50
   

What should be done about illegal immigration?

 
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2010 10:16 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:

How did my grandfather emigrate to Hawaii from Japan in 1896 if it was illegal? That was before 1924; show me how his immigration was illegal?


Hawaii was annexed in 1898. If your grandfather immigrated to Hawaii in 1896, he didn't immigrate to the United States.

As some Mexicans point out, your grandfather didn't cross the border, the border crossed him.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2010 10:17 pm
@ebrown p,
You're changing your tune from "Asians" to "Chinese people." Quite a huge difference.

You said Asians were illegal immigrants before 1924.

Stick with the story, or get the **** out of my face.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2010 10:21 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
1858 Yedo Treaty-Treaty of Commerce and Navigation ; Treaty of Tientsin-Chinese government agreed to prohibit permanent emigration; reversed in 1959
1862 An Act to Protect Free White Labor Against Competition with Chinese Coolie Labor and to Discourage the Immigration of the Chinese into the State of California, April 26, 1862
1868 Burlingame-Seward Treaty-United States and China agreed to trade, travel, and residence rights for each other's citizens; still prohibited naturalization; additional articles to Sino-American treaty of 1858
1875 U.S. Congress passed first law (The Page Law) excluding certain categories of aliens (e.g., convicts and prostitutes); declared all earlier state laws regarding immigration unconstitutional
1876 Reciprocity treaty between Kingdom of Hawaii and United States
1878 In re Ah Yup rules Chinese ineligible for naturalized citizenship
1880 Sino-American treaty revised-Chinese government limited immigration of laborers in exchange for U.S. protection of those here
1882 Chinese Exclusion Act prohibited immigration of Chinese contract laborers for ten years; subsequently renewed; prohibited naturalization
1884 Increased restrictions on Chinese here and those seeking reentry -wives barred; anti miscegenation laws
1885 Congress banned contract labor
1882 Treaty of Chemulpo (Treaty of Amity and Commerce) started diplomatic relations between United States and Korea, which allowed Korean immigration to United States
1888 Scott Act prohibited immigration of virtually all Chinese, including those who had gone back to China to visit
1889 Chinese exclusion case (Chae Chan Ping v. United States) - Supreme Court ruled that an entire race that the government deemed difficult to assimilate might be barred from entry regardless of prior treaty
1892 Geary Act extended exclusion of Chinese laborers another ten years and stripped most legal rights from Chinese immigrants; also required certificates of residence for Chinese in the United States
1893 Fong Yue Ting v. United States - Supreme Court declared Congress had the right to legislate expulsion through executive orders; Chinese community had raised money to bring this before the Court to test the Geary Act.
Congress amended the Geary Act to make it more difficult for Chinese businessmen to enter this country
1894 Immigration officers authorized to ban the entry of certain aliens, including Chinese
Gresham-Yang Treaty-China accepted total prohibition of immigration to the United States in return for readmission of those back in China on a visit; did away win Scott Act of 1888
1898 Congress excluded Chinese laborers from Hawaii; excluded Chinese in Hawaii from coming to the United States
United States v. Wong Kim Art - Supreme Court rules person born in the United States of Chinese parents is of American nationality by birth
1889 Open door declared-United States advocated equal treatment within territories and sphere of influence claimed by other powers in china
1900 Organic Act provided government for territory of Hawaii; Chinese required to apply for certificate of residence
United States v. Mrs. Cue Lim -Supreme Court ruled wives and children of treaty merchants were entitled to come to the United States
1902 Chinese exclusion extended for another 10 years
1904 All Chinese excluded from the United States, Washington, D.C., and all U.S. territories
1906 Asian Indians denied U.S. citizenship
1907 Proclamation of president Theodore Roosevelt-Japanese and Koreans issued passports for Mexico, Canada, or Hawaii were to be denied admission to continental United States
1908 Gentleman's Agreement (Affecting the Immigration of Japanese) Japan agreed to halt further immigration to the United States and the United States agreed to end discrimination against those Japanese who had already arrived.
1910 Angel Island open ; it served as a prison for hundreds of Chinese immigrants.


Again, our grandfather came to the US in 1896 from Japan.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2010 10:24 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Yeah you are right. Although there was quite a bit of nativist opposition to Japanese immigration. This was resolved a bit by the Gentleman's Agreement (1906) where Japan basically stopped immigration.

Japanese Exclusion (by law) started with the 1924 Johnson-Reed Act.

Funny enough, there were no restrictions put on Mexican immigration in 1924.

0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jan, 2010 10:28 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:

Again, our grandfather came to the US in 1896 from Japan.


You are contradicting yourself. Did your grandfather come to Hawaii in 1896, or did he come to the US.

Hawaii was annexed in 1898. In 1896 Hawaii was its own Republic, not a part of the US. It would have had its own immigration policies.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 11:58 am
@ebrown p,
It "was" its own republic, but the US made it its territory. What's your point?
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 12:26 pm
@cicerone imposter,
(You brought up your Grandfather to make a point about US immigration policy. Because your grandfather immigrated to the island before it was a US territory, US immigration policy had nothing to do with it. That's all I am pointing out.)

