Using the Term "Illegal Alien"

[David Zephyr]

There was a time when one hardly ever saw the term "illegal aliens" used here at the DU. I know. I remember that time. I remember that when that term was used, a kindly post here and there, gentle nudge from someone seemed to be more than enough to keep our language on a higher degree and reflecting higher values. I actually cringe now coming here seeing the use of this very insensitive term which has a very marginalizing tone to it.

I'm not on some high horse here. It's inappropriate. People are not "illegal". The term "illegal alien" is a very repulsive term filled with xenophobia and bigotry. I think some don't know better, but I fear some sort of relish using this lousy language.

Thankfully, the use of the term "retarded" which was rarely, if ever, used here in the beginning, but later had a period where it crept in to use, is now, for the most part, back to being rarely seen in posts again, as it should be. I don't know whether this is from the mods or, hopefully, from a heightened sense of values. But the word "retarded" is a reprehensible term loaded with hurt and cruelty. The same applies with sexist language. It never was here in the beginning (or very little) then as the site grew, that language appeared. Thankfully, it is, for the most part gone.

The DU is a dynamic site where people come and people go. While the DU certainly is not as leftward as it was nine years ago, I hope we don't continue to slide into a comfort zone where hurtful slurs are tolerated by the larger community. Being a gay guy, I know that we've had our moments here when hurtful language was tossed around with great ease by a few -- again by some who didn't really know better and some that did. The truth is that we lost a some really good DU'ers who were GLBT who were not tomb-stoned, but who just left. That's really sad.

I hope that through the language we use here, we are not also pushing away some of our Latino sisters and brothers or those who have families that are mixed as mine is racially. I am fortunate that no one in our family has ever had to live under the shadows of being without docuements and living in that fear. But I have known families that have been shattered and broken up because of our shitty immigration policies and it is a horror to behold beyond belief.

A child or a woman or a man may be here without documents (undocumented), but they are not in and of themselves "illegal". Consider: This slur is never used against prisoners or those who commit crimes. In my near 60 years, I've never heard a criminal called "an illegal". The term is clearly reserved for xenophobic use. And it is hurtful.

I hope we can do better. I wonder: How many here might have a grandfather or grandmother, an aunt or uncle who they love who never had "documents" and who lived in the shadows, working and paying taxes all of their lives? I wonder: What percentage of the DU community is Latino or Hispanic? I wonder: Is that percentage is as large as it truly should be at a progressive web site like this one? If it isn't, maybe we might ask ourselves why that is.

I can tell you this: coming to a website where the term "illegal aliens" is frequently used is hardly a welcome mat for a lot of people. Words can welcome and words can shun. There are words that trigger a lot of pain and heartache.

Ponder that, just a little, before you post. You might be accidentally hurting someone, you might be sending an unwelcoming message to those who visit the site. And that would be a real shame.

[Bold Lib]

1. It is an accurate term. I use, and will continue to use it.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lumberjack_jeff]

72. Agreed.

Aliens are either visiting on a valid visa or not. If not, they are "illegal aliens".

[Quantess]

114. "Aliens" will always make me think of spaceships and short, flat faced grey creatures with big eyes.

I call them "illegal immigrants".

[lumberjack_jeff]

118. Many if not most do not intend to immigrate.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/27/world/main6148649.shtml

They sent "home" more than $21 billion last year.

[Quantess]

174. They also pay taxes with their fake social security numbers.

Taxes paid on earned income. Sales taxes as well. I'm not seeing the illegal immigrants siphoning money out of the US in a noticeable way.

For that, you might want to examine giant corporate tax evaders who relocate to the Cayman islands.

[lumberjack_jeff]

214. Is $21b "noticeable"? YMMV. n/t

[arbusto_baboso]

242. It would be if it wasn't a bullshit figure.

[lumberjack_jeff]

247. Care to explain why you think it's bullshit?

"Bullshit" = "I don't like it, so take it back!"

[arbusto_baboso]

252. Plainly a $21B drain would be noticed.

Most people don't notice it.

As well, I work directly with social services. I know for a fact that "illegals" aren't getting any benefits. And even if the numbers of them are as greats as claimed, the average income would in now way enable them to send $21B out of the country in 50 years, let alone one.

As well, "illegals" almost always work under a citizen's social security number, thus paying INTO the SS system but never drawing from it.

Sorry, but the $21B figure just doesn't pass the smell test.

And the fact that it comes from corporate giant CBS should be another factor mitigating AGAINSt believing it.

How can you be so gullible?

[lumberjack_jeff]

253. You apparently missed the link upthread.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/27/world/main6148649.shtml

(AP) Money sent home by Mexicans abroad plunged a record 15.7 percent in 2009 as migrants worldwide struggled to find work during the global economic slowdown, the central bank reported Wednesday. Remittances - Mexico's No. 2 source of foreign income after oil exports - totaled $21.2 billion in 2009, compared with $25.1 billion in 2008, the bank said.
<snip>

Central bank president Agustin Carstens attributed the latest drop to the weak economy in the United States and the increased difficulty Mexicans are having securing employment there. More than 11.8 million Mexicans live in the U.S. Carstens said a 1.3 percent uptick in remittances in December, compared to the previous month, gave some hope for a recovery.

"It is just one figure, but it could indicate the beginning of a relative stabilization in the drop in remittances, and it would be congruent with the fact that economic activity in the United States is about to go from negative to positive," Carstens said. An analyst was less optimistic, saying that employment levels in the United States "remain very bad" and remittances to Mexico will probably continue to decline through the first half of 2010 when compared to the same period of 2009.

<snip>

Experts blame a crackdown on illegal immigration that has stemmed the flow of those heading north to seek work as well as the U.S. recession, in which many Mexicans, especially construction workers, have been laid off.

Mexico receives the largest amount of remittances in Latin America and the third largest in the world, after India and China. The country was also the hardest hit in Latin America by the U.S. economic slump with a drop of about 7 percent in Mexico's GDP.

While remittances represent less than 4 percent of GDP, their decline is being felt in towns across Mexico, where lines at Western Union counters have all but disappeared. New businesses financed by migrant money are no longer opening and construction has stopped on homes that have been built in stages as cash arrived from those working abroad.

It's not only noticed, it's counted, tracked and depended upon to fuel the Mexican economy and it's benefactor, Carlos Slim, the richest man in the world.

[arbusto_baboso]

254. And again, you're trusting those who "notice" and "count"?

Pull your head out.

If something isn't possible - and this isn't - then it isn't happening. No matter how much you want it to be happening. Belieiving doesn't make it so.

[lumberjack_jeff]

257. LOL!

You have more reliable data reflecting precisely how much money gets sent to Mexico... than the Mexican Central Bank does?

:rofl:

I don't like it! Take it back!

:spray:

[CreekDog]

85. what about illegitimate children?

how about that term?

[Bold Lib]

92. I guess it is better than the original term Bastard. But that's not the point of the O.P. is it?

[CreekDog]

94. should the term illegitimate children be used?

is it accurate?

what's the hesitation that you have in saying: don't use it, it's wrong to call a child illegitimate, the word suggests there's something invalid about their existence.

[Bold Lib]

109. Should you start your own O.P. on that issue or try to hijack this one some more.

No hesitation, I respect the issue of the O.P. (perhaps more than some). So why do you want to go back to the term Bastard anyway?

[Luminous Animal]

116. No need to use bastard or illigitimate. But, of course, you know that.

[Bold Lib]

121. What i DO know is that someone wants to divert from the O.P. and I'm not going to play. But of

course, you knew that already.

[Luminous Animal]

145. It is not diverting from the OP at all. The discussion is about the power of language.

When you deem a person illegitimate or illegal, you rob them of their standing amongst all human beings.

[CreekDog]

142. Not hijacking at all. Trying to illustrate the OP's point more clearly.

And I don't see why what you call a child should have anything to do with how his parents had him/her.

[uppityperson]

260. quack

[havocmom]

213. children do not choose the path of their birth

bit of a straw baby there

[CreekDog]

224. Not a straw baby, when I posted this DU was discussing a 17 year old who came here at 8 years old

Should a 17 year old who came here as an 8 year old be called an "illegal alien"? Or do we only call those that came here at 18 or later that word?

Ahhh, but then there's the connotation. If it's not a bad term, then we shouldn't worry about calling children that --except it is a bad term calling someone "illegal".

[BlueJazz]

160. I use the term "Illegal immigrants". I don't care where people come from..If they're in this...

...country and nobody knows about it...they are Illegal.

[LanternWaste]

230. speeders and pot smokers are Illegal Inhabitants?

Speeders and pot smokers are therefore called Illegal Inhabitants... (to better avoid intellectual inconsistency of course)?

[BlueJazz]

270. If that's what you think, I have no problem with it.

:)

[Xicano]

259. The Irony of folks like you is incredible.

And not in a good way I might add.

[Radical Activist]

4. The idea that a human being can be "illegal" digusts me. All humans are legal.

There's a very dark history of what happens when entire groups of people are classified as illegal or otherwise not allowed.

[Motown_Johnny]

5. People are not illegal, but it is possible for their presence in this country to be illegal

They are aliens who are here illegally. Illegal alien is an accurate term.

[ingac70]

54. +1

[readmoreoften]

106. -1

[county worker]

198. Accurate but not polite. It is offensive and if you use it, you knowingly offend people.

I would not take pride in that. The people are just as human and deserving of dignity as you are. They are no less a child of the universe because of the place or condition of their birth. They are not less of a human being and you should not feel so good about using the term. If tomorrow we repealed immigration laws that would not change their status one bit.

