Trump Doubles Down on Racially Tinged Nativism — Horowitz
Rob Horowitz, Guest MINDSETTER™
Trump Doubles Down on Racially Tinged Nativism — Horowitz
Using a broad brush to blame the entire 80,000 people strong Minnesota Somali community for a fraud scheme that 90 people — far less than 1% of that community — have been charged with, Mr. Trump called all people of Somali heritage in our nation “garbage” and said we don’t want people of Somali heritage in the United States. Steven Miller, the main architect of Trump’s immigration policy, followed up, telling Fox News, “If Somalians cannot make Somalia successful, why would we think their track record would be any different in the United States?”
And just in case anyone missed the racial overtones of the administration’s argument, at a rally several days later, President Trump reprised his comments about supposed “shithole” countries. “Why is it we only take people from shithole countries, right? Why can’t we have some people from Norway, Sweden — just a few — let us have a few from Denmark?’” remarked the president. In other words, why can’t we just have more white people.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTFor anyone who doubts that is exactly what Mr. Trump meant, he is backing up his racially tinged rhetoric with action. Recently, the administration paused immigration applications from people from 19 nations, including Somalia, all of whom have majority non-white populations and put in place travel bans for more than 30 countries. Earlier in the year, the president gave special refugee status to white South Africans, while suspending existing refugee programs that were bringing people of color from other nations in Africa, as well as several other nations around the world, all who were under far worse conditions and greater threat. He also revoked temporary protected status for Haitian immigrants.
The same cultural and racial arguments President Trump and Stephen Miller are making against today’s wave of immigrants, whether they be from Somalia, Afghanistan or South America, were made against Jewish, Italian and Irish immigrants in the early 20th century. The Immigration Act of 1924, for instance, was specifically aimed at severely restricting the number of Italians and Jews coming to our shores because both these groups were viewed as having distinct negative intrinsic characteristics that would make them culturally difficult to assimilate. As one of the sponsors of the legislation, Senator David Reed remarked, its goal was ‘homogeneity.”
Based on a similar nativist vision of our nation, these arguments are as wrong-headed today as they were 100 years ago. Research shows that today’s immigrants are assimilating as rapidly as previous generations of immigrants, enriching our nation culturally and economically.
Doubling down on this approach is also bad politics, as an overwhelming majority of Americans still believe we remain a nation of immigrants and that we are a nation best understood as an idea--not one defined by blood and soil. Nearly 8-in-10 (78%), for instance, believe that “America is best understood as a nation built around the idea that all people, regardless of the circumstances of their birth or station in life, have equal rights and freedoms,” according to a Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) poll. “Just 19% believe that “America is best understood as a nation comprised of people with a shared heritage and homeland.”
Mr. Trump’s success on border security provided an opportunity for him to declare victory and then move to lead an effort to adopt comprehensive immigration reform, marrying continuing tough border security with offering a path to citizenship for the ‘dreamers,” whose parents brought them to this nation as children, and long-term undocumented residents who have contributed to our nation’s economy and communities. Support for a path to citizenship for both these categories of immigrants here illegally has increased to 60%, according to a new PRRI poll.
Once again, the president has made the wrong choice substantively and politically. Instead of working to establish a sustainable immigration policy in keeping with our nation’s founding ideals, he decided to move the ugly racial underpinnings of his existing approach, front and center. Mr. Trump’s approval rating on immigration today is only 43% — a decrease of 5% points since March, documents PRRI. His frontal racial assaults will continue to turn what was one of the president’s signature political strengths into an area of weakness.
Most Americans realize that immigrants come to our shores to build a new life attracted by the promise of America and should not be judged by the conditions in their home countries from which they are fleeing. As President Kennedy put it: “Since the beginning, immigration has been an affirmation of our success, not a threat to it. People risk everything to reach this land because they believe in our greatness — our fair laws, our good values, our promises and possibilities. We should not worry when the striving and suffering arrive on our shores; we should worry when they stop coming at all.”
That is the vision of immigration that matches the greatness of our nation — a vision truly worth fighting for. Its fruition, unfortunately, will have to await a new president.
He is an Adjunct Professor of Political Science at the University of Rhode Island.