An Informed Discussion

As with much of American politics, the current immigration debate is filled mostly with polemics and demagoguery. It is often difficult to find a nuanced discussion of the issues and the wider context in which they exist. Luckily over the holiday break I was able to dive into two books on the subject, both of which provide a very contextualized account of central issues and controversies and where they reside in the course of debate.

The first one I read is They Take Our Jobs: And Twenty Other Myths About Immigration by Aviva Chomsky. It was a great book. Chomsky identifies key myths that are pushed about immigration from both pro and con positions. It places the immigration issue within the larger context of neoliberal reforms. While I wish some of the entries were longer, always good to leave the reader interested in finding out more, the book really stands out as a critically engaged account of the issues. One thing that particularly stood out was the role of marginalized labor and its place in the U.S. economy from the time of the American Revolution.

Ex Mex: From Migrants to Immigrants by Jorge Castañeda, a former foreign minister of Mexico, examines the historical context that situates the current debate. He also provides an excellent discussion of possible policies and the likely proponents and opponents to these policies. Examining the ways immigration from Mexico has changed, but also how it remains remarkably similar to previous decades, helps to identify that what we face is nothing new. Also noteworthy is that it provides a Mexican perspective on the issue, particularly from a person who has had a lot of influence and experience dealing with this issue at the highest levels of government.

While these are just two of many possible books that provide accounts of the current immigration debate, they are both very accessible and well-written. A proper discussion of immigration and its ramifications must start somewhere and these are good resources for that discussion.

A People's Economist

A recent article by Joseph Stiglitz, a noted economist, provides a concise and directed critique of the havoc created by the Bush administration. He details the economic mismanagement and financial audacity that has damaged the U.S. and will require significant effort to redact. He provides a good starting point for a discussion of the steps to be taken to fix this problem.

As far as economists go, I find Stiglitz to be one of the one's I admire most. He doesn't accept many of the "facts" spun out by economists and has worked to increase nuance among economic analysis of the "invisible hand" by identifying informational asymmetries and their role in markets.

While he still represents a more mainstream view than I would ascribe to, I find value in his analysis and his work for social change and justice. His recent involvement in the independent film "The Big Sellout" was excellent. In this film he commented on the commodification of goods and the negative effects that it had on various countries. It was a really good movie and provided some clear examples where the Washington Consensus was failing those it claims to be "developing".

Justice May Be Blind But Her System Is Not

A new report identifies that the rising rate of imprisonment in the U.S. has not resulted in a decline in the actual crime rate that many neo-conservative ideologues had predicted. The report "Unlocking America" also identifies that the massive expense that is incurred from this explosion of the prison population represents a significant burden on society. The U.S. has often considered itself a "law and order" society where revenge and justice are used in the same breath. Ideas of deterrence and paternalism inform the vast majority of our criminal policies. The linkages between the increased inequalities and hopelessness experienced by those who are born without is something that is often discarded as an important factor.

It is time for the U.S. to look to other models of justice that have found more success and attempt to create massive change. One significant barrier to any reform is the massive profit that is being made by the corporations that are building and running these new mega-prisons, as well as those industries (food, bedding, security) that are making an exorbitant profit from providing substandard services (in a parallel with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan).

The outdated notion of "lock them up and throw away the key" clearly has not provided Americans with the level of security they desire. A more nuanced approach to sentencing and rehabilitation is necessary to provide real safety. The further polarization of wealthy Americans into gated communities and the poor into squalid decaying inner cities only exacerbates this crucial problem. A serious focus must be made to close the gaps between the richest and the poorest. This must also be coupled with substantive reforms to our democratic process that allows for a more inclusive civil society where more voices have a chance to be heard.

The prison problem is a prime example of the ideology of neo-conservativism being passed off as fact. There are many different options for punitive actions in a criminal justice system. In the U.S. only the most expensive and least supported (in terms of facilitating a safer society) in the empirical literature are utilized. Examples such as those currently used in Scandinavian countries can help us to start a dialogue and create substantive reform.

A further point that must be identified is the fact that in terms of costs "white collar crime" represents a significantly larger drain on society than violent crime does. Though those folks that commit this sort of crime are more likely to receive a slap on the wrist versus real substantive punishment. When the quality of the lawyer is one of the main determinants of a persons chance of getting a fair trial, our justice system cannot be called just. The fact that crimes committed by the poor are those that are labeled a "social problem" just shows the complete bias and unobjective nature with which prosecutions are handed out. Those who cannot afford to pay for a good lawyer get a public defender, one of the most overworked and underpaid jobs. This vast discrepancy in quality of trial is just a further indication of the inequitable system under which we live.

Social Problems Require A Social Solution

A recent report from the UK finds that obesity is not the individual problem that most people seem to think. Instead, social factors appear to play a larger role in determining whether or not someone becomes obese. For someone in sociology this seems reasonable, but for those not familiar with the field it may be hard to understand how social forces can create social problems.