[lumberjack_jeff]

231. Crossing borders without consent of the people living there is a choice. n/t

[William Z. Foster]

266. ridiculous

In a country with a history of moving people off their land without their consent, and of bringing people here in chains without their consent, the arrogance of your statement and your attitude is breath taking.

[yodoobo]

6. its a legal term and technical term

But its been co-opted and become a loaded hot button word.

Frankly I think the term "undocumented" is a little disingenuous as well. This term makes it sound like they misplaced a term paper or something, when we all know its more significant than a paperwork snafu.

All in all, there is probably no term that will not become loaded with emotion. The best course of action is not to get bogged down in symantics and pass a comprehensive immigration reform law that makes it all a non-issue.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

28. Pretty much agree

I am not sure what kind of reform is possible at this point. In better economic times it would be much easier

[marshall]

60. What about "undocumented alien"?

Or illegal immigrant.

Undocumented immigrant is not accurate because the person is not an immigrant, they are an alien until they are processed legally through the immigration system.

I agree the term illegal alien is not accurate, because it doesn't imply to me an illegal act of bypassing the immigration process. It just implies being a non-citizen.

[Hekate]

148. "Undocumented worker" puts the reader's focus on the fact that these people are here to WORK."

"Aliens" are little green men bearing cookbooks.

Hekate

[marshall]

207. But undocumented worker makes no reference to their non-citizen status

Alien is the antonym to citizen. Though if one prefers, I suppose "undocumented non-citizen worker" would do.

The phrase needs to make reference to not being citizens and circumventing the legal immigration process.

[treestar]

7. I use it out of habit

It's a shorthand. Of course no one is "illegal." People can be illegally here, though. That said, I think they should get a path to citizenship.

[xchrom]

8. The problem is that when just about anyone and everyone can contribute

To the conversation - you're going to lower aspects of that
conversation.

I'm sure I've lowered the quality of lots of conversations.

[EFerrari]

110. Reading this thread is like reading a conversation between George Wallace's

sockpuppets.

[laughingliberal]

246. +1 nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

251. Amen

[The Northerner]

9. Isn't it a legal term just like the word 'legal alien'?

Some friends of mine are attorneys and they say that the term 'illegal alien' is a perfectly fine and specific term because the word describes the illegal action of an outsider who entered a country.

I suppose from a legal standpoint, it could be acceptable? But, that's just based on what my attorney friends say and they're quite progressive.

[Xipe Totec]

18. Never heard the term legal alien before

Does that mean is they stop being aliens they're no longer legal?

[Statistical]

20. Yes. My mother is legal alien from Finland.

Never decided to become resident despite being in the country 40+ years.

She has permanent residency but is not a US citizens thus is a legal alien.

As a kid I always thought the term was weird.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_%28law%29

[Xipe Totec]

36. Then she is a legal resident

Just like my mother was for most of her life.

[Bold Lib]

40. There is also the term Resident Alien for those that have permanent residency status. Like my fiance

BTW, my fiance uses the term illegal alien also.

[Xipe Totec]

44. How lovely. Glad you found your match

:eyes:

[Bold Lib]

86. Your glee make me all warm and fuzzy.

No, really. . .:puke:

[blondeatlast]

64. Well, if Ms. Future BOLD LIB uses the term, I'm convinced.

Her credentials are as impeccable as yours are.

:eyes:

[Bold Lib]

84. Don't really care what you think of my credentials. Really don't

And she does use the accurate term ILLEGAL Alien. Since you brought it up, it really does piss her off that someone violates the borders of this country in an illegal way when she has gone through all the time, money and paperwork to stay here legally. I cannot blame her one bit.

[blondeatlast]

245. My ex-husband did it legally too--and has no problem with the border crossers.

He just wishes it were as easy for them to gain citizenship as it was for him (and he had his citizenship BEFORE we married).

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[petronius]

103. Sting used it...

"...
I'm an alien I'm a legal alien
I'm an Englishman in New York
I'm an alien I'm a legal alien
I'm an Englishman in New York

Modesty, propriety can lead to notoriety
You could end up as the only one
Gentleness, sobriety are rare in this society
At night a candle's brighter than the sun

Takes more than combat gear to make a man
Takes more than a license for a gun
Confront your enemies, avoid them when you can
A gentleman will walk but never run

If, "Manners maketh man" as someone said
Then he's the hero of the day
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
..."

[Luminous Animal]

42. Maybe, maybe not.

http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/illegal_immigrant_is_the_real_euphemism

Why would your attorney friends use the term illegal alien when their immigration status is unknown? That is, their immigration status cannot be definitively determined until the legal process is exhausted.

[Buenaventura]

10. k&r

[Statistical]

11. Sorry it is a valid and legal term.

Someone who enters this country legally with the intent to stay is a legal alien or more commonly known as legal resident.

Someone who enters this country illegal is an illegal alien or illegal resident.

The person isn't "illegal" however their immigration status is.

[Bluebear]

13. It may be valid but it's disrespectful. You know darn well it is abbreviated to "illegal"!!

A la wetback, a la foreigner, etc...

[Luminous Animal]

12. Jaywalkers are not called "illegals". Speeders are not called "illegals".

I have brought up the point several times on DU that calling human beings, "illegals" dehumanizes them.

[Bluebear]

17. +

[readmoreoften]

107. +1. Hell, criminals are not called illegals.

Undocumented workers.

[Gormy Cuss]

249. "Illegals" is unacceptable as a descriptor for just the reason you stated.

However, "illegal alien" has a precise and legal meaning which is applicable to people who aren't citizens (aliens, foreigners) and who also do not have the proper authorization to live here (such as a VISA or green card.)

I'll shout down anyone here or IRL who refers to people as "illegals" but the term "illegal alien?" No.
It's a proper descriptive term, it's just not the preferred term among liberals which of course is why this discussion is taking place.

It is worth debating whether "illegal alien" should be tolerated on DU. OTOH, "Illegals?" There are very few terms that are flat out banned here. If they are deemed racist --and IMHO using just "illegals" is, since most people who use that term are focusing on Latinos -- they are forbidden.

[Upton]

14. Sorry...but I'm going to continue to use it..

the term defines the situation perfectly, for they are here ILLEGALLY..

[Bold Lib]

88. Don't apologize for being correct.

[Luminous Animal]

185. Thank you for your apology.

Though, not accepted.

[branders seine]

15. Historically, attempts to ban words has >retarded< the usability of language and

thus the free thought of individuals and free communication between people. It should be >illegal< to suggest that people not use words--*every* word is good.

Doubleplusungood.

[X_Digger]

16. I wish I could rec a post :) n/t

[Luminous Animal]

46. Sure it would be a good post, IF SOMEONE ACTUALLY ADVOCATED A BAN.

But nobody did, so it makes zero sense in the context of this thread.

[X_Digger]

57. "to suggest that people not use words" -- from Branders Seine's post.

Is that not what the OP is endorsing?

[Luminous Animal]

71. "To suggest" that someone do something any reason,

is not even close to advocating for a ban.

[X_Digger]

82. I forget that we're in a thread nit-picking word choices.

Unwad thy knickers.

[David Zephyr]

79. Here's what I wrote:

"Ponder that, just a little, before you post. You might be accidentally hurting someone, you might be sending an unwelcoming message to those who visit the site. And that would be a real shame."

[fishwax]

184. Nope. Not even close.

[Luminous Animal]

30. Who suggested banning words?

[David Zephyr]

47. Bingo. I see you noticed how he morphed my OP into a call for a "ban".

Thanks, Luminous Animal.

[Luminous Animal]

49. You are welcome, David. Good post, by the way. K&R

[L0oniX]

34. +1

[David Zephyr]

43. Show me where I used the word "ban" in my OP. Where?

But you did show in the title to your post how are comfortable with playing with the word "retarded" in this thread. Guess you thought that was clever.

Do you will the same way about the reprehensible "n" word?

[branders seine]

87. We're really on teh same side here, David Zephyr.

Yours was generally a good post.

Not to be snarky, but show me where I said you used the word "ban."

Implication is all either of us is guilty of.

Peace. We should all be civil and not negligently or carelessly insulting, and you said that very well. I'm just protective of words and our freedom to use them.

[William Z. Foster]

19. thank you for trying

People are actually unrecommending this.

Scary times. This will not end well. It never does.

[David Zephyr]

51. Appreciated.

:)

[msedano]

21. 5th and 14th Amendments, due process

You can expand your analysis by noting the due process clauses in the 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution. Often paraphrased as "innocent until proved guilty," the concept of equal protection means no one is actually "illegally" immigrated until a court judges one's status fairly and within the protections of the Constitution.

That pendejas and pendejos throw the term around illustrates the user's own intolerance for Democracy and democratic principles. But then, no one ever went broke underestimating the stupidity of the Unitedstatesian people.

mvs

[David Zephyr]

52. Well stated.

:)

[MajorChode]

120. You're "expand(ing) the analysis" to the point of absurdity

If someone calls a person an "illegal alien" because they have brown skin and speak only Spanish, then you might have something. If someone speaks about the problem with illegal aliens, they are not speaking about anyone in particular but rather the obvious problem that millions of aliens are indeed in this country illegally. Any implication that all those people need to be rounded up, tried, convicted, and receive their dispositions before anyone can refer to them in the generic sense is absurd, but really no more so than trying to claim the term "illegal alien" is inherently pejorative in the first place.

[William Z. Foster]

136. you completely missed the point

No one is guilty of anything without due process.

