate” after policies were implemented in an attempt to manage or restrict immigration.

As previously noted, the first instance of known immigration controls didn’t begin until around 1815, and has gone through various “modifications” at times over the next 195 years to bring us to the point at which we wrestle with the issue today. However, it is generally believed that there is pretty much an even split between the descendants of the original settlers and the descendants of those who came through Ellis Island beginning in 1892 and ending at its close in 1954.

It is clear to me that there is a distinction between those whose ancestors were the early “emigrants” coming to the “New World” because they held dissenting views of the political, religious, or economic systems where they were born, and those whose ancestors came much later after a civilization was created and a nation was established. Logic tells me that there could not have been the opportunity that existed for the second group, actual “immigrants” as opposed to “emigrants”, had it not been for the hardships suffered, and actions taken by those earlier settlers, who, along with their descendants, were responsible for the establishment of a “nation” and whose central government then eventually decided to restrict the flow of those who would be allowed to enter the “land of opportunity”.

In the beginning the intention of the new government of the United States of America was to encourage others to come and become a part of America. The process was “unfettered” for quite some time but as the need to manage the quantity and quality of the immigrants allow into the country changed, laws were promulgated and regulations written to implement those laws. But today it shouldn’t really matter how we collected the legal citizenry to this point, only that we need to maintain the integrity of a sane growth process to keep America on a path that will provide the same level of opportunity that has existed in the past for future generations.

Less Rhetoric – More Action

Today, as a top heavy bureaucracy, we find ourselves mired in a collection of “catch 22’s” that has almost every American Citizen searching for any semblance of sanity in our immigration policy.

Shouldn’t we just recognize that much of what is driving the debate is senseless rhetoric and take the necessary steps to impose the controls that will provide for the safety and integrity of the American Culture for the benefit of American Citizens?

Shouldn’t the debate be as to whether or not the “American Dream” or “land of opportunity” can be preserved and remain a viable, vibrant opportunity generator for those who qualify for Legal Citizenship?