Monday, March 20, 2023

Immigrants should be more than an investment for rural communities

Immigrants and refugees now makeup 31% of new residents in rural communities according to the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey. The University of New Hampshire's report finds that rural immigrants are more likely to be of working age (18-64), are more racially and ethnically diverse, and are nearly twice as likely to be poor than native-born rural population. With an increasing immigrant population, it is important to consider the way the narrative around immigrants is structured in rural communities, often emphasizing the labor value that immigrants add rather than focusing on their inherent value allowing for harm to happen.

Often, the narrative around immigration whether it be in our federal government, or the subject of academic literature is that we should allow immigrants into "our" country because they contribute to the workforce, have a strong work ethic, and are family oriented. These traits seem to resonate with rural Americans who too have close-knit family units and identify strongly with the work they do. However, painting immigrants with this brush leads to harmful and real consequences that allow for the continued exploitation and abuse of migrant labor and immigrant communities. 

The harmful narrative around immigration begins as a political strategy and continues as an economic one. Politicians often conflate crime and immigrants, utilizing "tough on crime" slogans to shape their campaigns and rally votes as evidenced here. Constructing a fear-mongering narrative, particularly depicting those entering the U.S. from the southern border as criminals, part of drug cartels, or "aliens" aims to evoke strong emotions that further an "us" vs. "them" mentality.

Inherent in immigration discourse, is the concept of "legality" or rather the lack of it. According to this UCLA Law Review article, "illegality or undocumented status is a function of a border regime, and as such, plays a significant role in creating and sustaining highly exploitable labor pools." Similarly, "where the border regimes are racialized, so too is the highly exploitable labor generated by those regimes." This becomes significant when furthering narratives that tie immigrants' value and worth to the labor they produce for rural communities. 

For example, when immigrants are considered a lifeline to save rural areas that are facing population declines, it allows for exploitation to take place rather than actually welcoming immigrants for who they are. Many jobs, not so coincidentally, some of the lowest paying with the least protections are dependent on migrant labor. Some of these jobs are a part of the agricultural labor, food services, and construction industries that are integral to society and dominate the rural economy. 

The racialization of immigration is crucial to understanding how people are excluded from the U.S. and how labor can be extracted from their bodies. Systemically denying citizenship to those that are not aligned with whiteness allows for the exploitation of those that are already vulnerable. Without legal status in the U.S., abuse within and of immigrant communities is magnified, especially in rural communities.

This violence is also gendered; low-income immigrant women are targeted for sexual abuse and harassment in workplaces and are subsequently silenced with the threat of a call to Immigration and Customs Enforcement looming over their heads. This becomes complicated in rural communities where women are even more isolated, further analyzed here

Abuse within immigrant communities also has many layers because victims that are undocumented or don't have citizenship might not want to interact with state authorities for fear of increased attention. Conversely, victims might not want to report their abusers for fear of them getting deported. Deportation acts as the ultimate punishment that can eventually lead to death and aims to scare immigrants into obedience. As we know, almost any sort of conviction or criminal record can be a barrier to naturalization thus risking retaliation for speaking out is usually not an option. 

Ultimately, immigrants should not be valued solely for the work they do, which is often borne out of necessity and as a way to achieve inclusion. Immigration should be viewed as a systemic political and economic strategy used by the state to determine who is included and excluded and for what reasons. Steering clear narratives that try to justify immigration based on labor, profit, and capital is crucial in ensuring that migrant labor is not abused and that immigrants are not prevented from accessing education, employment, or healthcare. Instead, we should ensure immigrants are welcomed into rural communities for who they are- human beings.

4 comments:

Taylor Singer said...

Interesting post, thanks for posting! I think you're totally right that this narrative centering immigrants around labor value is more convincing to people living in rural areas who are hesitant about being more accepting to immigrants, but ultimately doesn't go far enough in actually fully humanizing these people in their eyes. Reading past readings from this class, hearing the discussions, and reading even more articles outside of school, it's fascinating to see that seemingly every time this issue gets brought up, the next thing that gets mentioned is the economy. Would it be worse in the long run to accept this argument as the main way to rebut anti-immigration policies and attitudes, since it may entrench the idea of immigrant workers as only being valuable for their labor, not as people? Should this be an argument we're making at all? They're interesting questions, and I do agree with your overall point that we need to approach this situation with a much higher regard for the humanity of all immigrant populations.

Rooney deButts said...

I completely agree that recognizing and working to combat the racialized nature of immigration in the U.S. is crucial. Given our class discussion regarding the deeply concerning origins of modern American policing, which can be tracked back to the creation of formal runaway slave patrols, I looked into the origins of modern immigration policy. It turns out, in similarly concerning ways, from its inception U.S. immigration policy has worked to exclude non-white groups. Specifically, the first law to define eligibility for citizenship and naturalization limited the right to “free white persons” of “good character.” Critically interrogating our institutions, as you do here, is so so important. Thanks for posting!

Link to information on the Nationality Act of 1790 here: https://immigrationhistory.org/item/1790-nationality-act/

Theo Brito said...

Excellent post! I agree with the sentiment that immigrants should not be solely valued based on the work that they do to survive and that changing our perspective on immigration is the first step in ensuring that migrant workers are working in safe, legal conditions. That comment reminded me about the H-2A visa that is in place to give immigrant workers just that. Although the H-2A visa does protect immigrant workers from deportation, many employers who are responsible for housing workers do not fulfill this requirement. Oftentimes, as explained by John Oliver (https://youtu.be/41vETgarh_8), workers have to live in deplorable and inhumane ways of living. Where some workers are even sleeping outside and have felt as if they were on the brink of death. Many of these visa holders are from Latine or Hispanic backgrounds, which also relates to your comment on the racialization of immigration, as 78% of farmworkers identified as Hispanic. (http://www.ncfh.org/naws-fact-sheet.html#:~:text=Ethnicity%20and%20Race%3A%20Seventy-eight%20percent%20of%20farmworkers%20identified,self-identified%20as%20Hispanic.%20Ten%20percent%20self-identified%20as%20Indigenous.)

Overall, immigrants deserve a humane and legal way to provide for their families, and we must strive to deliver that to them.

Katie Eng said...

Thank you for addressing this important topic in your blog post. I agree the rhetoric regarding immigrants as hard working, family oriented, and an asset to the economy, is harmful to immigrant communities and identities. Your post reminded me of when my dad said it is not a complement when people say Chinese people are part of the “model minority.” He always believed that label did more hurt than good, while others in the Chinese community welcomed the label because it made them feel accepted and valued. The “model minority” fiction only pits Chinese people against each other in a race to be “perfect” and “assimilate.” Your post was a great reminder that immigrants should not be defined by their value to society.