What is a greater threat to the country?

- Poor indigenous people looking for work who cannot get the proper paperwork no matter what they do.

- Native born people willing to throw away the the entire legal system and all of our principles, human rights, and common decency in order to go after people seeking work.

My new term - "illegitimate interlopers" - "accidental citizens by birth who don't get the concept and should not be here and are destroying the foundation of the country and endangering all of us." Something must be done! Throw them out! They are advocating the destruction of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights!

Let's do an "exchange of prisoners" with Mexico. We will give them our racists in exchange for people there who want to work and will actually understand and appreciate what this country is all about.

[MajorChode]

183. Oh please...

Rarely have I seen so much strawman rhetoric in one post. Where shall I start?

The government has the obligation of assumption of innocence per the Constitution. As neither you, nor I, nor anyone else represents the government for the purpose of discussion on DU, and as such they are under no such obligation. Suggesting otherwise is nothing short of absurdity. So there never was anything that approached a substantive "point" in the first place.

"Poor indigenous people" exist the world over and many (if not most) would love to come to the US to seek work. Trying to suggest that one can't feel empathy for such people without advocating opening the flood gates of illegal immigration into this country is not only a false dilemma, it's the epitome of absurdity.

Trying to suggest that those who are against illegal immigration are by default xenophobic, heartless, and purposely cruel is pure unadulterated bullshit. I could just as easily suggest that those who are in favor of illegal immigration are by default against meaningful immigration reform and also favor the exploitation and ostracization of illegal aliens, but doing so would be just as much bullshit.

[William Z. Foster]

187. that is no reponse

Obviously, I was making a point with absurdities and hyperbole. Again, you miss the point.

You have not responded to the point.

[MajorChode]

210. Sure it is

It may not be the response you want, but I'm not going to get roped into arguing fallacies. I'm simply going to explain why it was a fallacy to begin with. So apparently you think that unless someone responds per your narrow set of arbitrary ground rules, they "have not responded." It's not much different than if you had asked if I've stopped beating my wife. A yes or no response is an admission of guilt either way. The proper response is to point out the question wasn't valid to begin with. I don't play by those silly rules. If you can find someone weak minded enough to do so, more power to you.

Cheers!

[William Z. Foster]

267. No one is guilty of anything without due process.

I said -

"No one is guilty of anything without due process."

Is that the "fallacy" you are talking about?

Is that the "narrow set of arbitrary ground rules?"

Is that the equivalent of asking you if "you've stopped beating your wife?"

Is asking for a response on that "silly rules?"

[MajorChode]

277. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8371323&mesg_id=8373849

[William Z. Foster]

190. crap

The other member, msedano, made an excellent and thoughtful argument and presented it well.

Respond to it instead of shitting all over it and then getting into some side show with me to distract people.

That post deserves a decent thoughtful response.

"Innocent until proven guilty" - what say you to that?

"Opening the floodgates" and "I am not a racist" is bullshit and not responsive.

[Lance_Boyle]

234. innocent until proven guilty?

Being a noncitizen and not having a valid visa to be here is de facto guilty. There is no need for a court trial. Are you here legally or not? Not? ICE and deportation for you.

Whaddaya say to that?

[William Z. Foster]

268. no such thing

There is no such thing as "de facto guilty."

You have just admitted that this has nothing to do with law, since no law can co-exist with its opposite - "de facto guilty."

Only in police states is there such a thing as "de facto guilty."

What do I say to what you wrote? I say that it is extremely alarming and disturbing that there are people thinking that way.

[Statistical]

22. What about "unathorized alien"? n/t

[Xipe Totec]

31. That is the correct term according to the INS nt

[readmoreoften]

108. And the INS is who we want to take our linguistic cues from...

:eyes:

[Starry Messenger]

23. Thank you David.

It's such a judgmental term. It's almost always used to talk about Latino/a people so pretending that it also refers to "the proper legal term" is just disingenuous. How many posts do we ever see here talking about Europeans illegally jumping the border in Canada?

[David Zephyr]

53. Good observation.

I think we'd break the search engine looking for such a post, Starry Messenger. Thanks.

[CreekDog]

143. [phone]

:hi:

[petronius]

24. This reminds me a bit of how RWers get worked up over "suicide bomber",

complaining that it should be homicide bomber or whatever.

WRT persons who have entered the country without benefit of government permission, I think the phrase "illegal alien" is well understood and doesn't imply that the person is invalid. Rather, it's clear that the alienhood is the thing that is illegal, just it's perfectly clear that homicide is the goal in the case of the suicide bomber...

[Luminous Animal]

152. Actually no. Aliehnood is not illegal. Alien is a term for many classifications of

foreigners living and residing in the U.S. I think, inadvertently, you've made David's point by saying that "it's clear that the alienhood is the thing that is illegal".

[petronius]

155. I know what alien means. The alienhood I was referring to was the

specific alienhood that was being modified by the term illegal.

[Luminous Animal]

163. Ah, but you didn't say that. And that is part of the OP's point.

We will become lazy with language to the point that our shorthand encompasses that which we don't mean.

[petronius]

165. Actually, I did say that. You have to read both sentences. (nt)

[Luminous Animal]

178. I read both and you said this (thus my response)

"Rather, it's clear that the alienhood is the thing that is illegal, just it's perfectly clear that homicide is the goal in the case of the suicide bomber..."

And I will state again. No, it is not clear that alienhood is the thing that is illegal. There are many classifications of immigrant aliens. Alienhood, in and of itself is zero indication of illegal activity. So thus, for you to assert that alienhood is the thing that is illegal signals to me that you equate the words "alien" and "illegal" despite the fact that your own government reaches no such conclusion. Thus, I believe that the reactionary right wing meme has been firmly cemented in your mind.

[petronius]

188. Again, you are misunderstanding and leaving out the part of my post that would

make obvious your misinterpretation. In one sentence I refer to the phrase "illegal alien". In the next sentence I state that it is the alienhood that is illegal. It is clear that the alienhood referred to in the second sentence is the alienhood (i.e. the alienhood modified by illegal) from the immediately preceding sentence. In other words, 'illegal' modifies the word 'alien' to denote the specific classification of 'alienhood without authorization.'

I notice that you dropped the "the" in your comment, implying that I said alienhood was illegal. Deliberately? It appears to me that you are so eager to see "reactionary right wing memes" that you are failing to accurately read and process what you are responding to...

[H2O Man]

25. Recommended.

It appears that many here are unaware of the difference between a civil and criminal infraction.

[David Zephyr]

76. Thanks, you!

You are one of the gems here.

[Lance_Boyle]

236. Both are infractions againt the law, hence illegal.

Why the word games? Just admit you want an open borders free-for-all and be done with it.

[H2O Man]

239. Nope.

The command of the English language and knowledge of the law should not be confused as "word games" by those lacking in either area.

[Catherina]

26. Thank you my old friend. That needed to be said n/t

:hi:

[David Zephyr]

77. You are a dear old friend, Catherina.

:hi:

[Xipe Totec]

27. The correct term, according to the INS, is unauthorized aliens

or Unauthorized migrants

Unauthorized aliens include those who enter the United
States without documentation or with forged documentation;
lawfully admitted immigrants who remain in the
United States after violating immigration law; and aliens
who have entered the United States on a temporary visa
and remained past the time limit of the visa.

Immigration Policy in the United States, Page 23:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/70xx/doc7051/02-28-Immigration.pdf

[L0oniX]

29. Try sneaking into the UK ...it's illegal = against the law ...just like it is here.

WTF is wrong with people??? It is ILLEGAL to enter and live and work in the USA if you don't have a green card. Out of all the countries, we make it the easiest to become a citizen here but yet people come into our country by "breaking the law". WTF is so hard to understand about that? "I don't care what country you are coming from", enter the USA legally! Damn law breakers ...WTF do people think laws are written for? If you aren't going to enforce the law then take it fucking off the books. I am sick and tired of idiots trying to change this into a race thing. It's not a race thing, it's an ILLEGAL thing. Look into what happens if you try to enter the UK without papers ...check out what other countries do to people who enter without papers. We are about the only country that does not enforce it's own laws in this matter. But go ahead and hijack the problem by labeling it racist or attacking the labels ...it won't solve the problem of people entering the USA without papers IE illegally. I watched a co-worker from the UK spend years here with a green card to become a citizen of the USA and he did it the legal way. Maybe he should have just entered the USA without papers illegally since everyone else seems to be able to do it and not be prosecuted for breaking the law.
:eyes:

[Xipe Totec]

38. Read the policy before you mouth off

Education is a wonderful thing.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/70xx/doc7051/02-28-Immigration.pdf

[Zywiec]

62. Is the CBO more accurate than the USCIS?

Look in the glossary for Illegal Alien:

A foreign national who (1) entered the United States without inspection or with fraudulent documentation or (2) after entering legally as a nonimmigrant, violated status and remained in the United States without authorization.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=515cfb41c8596210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=515cfb41c8596210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

Hmm, getting definitions from the Congressional Budget Office?

[L0oniX]

99. WTFare you talking about ...fucking CBO shit

[dana_b]

32. I agree

however it looks like a lot of people here don't. Such is life but as someone above me said, this won't end well.

It kind of reminds me of people calling a child who was born out of wedlock "illegitimate". I hate that term too.No child is "illegitimate".

[rfranklin]

56. It was the word that replaced "bastard"

and was more genteel than that time honored description.

[David Zephyr]

58. Yes, an "illegitimate" was a "legal" term. It was on birth certificates.

It is sad that the fall back by some is that this term might be a "legal" term and that's why they use it.