But let's move on. Your Grandfather certainly faced the racism of the anti-immigrant movement. I was wrong about the timing of the exclusion of Japanese from immigration... but there was very strong anti-Japanese sentiment which led to the "Gentleman's agreement" in 1906 which practically halted Japnese immigration. The complete legal exclusion of Japanese people from immigrating was passed in 1924.

Let's read what anti-immigrant groups were saying around the time your Grandfather came to Hawaii.

Quote:
Thousands of fair minded and well meaning people who were biased and ignorant on the question of Japanese immigration have during the last year, entirely changed their views on the subject. They have learned the truth that the Japanese coolie is even a greater menace to the existence of the white race, to the progress and prosperity of our country than is the Chinese coolie.

But if there has been danger from Asiatic imigration to our state before, that danger has not lessened now.

On the contrary it has increased.

The great calamity which befell San Francisco will furnish the Orient with lurid tales of opportunity for employment and profit. California, the land of fabulous wealth, revenue and mountains of gold, and San Francisco with its wonderful wages will be exploited before the ignorant coolies until they will come in ship loads like an endless swarm of rats.


http://www.sfmuseum.org/1906.2/invasion.html


cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 01:01 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown wrote:
Quote:
But let's move on. Your Grandfather certainly faced the racism of the anti-immigrant movement. I was wrong about the timing of the exclusion of Japanese from immigration... but there was very strong anti-Japanese sentiment which led to the "Gentleman's agreement" in 1906 which practically halted Japnese immigration. The complete legal exclusion of Japanese people from immigrating was passed in 1924.


But your original contention was that all illegal immigration were Asians. How many other (than Chinese) Asians were illegal immigrants since 1906? I want to see you back up this claim?
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 01:13 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I have conceded the point. It was only Chinese people who were legally excluded in the latter part of 19th century.

However, Japanese immigrants were targets of racist anti-immigrant propaganda in the early 1900s which claimed they wouldn't assimilate, would bring disease and would steal jobs from Americans. This led to an effort to exclude all "Asiatics" which resulted in a policy that practically stopped legal Japanese immigration in 1906 and a complete legal exclusion of all Japanese people in 1924.

My main point is that the anti-immigrant propaganda that is hurled at Hispanic immigrants today-- and that you seem to support, would be very familiar to your grandfather.


cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 01:18 pm
@ebrown p,
How? Our grandfather immigrated to Hawaii as a legal immigrant. My father, uncles, and aunt, were all "naturalized" citizens when Hawaii became a territory of the US. My siblings and I are third generation American.

Where's the comparison?
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 01:33 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Anti-Immigrant groups didn't want your grandfather in America. They painted Japanese people (regardless of status) as "threats to American culture" and of bringing disease and stealing American jobs. Your grandfather was lucky. Many people of his generation, particularly if they came as contract laborers, were deported.

There is a common experience shared by Japanese and Hispanic immigrants, particularly in the rhetoric used to attack them. Your grandfathers story is the same as Hispanic legal immigrants. My point is that the anti-immigrant groups attacking immigrants haven't changed much.

I am wondering. If you found out that your grandfather did break the law to get here, would your opinion on illegal immigration change?

dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 01:36 pm
@ebrown p,
It was only four years ago (2007) that the state of New Mexico voted down the law that prohibited Japanese/Chinese and east Indians from owning property in the state of New Mexio.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 01:56 pm
@ebrown p,
I know all about the discrimination against most minority groups in contemporary America. I also know that most Europeans were discriminated against early in our history.

During my lifetime, I have lived the anti-Japanese sentiment in this country, so you're not telling me anything I don't know.

What you also seem to be ignorant about is that Japanese and Hispanics have always gotten along in this country - generally speaking.

The difference between the Japanese and Hispanic experience in the US is that the majority of Japanese have advanced economically, and most of our children have married into other cultures/races. When I say most, I would guess over 90%. I'm not aware of any other racial minority group in the US with that kind of record.

If ignorant people wish to continue their racist rhetoric against Japanese-Americans, they're too ignorant to be bothered with.

If whites wish to discriminate against Hispanics or Arabs, I will advocate for them, because our country shouldn't have to defend Hispanic-Americans or Arab-Americans. They are all citizens of this country, and should enjoy all the freedoms and opportunities everybody else enjoys.

If you're so concerned about whether my grandfather "broke the law" to get here, you're a racist bigot, because you don't speak to other races breaking US immigration laws - including Europeans.

You're a loser and a racist pig.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 02:22 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The difference between the Japanese and Hispanic experience in the US is that the majority of Japanese have advanced economically, and most of our children have married into other cultures/races. When I say most, I would guess over 90%. I'm not aware of any other racial minority group in the US with that kind of record.


That's an interesting thing for you to do, to point out the differences between two ethnic groups... sure I will play.

First, the slur that Japanese immigrants don't/can't assimilate was common in anti Japanese propaganda. Of course this is still said about Hispanic immigrants. As I pointed out, the anti-immigrant rhetoric, at its core, hasn't changed that much.