Some will still argue that it is an individual's "choice" and responsibility to control and regulate themselves. This atomistic view of the world misses the way in which our choices and ideas are constrained by the social world in which we live. For example, energy dense foods (e.g. fast food) that are cheap and available to the poor are more likely to lead to obesity than more nutrient dense food (e.g. fresh fruits and vegetables). While many would say that this just means that the poor need to "make better choices," the fact that these findings show a clear pattern by sociodemographic factors indicate that ideas of choice and responsibility are not sufficiently nuanced to get at the reasons for difference.

Societal factors such as sedentary lifestyle, energy saving devices, automobility, and energy dense cheap foods are all on the rise. Social problems require social solutions and this report just highlights this. A considered response is necessary to combat this problem. It is important to identify and attempt to work on structural factors and not just the symptoms. Issues of consumerism and excess consumption must be examined along with things such as education. We also must come to hold corporations more accountable for their actions and products. Simply providing the nutritional information of the products is not sufficient. It is true that people have the ability to decide what they are consuming. The fact that it is often easier to consume something fast and unhealthy than something self-prepared and nutritious shows a failure of the market to provide adequate alternatives.

Utterly Appalling

A recent report identifies that the Millennium Development Goals in the area of maternal death are woefully off target. This critical issue is something that is often overlooked when health policies and practices are being implemented in international development. This absence is a a crucial one and one that I can't honestly understand. As has been noted by distinguished authors like Amartya Sen, health costs are much lower in countries that are just implementing health policies. This is because the initial steps taken to set up a clinic or extend the range of health care professionals in most developing countries is much smaller.

Another important aspect that is identified in the article is the estimated twenty million unsafe abortions that go on every year. This is a significant contributing factor to maternal death. Safe, legal, and accessible abortions are something that must exist as the need for them is always there. The article does not identify how many of these unsafe abortions are actually illegal but it can be assumed that many unsafe abortions are the result of nation wide bans on abortions. This forces all women, even those who have life threatening pregnancies, to have a "back-alley" abortion.

The report concludes that one reason for such little progress is that in many societies women are viewed as nothing more than a vessel for reproduction. This extremely disheartening conclusion indicates the importance of positive action on behalf of women all over the world to increase their status. Cultural relativism must have its place in discussion of international development, but it cannot be used as a tool to allow domination of marginalized populations.

Time to Abstain from Abstinence

While those in the public health field have been familiar with this finding for some time it is worth reiterating the point in light of even more evidence that identifies the inadequacies of abstinence education. This report is particularly damning in light of the position of abstinence education as the only form of sex education that is able to receive federal funding. This sort of extreme ideological policy without any concern of its effectiveness typifies the policies of the Bush administration and its backers in Congress (in such wide ranging fields from health care to the Iraq war). Teaching that sex is bad in school stands no chance of competing with the rampant hyper-sexualized messages that teens see throughout popular culture. The report identifies that teaching students about the use of condoms and their importance in preventing the spread of diseases and reducing the risk of pregnancy are much more effective. While academic literature has never been the way in which Bush and his supporters have constructed their policies, it can be hoped that those who replace them take this sort of work into account when attempting to clean up the mess left by those currently in power.

False Contrition

Despite China's supposed attempt to reign in bad business practices, a recent report found that some of the merchandise for the upcoming 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing has been produced under such deplorable practices as child labor, forced overtime, and extremely low wages. Along with other recent problems such as lead paint in childrens' toys and poisonous contamination of pet food, it is difficult to argue that a sufficient regulatory industry exists for products made in China.

This sort of behavior is accepted as normal in the global economy and does not bring much outcry. The entire business of hosting the Women's World Cup and then the Olympics in totalitarian state that abuses its people is disheartening at best and a crime against humanity itself at worst. I fail to understand how we can justify such close ties with such a despicable and deplorable regime. If it didn't have as much capital or as large of a consumer base, there is no way we would be as involved with it (see Myanmar, Syria, North Korea). The fact that companies and countries are willing to make condolences and refrain from criticizing Chinese policies is one of the largest failings of public morality of our time. The money we invest in China is used daily to repress and create fear within an already troubled country. While we see photos of the massive amount of development and consumerism in the ports and cities, we don't see the rampant extreme poverty experienced by those in the rural areas. While engagement with all forms of government is important in the international system, such unquestioning patronage to China is dangerous and provides no carrots or sticks (international relations terms for rewards or punishments, respectively) for them to move toward democracy or more adequate worker protections for their wide range of businesses. The brutal repression of democracy movements in China continues and companies like Google continue to uphold the abhorrent "Great Firewall" while still claiming some level of ethical business. It will be interesting to look back and see how these facilitators of oppression are viewed when the history of this time is written.