Thanks, dana_b.

[Bold Lib]

90. Are you suggesting that we go back to the term "Bastard"?

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bold Lib]

105. I'm just wanting to be clear here. Thank you for

letting me know you "Got it". I was terribly worried that you didn't. Oh, and perhaps you may not have seen me here before but this is not my introduction. I've been here a while - though not often.

[Luminous Animal]

113. How about "child" regardless of the parent's marital status.

[Bold Lib]

122. Perhaps you should suggest that to dana_b. It was that DU member that brought up

this whole "illegitimate" thing. I was just asking for clarification. But, of course, you knew that.

[Luminous Animal]

150. Well no, you suggested that there is only one alternative toillegitimate, that being "bastard."

I proposed another.

[Bold Lib]

227. No I did NOT suggest that as an alternative. Please see your elementary school

teacher for a refresher on reading comprehension.

[dana_b]

216. wtf?!

yeah - that's EXACTLY what I'm suggesting. :eyes:

[proteus_lives]

33. I disagree, people can be illegal.

It's not inappropriate to call them so.

[Luminous Animal]

115. There is no such thing as an illegal human.

Classifying a person, as such, defines their very existence a crime.

[proteus_lives]

128. Once again, I disagree.

There presence is illegal which means they are.

[Luminous Animal]

146. So they are illegal human beings?

Are jaywalkers illegal human beings?

[William Z. Foster]

151. isn't this amazing and chilling?

We are watching a population work itself into a frenzy of racist hatred right in front of our eyes, hearing all of the convoluted "logic" that people are coming up with to justify it. The firestorm is growing and growing hourly.

The more we refute the absurd arguments, the angrier and more aggressive people are getting. We are interfering with their opportunity to hate and hurt people, forcing them to see that this is what they are craving. Rather than turning them back, that is egging them on. Is there any way to stop this now, or has it passed the point of no return? It is like trying to talk to automatons. People are deaf to any approaches based on reason or sanity.

[proteus_lives]

161. They are being illegal while in the area they're not supposed to be walking.

And for illegal immigrants, that's the whole country.

Send them home and they're not illegal anymore.

[William Z. Foster]

166. then all walkers must be checked

There will be no more unauthorized walking. All walkers will be arrested and detained and questioned until it can be determined whether or not they are authorized to walk. Meanwhile all are to be suspected of being illegal until discovered not to be. This problem is so dire, that all Constitutional principles and protections are to be suspended. Unauthorized walking must be stopped.

PROVE that you did not jaywalk to get where you are. Everywhere you go since you have jaywalked makes you illegal. There will be no due process, no habeas corpus, no say in court and no consulting with an attorney for you.

[proteus_lives]

193. Really?

:rofl:

You know it's not that simple. Jail and fine those knowingly employ illegals, end or tone-down the drug war and you'll find a lot of problems fixed.

Ever going to give a reason for why the laws of the land don't apply to them?

[Luminous Animal]

168. And yet, you have never heard in your entire life

the millions of us who jaywalk being described as illegals. Jaywalking describes an infraction but does not make the individual who jaywalks an illegal human being. An undocumented resident describes an infraction (civil, not criminal, by the way) but does make the individual without documentation an illegal human being.

[proteus_lives]

195. Illegal immigrant, BTW.

I don't believe the law says "illegal human being" anywhere.

They're breaking the law by being in the U.S.

Send them home or legalize them and they're not illegal anymore.

And you guys still haven't given a reason why they should be allowed to break the law.

[William Z. Foster]

149. interesting

A few months ago people denied that they were making this sort of connection. Now it is right out in the open, as a talking point.

A person can be characterized as "illegal" - as a state of being - indefinitely, by their mere presence.

And there are people here who are now OK with that sort of thinking?

Funny that so many are saying they are upholding the law - "it is not immigrants I am opposed to, it is illegal immigrants! It is the law!!!" - when their very argument contradicts and precludes any possibility, any concept of any system of law. A person, rather than an act, is to be seen as illegal. They are in an ongoing state of committing a crime by merely being. All people by merely being are suspect and possibly ciminal until and unless the can prove they have a right to be.

There could be no system of law that could exist along with that bizarre concept.

Clearly. logically, this is not about "illegal" immigrants, rather "unwanted" immigrants, and the anti-immigrant people don't want the law either, any sort of law.

[proteus_lives]

162. Gee, I wish I lived in a world where laws had only had to be obeyed by certain people.

I'm against all illegal immigrants. Why? Because I know too many people who are legal immigrants, fought, bled and worked for it.

What other laws do illegal immigrants not have to obey in your opinion?

[William Z. Foster]

164. you do live in such a world

The wealthy do what they like for the most part, and the law is used as a weapon against the working people. Not sure how anyone could fail to notice that.

The "illegal immigrants" have "fought, bled and worked for it" too, but are being denied. People with money, on the other hand - those who paid and paid for it rather than "fought, bled and worked for it" - have a much easier time.

[proteus_lives]

191. The wealthy will do as they like.

Always have, always will. Nothing changes that.

But it really doesn't matter to the discussion. You haven't given any reason why illegals should be allowed to break the law.

[William Z. Foster]

271. such a massive contradiction

"The wealthy don't have to pay attention to this or other laws - that is just the way it is and always will be - but that is no reason not to throw the book at poor people!"

You are so swept up in your anti-immigrant hatred that you are actually arguing - on a board full of progressives and liberals - in favor of inequality and injustice.

W.T.F.

Unbelievable.

[lunamagica]

35. K&R. Funny that no one who likes the term comments on the wonderful point you make

about calling people who are in prisions "illegals".

Why the double standard?

[David Zephyr]

61. We know why there's that double standard.

Thanks, lunamagica. They know it, too when they use it.

Look how eager some are to defend it. Revealing.

[petronius]

111. Because it's a flawed point. "Prisoner" is the term that accurately describes

the status of a person in prison - it doesn't imply that they are nothing else, or invalidate their humanity. A person who starts inappropriate fires is called an "arsonist" when that fire-starting habit is the topic of discussion. The term doesn't mean that they have no other attributes, or question their humanity. Likewise, a person who is in the country without authorization can fairly be called an "illegal alien" - the "illegal" conditions the "alien" and doesn't suggest they are nothing else or imply that they are not unique and intrinsically-valuable human beings.

Exactly the same applies to the contraction "illegal" - common and well-understood usage is that it refers to a person in the country without permission. It has no bigoted connotation unless the speaker adds it by context or the hearer chooses to hear it that way...

[Luminous Animal]

144. "Illegal" became popular after 1996 when Tom Tancredo, the reactionary

who claimed that Sotomayor was a member of the Latino KKK, introduced the "Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act" . You'd be hard pressed to find the phrase illegal in INS regulations prior to that.

[petronius]

156. That really doesn't change my point at all. Even if the phrase made it's very

first appearance ever in a bill authored by a winger, it still means what it means - "illegal" characterizes the alien status as being without permission, and does nothing to invalidate the person...

[Luminous Animal]

173. Well, no. It means that you have internalized the language of those

who spend a lot of political capital convincing us to hate on other human beings who should be our allies. It means that liberals, who were on the side of workers however they found their way to the U.S., will now reject the power of organizing marginalized human beings. It means that we are circling the wagons with the reactionaries.

[petronius]

181. I would not say that it means any of those things - it means what I described in the post above

You may choose to apply the extremely broad interpretation you've described here, but that's your choice and I expect it's not the dominant interpretation (certainly not in my experience).

[Luminous Animal]

182. I am only quoting your words.

"Rather, it's clear that the alienhood is the thing that is illegal"

[petronius]

197. Are you just playing, or do you honestly not understand what I said upthread?

Either way, I'll try to simplify it: in the specific context of a person in the country without legal authorization, the phrase "illegal alien" indicates that the specific alienhood of that specific alien is illegal (or unauthorized if you object to the looser use of 'legal'). That's all it means. It doesn't mean that the person is invalid, it doesn't mean that the person is 100% described by the term, it doesn't indicate that alienhood in general is illegal...

[petronius]

157. Edited

It was a brilliant post to be sure, but not worth posting twice... :)

[grantcart]

37. This could be a problem

We are in agreement two days in a row.

Your OP was right on.

There is a larger point and that is that all people who want to have an honest job and provide food for their family deserve compassion even when we think that their status means that they should be deported. Long term residents who have worked to build our cities (like Phoenix) and feed our citizens should be rewarded with a simple path to regularlize their status quickly and citizenship if they so desire.



edited to add

Finding it incomprehensible that this thread would have a negative rec count.

Its a rather obvious and modest point.

[David Zephyr]

80. Thanks.

But we can't let this continue. ;-)

[Zywiec]

39. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Definition

Illegal Alien
A foreign national who (1) entered the United States without inspection or with fraudulent documentation or (2) after entering legally as a nonimmigrant, violated status and remained in the United States without authorization.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=515cfb41c8596210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=515cfb41c8596210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

[blondeatlast]

41. Illegal motorists are a far bigger danger to the country.

I'm sorry to say I am one--to the tune of a $180 fine.

(I sooo agree with you, DZ)

[David Zephyr]

81. Thanks.

:)

[SpartanDem]

45. The term has nothing to do with declaring people illegal

it is about their immigration status. Calling these people undocumented workers is political correctness gone wild at best and a lie at worst. Since it has nothing to do with their lack of documents it's not like they're just misplaced.