Your suggestion that Hispanics don't marry other races is ridiculous. There are lots of examples-- Alberto Gonzalez married, not one, but two non-Hispanic Americans. After the second or third generation, any immigrant group assimilates and intermarries-- Japanese immigrants and Hispanic immigrants are the same in this regard.

Second, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think you are claiming that Japanese economic success is a factor of race. At least I hope you are not making this claim.

Economic success is a factor of history. For much of our history, it was much easier to exclude Japenese immigrants, by law and because of distance. This meant that the people coming were starting out as people of means. There is also, due to history and geography, a greater number of Hispanic immigrants now-- particularly migrant workers.

Of course, there are plenty of examples of the descendents of immigrants rising to success - Justice Sotomayor and Sen. Daniel Inouye among them.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 02:27 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown wrote:
Quote:
First, the slur that Japanese immigrants don't/can't assimilate was common in anti Japanese propaganda. Of course this is still said about Hispanic immigrants. As I pointed out, the anti-immigrant rhetoric, at its core, hasn't changed that much.


The history of Hispanics in this country goes back into the earliest history of this country, but Asian American history in this country is less than 200 years. Your point doesn't make any sense. Show me where Hispanic intermarriage is anywhere near 90% in the US? You're looking at very different histories of the two countries; Japan and Mexico. Tell us how they compare?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 02:40 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown wrote:
Quote:
Your suggestion that Hispanics don't marry other races is ridiculous. There are lots of examples-- Alberto Gonzalez married, not one, but two non-Hispanic Americans. After the second or third generation, any immigrant group assimilates and intermarries-- Japanese immigrants and Hispanic immigrants are the same in this regard.


No, you are totally ignorant and wrong! Just because you can name one Hispanic who married non-Hispanics is not only laughable but shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Just in our family (mine and my wife's) Out of 16 children of marriage age, 11 married non-Japanese; that's 100%. We have Japanese friends who's children married outside of our culture. Quit making a fool of yourself on topics you can only guess at.

ebrown wrote:
Quote:
Second, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think you are claiming that Japanese economic success is a factor of race. At least I hope you are not making this claim.


Where did I say that? Please cut and paste from any of my posts where I made such a claim?

ebrown wrote:
Quote:
Economic success is a factor of history. For much of our history, it was much easier to exclude Japenese immigrants, by law and because of distance. This meant that the people coming were starting out as people of means. There is also, due to history and geography, a greater number of Hispanic immigrants now-- particularly migrant workers.


Wrong! People who immigrated to the US came because of job opportunities. That hasn't changed since the creation of this country.

ebrown wrote:
Quote:
Of course, there are plenty of examples of the descendents of immigrants rising to success - Justice Sotomayor and Sen. Daniel Inouye among them.


This only proves that this country has made progress in equality. Those who have the desire and motivation to succeed usually can. This wasn't always true, but it's obvious in all sectors of our economy that those who have the knowledge, motivation, and desire can usually succeed. It's more a level playing field than it was half a century ago.

I'll add one more note: It wasn't that long ago that ads or newscasters never had minorities in them. Today they are common. That's progress.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 03:35 pm
@cicerone imposter,
These statistics you are throwing out are interesting. I just did a bit of research on intermarriage rate and you are correct. There is a higher intermarriage rate between Asians and other races (particularly whites) then between Hispanics and other races. However the Hispanic intermarriage rates are in the middle. The intermarriage rates between Blacks and other races are even lower (whatever that means).

But this raises the more interesting question.

Why do these statistical differences between races matter to you?

I am pointing out the similarity in the immigrant experience of Asians and Hispanics-- particularly in the attacks made by anti-immigrant groups. My point is that the arguments made against Asians are the same as the arguments made against Hispanics. The rhetoric, the sentiment and the goals of the anti-immigrant groups are very similar in each case.

The argument was made that Asians don't/can't assimilate was used to justify anti-Asian policies and hatred. These are the exact arguments being used against Hispanics.

What is your point?


cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 03:39 pm
@ebrown p,
It matters, because it means we have progressed way beyond discrimination against Japanese Americans. This all happened in less than fifty years after WWII, when we were rounded up and put into concentration camps by our government.

That's probably also some record in the history of America from outright discrimination to complete integration.

Your attempts to compare Japanese and Hispanics is laughable; other than most immigrants (from Europe too) who suffered from discrimination, you have no case.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 03:46 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
It matters, because it means we have progressed way beyond discrimination against Japanese Americans. This all happened in less than fifty years after WWII, when we were rounded up and put into concentration camps by our government.

That's probably also some record in the history of America from outright discrimination to complete integration.


Yes! and you and I agree that this is a great thing.

Not that long ago people were publishing pamphlets about the "invasion" of immigrants from Japan who were threatening American culture. Now you never hear this type of hateful rhetoric about Japanese immigrants.

I look forward to the day when we can progress beyond hateful rhetoric against Hispanic Americans.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jan, 2010 03:50 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I should also mention that currently, it is Americans of Arab descent that face the worst hatred and discrimination.

I hope that we progress beyond anti-Arab discrimination quickly.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 12:56:22