Aggravated Felons
As you may or may not know, the U.S. is currently debating whether to adopt an extreme or a moderate approach to immigration reform.
In the extreme category, you find a bill that went all the way through the House of Representatives* with language that would designate undocumented immigrants as “aggravated felons.”
In November of 2003, I wrote a bit about the rhetoric of illegal immigration, noting that:
Immigration becomes illegal, but not necessarily immoral, as a function of migration laws that [tend to]… change dramatically.
However, such distinctions are often absent in contemporary political rhetoric which characterizes illegal immigrants, first and foremost, as lawbreakers.
It’s only logical that those who benefit politically from creating categories of disenfranchised peoples (e.g., octaroons, ghost detainees, illegal aliens) would seek to consecrate these terms in constitutional garb.
I think they’ll fail this time but it’s worth stressing that rhetoric is always a key component of every political movement.
My experience with U.S. culture suggests that we are unprepared for our duty as the stewards of the U.S. Constitution. Simply put, we don’t speak or listen to the English language nearly as carefully as we should.
To make my point, I’ll relink to a Salon article from October of 2000 that I cited just a few days ago, in a similar context.
It will “blow your mind.”
The people’s house, huh? We’ll come back to demographics and enfranchisement shortly. But here’s some food for thought.