[blondeatlast]

50. So you loves you some Frank Luntz terminology.

Lest I forget, Stalin liked that "politically correct" phrase too.

[SpartanDem]

66. No, I love honest debate

so either refute my points or go somewhere else with with the Luntz, Stalin BS

[Warren Stupidity]

69. Fuck it just go with wetbacks.

It is much clearer where you stand when you speak plainly.

[SpartanDem]

70. Where I stand?

I'm not the one advocating using PC language to cover up the issue

[Warren Stupidity]

73. Carry on. I agree drop the PC entirely.

[Luminous Animal]

153. Indeed. Please ignore the word illegal.

[Mike K]

48. If someone climbs into your home through an open window

without your permission he is correctly referred to as a burglar -- a criminal. If some might prefer to call him an uninvited guest, that's fine. Do so. But a rose is a rose and this tendency to euphemize certain realities is an oblique attempt to alter the nature of a circumstance.

There needs to be an equitable guest worker program in place. The fact that there is not such a program has led to a social monstrosity that simply cannot be sustained. There are more "uninvited guests" in our country than our resources are able to accommodate and the worst part of that is we really don't know how many there are or where they are. And because of the absence of control that secure borders and a viable guest worker program would provide we have the following to contend with:

"In March 2000, Congress made public Department of Justice statistics showing that, over the previous five years, the INS had released over 35,000 criminal aliens instead of deporting them. Over 11,000 of those released went on to commit serious crimes, over 1,800 of which were violent ones .

"In 2001, thanks to a decision by the Supreme Court, the INS was forced to release into our society over 3,000 criminal aliens ."
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/3/27/114208.shtml

We need this?

While a significant percentage of the "undocumenteds" presently living in the U.S. are decent, hard-working, deserving people we cannot afford the luxury of allowing that fact to divert attention from the reality of the overall problem, a serious situation in which millions of uninvited foreigners have unlawfully crossed the border into our country.

These people are illegal aliens.

[Oregone]

55. No. He is a trespasser

Calling the person a burglar implies they will continue committing crimes after entry. To continue using this language as a parallel to immigrants is sick and wrong.


"There needs to be an equitable guest worker program in place."

Its true! We need cheap workers to chew the fuck up and send the fuck home when we are done, without benefits or retirement. Isn't that what you mean to say?

[rfranklin]

59. No he's not a burglar, he's dead...

at least if he tries to invade my home.

[Oregone]

63. Go join the Minutemen then

[Skip Intro]

102. +1

[Bold Lib]

130. And that would be the correct outcome.

[wuushew]

147. You do nothing to disprove the Texas stereotype

n/t

[Mike K]

140. If he enters onto your private premises without authorization

he is trespassing. If he unlawfully enters your residence or business premises, he is a burglar -- unless he can prove he had no intention of doing anything unlawful while there. Then he might slide by with unlawful entry

[Oregone]

179. So if a man enters into a country....

We all know what you are trying to do here. You are trying to imply that illegal entry into geographical borders, and all actions thereafter, are much like a shadowy threatening person breaking into your home (a person who only intends to hurt you further).

You are using your parallel to implicitly say illegal immigrants perpetuate threatening crime that everyone should be afraid of. Its bullshit

[Mike K]

200. Not so.

You are trying to say it's okay to enter any country one wishes to without consent and not be subjected to suspicion or critical language. And I am saying it's not okay because it's against the law. Nothing more sinister or complicated than that.

If one enters the United States illegally one is an illegal alien, or an illegal immigrant, or an illegal presence, or, if informal verbal shorthand is in order, an illegal.

[uppityperson]

261. Wrong. What if he enters without permission to rape? Is he still a "burglar"?

Entering without authorization is trespassing. Simply entering does not = burglary.

[Starry Messenger]

65. Newsmax--what a shocker.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsmax_Media

Christopher W. Ruddy started Newsmax.com on September 16, 1998, supported by a group of politically conservative investors, including the family of the late Central Intelligence Agency Director William J. Casey. Later, Richard Mellon Scaife, his former employer at the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review and a supporter of conservative causes, invested in the fledging company.<2> One of the initial board members was author James Dale Davidson who edited a financial newsletter that had shared Ruddy's interest in the alleged suicide of President Bill Clinton's aide, Vincent Foster. Davidson's co-editor, Lord Rees-Mogg, former editor of The Times and Vice Chair of the BBC, later became chairman of Newsmax Media.<3>

Other news figures who later joined the Newsmax board included Arnaud de Borchgrave, the longtime Newsweek chief correspondent who also serves as editor at large of UPI, a media company owned by the Unification Church, and Jeff Cunningham, former publisher of Forbes. The late Admiral Thomas Moorer, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Chief of Naval Operations during the Vietnam War, also served as one of the company's founding board members. Former US Secretary of State and Nixon administration Chief of Staff Alexander M. Haig Jr. served as special adviser to NewsMax.<4>

Ruddy aimed at creating an Internet news company by building a team of reporters. In August 2001, talk radio host Michael Reagan merged his monthly newsletter The Reagan Monitor with Newsmax Magazine and began writing a regular column for the publication.<5>

[David Zephyr]

75. Very little escapes your sharp eye, Starry Messenger.

We had another one the other night who posted an article from The Washington Times!

[Starry Messenger]

78. I teach high school.

I'm practically a ninja. :D

[EFerrari]

100. Lol! Good thing you're on our side!

[William Z. Foster]

96. this analogy is so obviouslly false and misleading

The country is not private property.

Interesting, though, to hear so many white people talking about the country as though it were their private property. At the same time, so few object to so much of the country literally being privatized.

[political_Dem]

159. +1

[Mike K]

202. You're right.

The Country is not private property. It is community property and it is against the law to enter without consent. Just like it is illegal to enter someone's home without consent.

It's not such a difficult concept to grasp.

[William Z. Foster]

272. correct

And we are in the process of reaching consensus that will hopefully lead to reform of the law.

The problem is that there is now not clear consent, and no clear lack of consent. That is why there is an issue. Some, such as you, are saying "we don't want you." Others, such as myself are saying "we want you." The government has not resolved this one way or the other, and millions are waiting for clarification of status.

It is not "just like" breaking and entering. That idiotic talking point has already been refuted. Address the counter-argument, if you can, or stop using misleading talking points to trash out the discussion.

Are people so carried away with hatred on this issue that they can no longer think logically? WTF?

It is against the law to presume people are guilty, it is against the law to arrest and detain people without probable cause, it is against the law to violate habeas corpus and due process. It is against the law to deny people access to counsel, it is against the law to find people guilty without a fair trial, it is against the law to hold people indefinitely, it is against the law to deny citizens of other countries a hearing.

THAT is the problem - not poor people in a state of confusion and at risk. It is those with power who are breaking the law, egged on by the hatred and irrationality of people like you.

[readmoreoften]

112. America is not my personal, private property. And no one crawls into my home looking for a job.

And no one crawls into my home looking for a job because NAFTA has dislocated farmers and indigenous masses.

[Luminous Animal]

158. If someone climbs into your home through an open window

and cleans your house, grows your food, and cooks your dinner, I'm thinking you'd be a-ok with it. And fuck guest worker programs unless the workers have all U.S. civil rights, including the right to vote and organize into labor unions.

''We wanted workers, we got people."


As for your reactionary News Max link? It has been debunked several times over. I would suggest that if you want to have any credibility at all as a democrat, you do some research.

[Warren Stupidity]

67. Couldn't agree more. Language matters. Framing matters.

People are not 'illegal'. That is the language of objectification, of framing a group of people as 'the other' so that they can be put outside of the normal ethical framework for human interaction. It is the language of authoritarianism. Reject the framing.

[David Zephyr]

83. Thanks, Warren.

Reject the framing. :)

[Laughing Mirror]

219. Yes, turning people into objects takes away their humanity

They're no longer persons but things. And when a person is no longer a person but a thing, you can treat the thing anyway you want and feel good about it, because it's just a thing, maybe a thing I don't like, and it's not a real person like I am.

[aikoaiko]

68. It was good enough for Genesis.

http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Illegal-Alien-lyrics-Genesis/C99AE0CBE681B37B48256960001EFBAB

Got out of bed, wasn't feeling too good
With my wallet and my passport, a new pair of shoes
The sun is shining so I head for the park,
With a bottle of Tequila, and a new pack of cigarettes

I got a cousin and she got a friend,
Who thought that her aunt knew a man who could help
At his apartment I knocked on the door,
He wouldn't come out until he got paid.
Now don't tell anybody what I wanna do
If they find out you know that they'll never let me through, cos

It's no fun being an illegal alien, no
It's no fun being an illegal alien

Down at the office had to fill out the forms
A pink one, a red one, the colours you choose,
Up to the counter to see what they think
They said "it doesn't count man, it ain't written in ink".
I don't trust anybody, least not around here, cos

It's no fun being an illegal alien, I tell ya
It's no fun being an illegal alien, no no no no no
It's no fun being an illegal alien, I mean it when I tell ya that
It's no fun being an illegal alien,
An illegal alien, O.K.

Consideration for your fellow man
Would not hurt anybody, it sure fits in with my plan
Over the border, there lies the promised land
Where everything comes easy, you just hold out your hand

Keep your suspicions, I've seen that look before
But I ain't done nothing wrong now, is that such a surprise
But I've got a sister who'd be willing to oblige
She will do anything now to help me get to the outside

So don't tell anybody what I wanna do
If they find out you know that they'll never let me through, because

It's no fun being an illegal alien, I tell ya
It's no fun being an illegal alien, and it's getting me down
It's no fun being an illegal alien, no no no no no
It's no fun being an illegal alien, yeah yeah yeah

It's no fun (not much fun) being an illegal alien, I tell ya that
It's no fun being an illegal alien, I tell ya
It's no fun being an illegal alien, no no no
It's no fun (not bloody much fun) being an illegal alien,
It's no fun being an illegal alien, and that's what I am.

[political_Dem]

74. Thank you. The term bothers me because it is similar to the n-word.

People who use the term, use it with such vindictiveness and hatred that it is not a benign term. I would even go as far to say that the people who revel in using the term to describe the undocumented ventures on bigotry.

Sometimes, I think that people use that word because they can't say other racial slurs in which they would be ostracized for. And what is worse, it is a term laden with white supremacy and privilege.

And it is equally repulsive when this slur is used in broadcast, print and other public venues in society.

This type of crap would stop if the public would openly use "cracker", "honky", "peckerwood"** and other insulting terms in the media without batting an eye. How would white people feel if anchors, reporters, bloggers, pundits and commentators pontificated their views peppered with those racial slurs unapologetically? How would they feel if people unrepentantly defended their use of these terms openly because it "truly describes the people targeted and what they are"? How would they feel if the POTUS and other assorted politicians used this language openly without even thinking about the feelings of some of the members of their constituency?

You know what would happen? Look to Arizona. After all, they passed a law to stop ethnic studies in order to prevent the "resentment of the white race". Go figure.

So, kick and rec'd.

**used for demonstrative purposes only.

[EFerrari]

97. People use it exactly like the n word.

[political_Dem]

264. And they use it with such hate too. :(

I get sick every time I read the message boards of newspapers because there are usually a whole host of posts that lack substance but blame everything on undocumented people. And these folks just don't use the term to talk about simply "criminality". They use this term to belittle undocumented folks as much as they can with utter abandon.

[Mike K]

139. I am White.

And if you wish to call me a peckerwood, a cracker, a honky, or any other silly name you can think of, be my guest. Because a rose is a rose.

Got it?

[political_Dem]

141. It's not just down to a individual level.

The terms "illegal" and "nigger"** were used in polite discussion in public such as speeches, news reports, commentaries, political debates, news stories and other such oratory. It's been echoed in the media ad nauseum without rebuttal. Even politicians to the top leaders of nations described Black people as such. Some of our national leaders today have used "illegal" to denote the undocumented without considering the dehumanization of the people described.

Now, if a politician uses peckerwood, cracker, honky** or other racial slurs debasing white people in a stump or policy speech regarding his constituency--especially when it has to do with a draconian law restricting the rights of white people, you may start to care.

That is what they are doing in Arizona.

Now, if a whole host of talk show pundits begin to use white racial slurs on air and defend such use as saying that they aren't racist and it "describes the people as they are" while ignoring the outcries of white people, you might care.

And if there is a "grass roots movement" of old, disgruntled people of color who openly put racial slurs describing white people on signs while supporting politicians who openly call for restricting white people's rights, you might care.

Now if you continuously hear white racial slurs in commercials day in and day out without stoppage or apology, you might care.

And if you fight back against such public usage of terms while the nation enforces policies restricting white people because of who they are while the supporters of the law tell you to "suck it up because it is the law", then you might care.

And if the public openly calls your children and babies a derogatory slur denoting their white birth without apology, you might care.

Because that's what people of color have had to put up with for a mighty long time. Even if they protested it and spoke out about it, the dominant culture ignored them and continued using such racial slurs without stoppage. In fact, they would explain it away and say, "Stop whining about race!"

So, this type of offensiveness is not just about one person calling another a racial slur; it is an entire society using that term and implementing the feelings because of to create laws that infringe on human and civil rights.

**racial slurs used demonstratively, not figuratively.

[William Z. Foster]

170. great post

Thanks.

[political_Dem]

175. You are very welcome. Thank you for your compliment. :)

I usually do not use language as derogatory as this, but I think this needed to be said.

I'm tired of people pretending that calling someone an "illegal" is benign. It's about time for this country to return to civility and humanity.

[William Z. Foster]

177. I agree

Your post was masterfully done.

[Mike K]

176. I attended a lecture by James Baldwin at Columbia University

in 1964 when the Civil Rights Act had just been passed. Among the things he said that I still remember is, "The American negro will not be truly free until the word nigger no longer troubles him, because the absence of chains and the end of Jim Crow segregation does not free the mind."

And someone else once said, What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

A rose is a rose is a rose.

[political_Dem]

199. Individuality is still not the issue here.

Mr. Baldwin may have felt that way and rightfully so. I also say this as a fan of books. I most especially adore Another Country, If Beale Street Could Talk, Notes of a Native Son and The Fire Next Time.

But, I still feel that you are missing the point. Let me put this to you succinctly:

1)This is not about the individual use of racial slurs and its said effects on that individual. I'm talking about such effects on individuals via the societal level.

2)Someone can cast the shackles off and not let the word enslave them. That's fine and well. However, such an individual act still doesn't take away the vindictiveness and implementation such racial slurs had in terms of influencing the public to hate a specific group of people as well as instigating the passage of oppressive legislation to infringe upon civil and human rights.

That is what undocumented people experience today.

3)Such an act will not stop bigoted individuals in the media, politics, education or other social institutions from using the term openly in a public venue without equal time given in order to publicly address the corrosive nature of such a term.

Privilege takes away the responsibility due to recognizing the implications of "othering" socialized out-groups. As a result, it allows the myopic view that the word in connection does not have dangerous and oppressive effects on groups targeted as offensive by the dominant culture.

4)Such racial slurs are implemented to denote power and supremacy, especially when it has to do with legislation. When Tom Tancredo started throwing around this word, it was no mistake what he meant by it. And he and his ilk still use the term despite the efforts of such individuals to cast off the shackles of this term.

And despite that ceremonial "casting off" by such an individual recipient of a specific racial invective, legislation such as California's Prop 187 and Arizona's H.R. 1070 was still thought up, written, passed and endorsed by societal leaders who used the racial slur in terms of dehumanizing the undocumented. And they still didn't care that it targeted and hurt some of the constituents in their areas.

Simply put: People who use racial slurs probably don't give a damn whether a targeted individual "casts off the shackles or not". To racists, that targeted invididual is still the slur in question. And the racists will endorse and vote for legislation that further punishes that individual and his or her specific socialized out-group.

Jim Crow was partially built from the language-oriented and image-laden dehumanization of Black people--especially from minstrel shows by white males in black-face.

The slur, "illegal", is not any different. In public, it promotes "otherness", disrespect and "dehumanization" in the same manner. It desensitizes the dominant culture against treating the targeted individuals with humanity or respect. Racial slurs add virulence to those policies--especially when such terms are legitimized by societal leaders. This occurs no matter what the individual does to "break free of the shackles" of such corrosive language.

Usually the voices of privilege never consider the effects that their words or behaviors influence the policy of racism in this country. That is because the implications such slurs possess have never been used to demonize and discriminate against whites via individual and institutional racism--especially to the degree of Jim Crow and now the laws of Arizona.

[Laughing Mirror]

221. Beautiful!

Thank you.

[political_Dem]

262. You're very welcome. :)

[William Z. Foster]

169. whites have so many options

Since derogatory terms used against whites are not in any way connected to them being persecuted, abused or killed, they have all sort of freedom here - hey call me a honky, whatever, it won't affect me or my status. I'm white! Get it?

Don't call them a racist, though, no matter WHAT they throw out there or do. That would be so cruel and unfair to them, and they are so persecuted and maligned.

[David Zephyr]

192. Eyebrow raising that you have to spell it out so at a liberal blog, huh?

But there it is.

[political_Dem]

201. Yes. I am saddened by that. However, I am very glad that you posted this thread.

So, I give you my thanks once again to your contribution of getting people to think in humane terms.

Well done. :)

[BellaLuna]

222. Are you seriously comparing the N word to this?

I think the intent of the use of words is a factor. If you think using 'illegal aliens' is intended the same as the N word or other terms you are naive. Ever heard of Wetback, beaner, etc.? THOSE are intentionally used out of hate or ignorance. Illegal alien is used because that is the term most people are familiar with and can be argued is more descriptive of the person's status which is of course what is the issue. I guarantee you when white people want to offend Mexicans they do not use illegal aliens - they use far more crude words where there is no doubt what the meaning is behind it.

Be offended by 'illegal alien' if you want but do not try to equate it to the N word - it doesn't make sense even if it is emotionally charged.

[political_Dem]

237. Yes I am. I am very serious.

Although, I've said my peace in earlier posts, I'll say why here:


1)"Illegal" is often used out of hate and ignorance. I also guarantee that white people don't mean "illegal" as a term of endearment just like they don't mean the "n-word" as one. When I've heard and read of others using it, some folks almost never use the term "illegal alien". They just simply shorten it down to "illegal". In that vein, when "illegal" is used it is emotionally charged--even in this thread.

2)On the societal level, it is repeated in the media with the same emotional and vicious intent--especially when this word is endorsed by the the figureheads and informational gatekeepers of the nation. However, that does not make this word right or benign in its usage. And just because someone from the dominant culture endorses such a word, doesn't take the sting or intent out of its usage as well. A group of people are still being demonized here.

After all, Tom Tancredo didn't mean that he loved undocumented people when he coined the word "illegal". Lou Dobbs doesn't use this term to convey his respect and praise either. This word was meant to describe the targets of their animus to be as repulsive and vile as possible. Both of these men as well as others of their ilk mean it that way.

I believe that when the dominant culture uses it, it is meant to debase and dehumanize their targets to the point of non-existence, just like when they use other racial slurs against people of color.

The fact it is argued by the dominant culture to legitimately use this racially-charged invective against undocumented people tells you a lot right there. It is especially ironic that those who use it are often in denial about how it hurts others as well as the word's impact on race-relations and legislation in this country.

So therefore, this is not a trivial issue. I meant every word I said.

[BellaLuna]

279. the problem with your argument is this group of people are indeed here illegally

My issue isn't so much with not liking the use of 'Illegal Alien' but it's comparison to the N word.

You're trying to compare a people who came here of their free will and have the ability to change their situation to people who were ripped from their homelands and had NO rights.

It's the old apples and oranges analogy, and equating the 2 is insulting to the plight of victims of slavery in my opinion.

Two wrongs are not always the same - they are simply both wrong.

[political_Dem]

280. That may be so.

Let me first say that I understand where you are coming from. But, I see this situation--when discussing the usage of derogatory terms to pigeonhole a people to nothingness--differently.

This is not about oppression olympics. It's not about equating the experiences of the two situations in my book. And yes, you cannot equate the experiences of the two. But then again, I never did in my entire argument. I do, however, equate the employment of derogatory terms to debase, demoralize and remove civil liberties from a group of people who are looked down upon by the dominant culture.

In that stance, it is equally important.

Furthermore, my stance is about bringing humanity and civility to treating all people regardless of their background with a sense of decency and respect. Different experiences do not make a group of people any less deserving of being treated with humanity, decency and a sense of dignity.

On that note, I believe that "illegal" when used as a pejorative by the dominant culture, is a racial slur mainly because it is aimed at folks coming from South America. As such, this group of people are objectified by such terms. And yes, because it is targeted at people who have brown skin (because you never hear whites insult undocumented people from European Countries), it is used as a racial slur whether "two wrongs make a right or not."

Furthermore, I am a descendant of slaves and am pretty much aware of the experiences that have occurred due to racism, exclusion, oppression and omission. Thus, whenever I see people suffer and experience the scorn of society through acts put forth by the dominant culture, there is no other stance to take but to fight for their dignity, humanity and civil rights--even down to the virulent and stinging words used to demonize their person.

[CreekDog]

89. Connotation is important and we should do away with calling people things that dehumanize them

i could see calling someone a name based on something they've done...that's different.

but just for being from somewhere else...heck, call them a refugee, many of the undocumented here are simply economic refugees. many are political refugees. but people aren't by defintion "illegals" and "alien" is so outmoded as to be inaccurate by now.

in the global village, i don't think anybody is alien anymore.

on edit: oh and K&R...can't believe this thread can't stay in positive territory with recommends.

there's a large segment of DU that likes to show it's hate and judgment of undocumented within our country. they are having fun here.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WillyT]

95. K & R !!!

Could not overcome racist unreccers.

:shrug:

:kick:

[David Zephyr]

104. Thanks.

:)

[Laughing Mirror]

218. Yeah, same here

I must say also that it was startling just now to hit recommend and not see the counter jump at least to a +1. And then I began to read through the comments, and I understood why.

[Skip Intro]

101. Dude, if they are in the country illegally, and they are immigrants, they are illegal immigrants.

Reality isn't all fuzzy smiley faces. Wish it were, but it ain't.

[William Z. Foster]

171. sure

And if people talk about "them" and support the racist anti-immigrant movement, then they are racists.

Hey it ain't all smiley faces, but ya gotta face reality. Wish it were all smiley faces, for your sake, but it ain't.

[backscatter712]

117. Did your ancestors have papers when they entered America?

A lot of them didn't. The Pilgrims didn't have papers to show to the Native Americans when they landed at Plymouth Rock. Many of the immigrants who landed at Ellis Island, after passing that famous statue with the inscription "Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses..." didn't have papers either. But I guess that now that the current generation of immigrants tend to be brown, we can hold them to a different standard...

The reason why people are jumping the border to get into the U.S. is because 1. Economic conditions - even sub-minimum-wage exploitative jobs over here pay more than they can get at home, and 2., because immigration law in the U.S. is utterly brain-damaged, so it's next to impossible to immigrate legally, especially if you're poor and can't afford to shell out thousands of dollars for an immigration attorney and all the fees and hoops you have to jump through to try to immigrate legally (assuming ICE or INS doesn't decide to deny you or deport you for no reason, which they can and do frequently...)

So don't tell me "What part of illegal don't you understand?" My response is "What part of 'bad law' don't you understand?" Slavery was the law. Internment of Japanese Americans during WWII was the law. Jim Crow was the law, but if you tried justifying it to me just by saying "It's the law", I'd be split between laughing in your face and punching you in the face.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WinkyDink]

129. Aggressiveness is not an argument. Pre-Constitutional history isn't, either.

The abolition of slavery and of Jim Crow laws and the termination of Japanese-AMERICAN internment were all positive results for our society.

Are you arguing for the abolition of all immigration laws? I.e. arguing for open immigration?

[backscatter712]

132. I'm arguing for better immigration laws.

The laws as they currently stand are nearly innavigable.

Perhaps if we cracked down on businesses that hire undocumented immigrants and exploit them, created a legal immigration path that made sense, so people don't have to jump the border, made sure that civil rights laws were enforced, and sensibly dealt with the undocumented immigrants who are already here, and have families here, say by letting them come clean, pay a fine for jumping the border (it's an administrative violation - not a serious crime), have a path to citizenship if they want to work to earn it - in other words, not give away citizenship or the privilege of remaining in the U.S. for free, but making things fair), our border situation would be improved.

[WinkyDink]

208. THIS, I agree with. But we'll wait a long time before any bidnessmen hear the policeman's knock.

[KonaKane]

133. "MY ancestors came here legally from Blahdeedaavia!"

I'm getting really sick of this one. I hear it from any number of privileged people who have no idea what it's like to flee a country for your life.

For the record, my ancestors came here legally too. But they had the resources ($$$), the time and support to get to the USA. They were not fleeing persecution or death squads. They chose to come here because they were converted in Denmark to Mormonism and they wanted to live with the "saints" in Utah. Hardly the same set of circumstances for so many immigrants from the south of us, who are trying to feed their kids, or fleeing a death sentence. They, unlike my lucky forebears, do not have the bucks, the connections and the convenience of time to plan a relocation.

That's what's so vexing about this issue. It is not black and white. For all the idiots who can mouth nothing but "what part of illegal don't you get" I ask them, is there NO case in which you would break a law? I know I would. If it meant to save my own skin or that of a loved one, I wouldn't have a second thought about it. "Higher law" doesnt mean a thing to these xenophobic, racist morons.

[William Z. Foster]

172. papers

Many immigrants have no papers in their home country, and never have, and couldn't read papers if they had them. Talking to them, the whole concept of "papers" suddenly seems absurd. What are we, dogs in a kennel? Slaves? Prisoners? May as well be. They see what we cannot - that "papers" is all bullshit, just one of the many ways we are controlled by the ruling class.

Are the anti-immigrant people perhaps saying "look we are as dogs in the master's kennel, neutered and muzzled, prodded and tormented, doing his bidding. We have to be miserable, and have chosen to be grovelling cowards and weak and joyless creatures in a cage, and so should you!"

Kiss the master's ass and obey his every whim, and you get more biscuits. That is reality, the way things work and you may as well accept that. But there are not enough biscuits for everyone, and if you dogs come here - especially when you flaunt the rules here - then maybe none of us will get biscuits. Go back to the military dictatorship you came from and ask that master for biscuits. Maybe someday you will be "advanced" civilized dogs like us, and learn how to cower and obey, and sit up and beg, and to attack any illegal alien dogs that come around. Then maybe you too will deserve more biscuits.

Actually, we treat dogs better than we treat immigrants, that is the really sad thing.

[ismnotwasm]

123. Thank you

It's a horrible destructive and divisive term, heavily weighted with bullshit judgmental baggage. It interferes with civilized debate and discussion and simply adds to the problem. No one should use it when discussing immigration, no matter what one's personal view is on the subject.

[David Zephyr]

186. It is sad that it is even a "discussion" here.

But, alas it is. Thanks, ismnotwasm.

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KonaKane]

131. You sure you're in the right place?

Because I don't think you are.

[janx]

127. I often go back to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Vq0FRUjSbA

[Odin2005]

134. Comparing "Illegal Immigrant" to "Retard" is moronic.

If you are a non-citizen and you did not obey the immigration laws you are not here legally. Yes, some people use "illegal" as an insult, that doesn't mean the term itself is bad, any euphemisms will eventually be used as insults, too (like how "special" is being used the same insulting way as "retard")

[EFerrari]

154. Reducing a person to one attribute is dehumanizing, period.n/t

[David Zephyr]

196. It is.

I wonder if those justifying this hateful slur would wag their finger at a six year old child of undocumented parents and call her or him "illegal"?

I like how you said it, EFerrari: "Reducing a person to one attribute is dehumanizing, period."

[Odin2005]

209. How is saying that a non-citizen is not here legally "reducing a person to an attribute"?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

211. "Illegals" reduces a person to their immigration status, doesn't it?

The reason some people use that term isn't because it's "accurate" but because it allows them to dehumanize others the way the n word used to. Or in some cases, the way the n word still allows them to dehumanize others.

Once someone is dehumanized in your mind, you can pile on all kinds of irrational hatred and fear without even a second thought. It's a remarkable process.

[petronius]

225. It depends on context, doesn't it?

In a conversation about migration (which is how the terms arrive here on DU), 'illegal' is an appropriate and often necessary characterization (although 'unauthorized' is just as good). It's not dehumanizing or inappropriately reductionist to refer to a person by a single attribute when that attribute is the relevant topic of discussion.

You are right that there are people who use 'illegal' as a surrogate for a whole slew of less palatable epithets, but I don't think that's what we're seeing here on DU and I think it's incorrect to generalize from that specific misuse to the sweeping indictments of the term that are being made on this thread...

[EFerrari]

228. I don't agree with your premise.

And especially after having followed these threads on DU, I don't agree that this term isn't more often used as a way to dehumanize the subject of the conversation.

I bet few people would agree that dropping an 18 year old young lady in a foreign country away from her family and friends is a good idea. But that is what people were arguing was an appropriate way to respond to Ms. Castro yesterday -- she's an illegal, after all. That's one example that comes to mind, anyway.

[petronius]

235. That's fair, of course. I don't particularly agree with your assessment either,

but I believe I understand your points. I hope I've also clearly expressed my opinions on the semantics of migration.

Tell you what: I'll promise to avoid the 'i'-word in response to any of your posts, if you promise not to assume it's a dehumanizing attempt if I forget. Deal? :)

[EFerrari]

238. Deal!

:hi:

[Odin2005]

256. One can do that with ANY word.

The difference is that "Illegal Alien" has a legitimate, legal, usage. The N-word is just an epithet. People use "Spaz" as an insult all the time, and it's a term I hate, but that doesn't mean that "Spastic-type Cerebral Palsy" (which a good friend of mine has) is not a legitimate medical term. "Mental Retardation" is a perfectly acceptable diagnostic term, that doesn't mean it's OK to call someone a "retard".

Context is everything.

[EFerrari]

258. That it can be done with any word doesn't disallow that it is being done with this one. n/t

[William Z. Foster]

167. I am very disappointed

I have respected and admired your posts until now. This is very disappointing.

What if I were to say this:

"If you are supporting the racist anti-immigrant hysteria, you are a racist. Some use that word as an insult, yes, but that does not mean the term itself is bad, as any euphemisms will be used as insults too."

[cliffordu]

135. Citizenship challenged??

Human beings aren't illegal.

Undocumented, perhaps, and maybe even Fer'ners.

But not illegal.

The bigotry here used to be soft.

Now, not so much. Very telling....

[SpartanDem]

180. Bigotry has nothing to do with it

it's an official term to define somebodys immigration status. The undocumented term is nothing more than an attempt minimize the fact that some people are here illegally.

[David Zephyr]

194. Thanks.

:)

[cliffordu]

217. Anytime, big guy.

:~)

[datasuspect]

137. I prefer "Verbrecher"

When these people violate the laws of our homeland, they strike deep to the core of our family values and patriotic heritage.






































































































s
a
r
c
a
s
m

[cliffordu]

138. Tha's right, mein herr....

:rofl:

[blondeatlast]

265. One of the absolute best posts I've ever read here. Major, major kudos.

Just brilliant.

[tavalon]

189. Kicking it to the top. Recced too.

[thelordofhell]

203. Genesis didn't have a problem with it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9byfevggn0

[Lasher]

204. You are trying to frame an argument.

I'm not a big fan of censorship.

[Macoy]

206. Seems Clear

If I drive a car without a license, I am an illegal driver

If I sell drugs without a license, I am an illegal drug dealer

If I do electrical work in your house without proper license/certification, I am an illegal electrician

If I am in this country illegally, I am an illegal alien

Seems clear to me


Macoy

[grantcart]

220. This is cynical bullshit

When Phoenix was the fastest growing city in North America and needed all of the low cost construction workers they could get no one was saying anything about asking people for their papers.

When things are going good and the restaurants cannot find workers to work in their hot kitchens no one can find any 'illegal aliens' even though everyone knows every single kitchen in Phoenix is filled with them.

Oh and everyday 5,000 of the same workers are now deemed 'legal' and cross the border at Yuma to pick the crops so that the people in Arizona can eat cheap food.

These workers are wanted and needed in our system and it is only when the economic situation goes bad that the fear mongers are able to draw out the worst in America and brand people, some of whom who have worked here for 2 decades without every breaking a law, 'illegal' or criminials.

[Adsos Letter]

278. Seems clear to me

If I drive a car without a license, I am driving illegally

If I sell drugs without a license, I am selling drugs illegally

If I do electrical work in your house without proper license/certification, I am performing electrical work illegally

If I am in this country illegally, I am here illegally (and if I am working, I am working illegally).

Seems clear to me

[tavalon]

205. I agree we're using the right's term and it's ugly

Would undocumented be better? Because we are going to be talking about this a lot, thanks to Gov. Brewer and her asinine legislature.

As an aside, I have personally been a primary reason for the terms fucking retards and fucking retarded showing up over the last 24 hours. I used in the "Rahm, do you hear us now" topic and I used it to remind everyone that Rahm used that terminology to marginalize the left during the healthcare debate. And you are right, it is highly pejorative, but then, so is Rahm Emanuel on a regular basis. I guess I wasn't all that high minded on that specific thread because I was doing a rather mean happy dance on his smug face. I can't wait to be saying goodbye to our party's very own Turdblossom.

[Lance_Boyle]

212. Would you prefer 'unwelcome visitor?' n/t

[donco6]

215. I say "undocumented."

I realize there are a good number of folks here who want the US to break out the boxcars and Gestapo, but I think the only possible solution is amnesty.

It's funny that some of those same people who refuse to consider this solution are the ones always blathering about "you have to be practical."

[David Zephyr]

232. We see this eye to eye.

Every word you wrote is spot on.

[MidwestRick]

223. Instead of illegal...

...how about criminal?

-MR

[Luminous Animal]

226. Because it is not a crime but rather a civil infraction.

[David Zephyr]

233. So a six year old child of parents without documents is a "criminal" in your eyes?

.

[MidwestRick]

248. They are here criminally.

Since they are minors, I wouldn't blame them, but their parents who broke the law to come here...illegally.

[EFerrari]

255. Wrong. Immigration law is not criminal law.

At least get your rationalizations straight.

[lumberjack_jeff]

229. How much garment rending is appropriate in the search for an adequately sensitive euphemism?

"It's just like the N word" or comparing it to pejoratives used to describe people with disabilities or the GLBT is a foolish analogy, for one simple reason; illegal aliens have full and absolute autonomy to change their status.

Further, "illegal alien" is not a race.

The alternatives "undocumented worker" "undocumented immigrant" simultaneously euphemize the fact that they acted of their own volition and project stereotypes onto their motives. Do they plan to immigrate? Are they here to work? It's impossible to generalize. The only generalities that can be made is that they are citizens of another country who crossed the border without the permission of the government which operates inside it, thus "illegal" and "alien".

[ItNerd4life]

240. What part of 'illegal' is not understood? Their actions are 'illegal'!

Nobody is saying they aren't people, they are saying their actions are illegal.

If someone makes an illegal u-turn does that mean that u-turns are now bad and no longer viable?

By your argument we shouldn't call people who are kidnappers, rapist, or drug addicts those types of things because we could hurt their feelings.

[Name removed]

241. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

243. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laughingliberal]

244. K & R nt

[guardian]

250. Why not just use the term "foreign national"?? n/t

[TheKentuckian]

263. I use unauthorized migrant to describe folks in the situation

I support the right of all lifeforms to migrate, including humans.

[Kali]

269. you have explained the issue in the most respectful, non-confrontational and kind way

I have read so far. While I sometimes fall into using the same verbal shortcuts so aggressively "defended" by some I hope my actions speak louder than my words sometimes do. Thank you for a VERY well written post.

[David Zephyr]

276. Thank you, Kali

My OP was not a call to ban words, but a call to ponder how those words are loaded with a lot of xenophobia and racism. You got the intent of my OP. Sadly, others felt the need to defend, even champion the use of that term.

Thanks.

[Florida Blue]

273. Aren't they in the Country illegally ?

[deaniac21]

274. In law, an alien is a person in a country who is not a citizen of that

country.
Types of "alien" persons are:

An alien who is legally permitted to remain in a country which is foreign to him or her. On specified terms, this kind of alien may be called a legal alien of that country. This is a very broad category which includes tourists, guest workers, legal permanent residents and student visa resident aliens.
An alien who has temporary or permanent residence in a country (which is foreign to him/her) may be called a resident alien of that country. This is a subset of the aforementioned legal alien category.
An alien who is visiting a country (which is foreign to him/her) may be called a nonresident alien of that country. This is a subset of the aforementioned legal alien category.
An alien who is present in a country (which is foreign to him/her) unlawfully or without the country's authorization is known as an illegal alien of that country.<2> An illegal alien commonly refers to a foreign national who resides in another country unlawfully, either by entering that country at a place other than a designated port-of-entry or as result of the expiration of a non-immigrant visa.
An enemy alien is an alien who is designated as an enemy.

Hurtful? Only if you haven't a clue.

[miscsoc]

275. I'd say you're generally right,

"undocumented worker" sounds a bit prissily respectful to the point of condescension and I think that this is why even sympathisers often avoid it, but it's better than "illegal alien" and in any case as it replaces the latter term it will cease to feel awkward (as it still does, i think) and will just become the standard term. in doing so it will modify the way we think about the people in question in positive ways.

So it's a preferable term, but I can see why people on here might prefer those more traditional, problematic words, although I don't agree with them.