<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-banner-ad-top">
<div id="gmail-div-gpt-728x90_1" class="gmail-ad-728x90"><div id="gmail-google_ads_iframe_/6177/slm.hotair/articles/728x90_1_0__container__" style="border-color:currentcolor;border-style:none;border-width:0pt;display:inline-block;width:970px;height:90px"></div></div>
</div>
<div class="gmail-row">
<div class="gmail-col-xs-8">
<div class="gmail-article-1">
<h1 class="gmail-article gmail-text-capitalize">No, we’re not “weaponizing” immigration language</h1>
<p class="gmail-byline"><span class="gmail-author gmail-text-uppercase">Jazz Shaw</span>Posted at 7:01 pm on February 3, 2018</p>
<div class="gmail-row gmail-button-span">
<div class="gmail-col-xs-4">
</div></div></div></div></div>
<div class="gmail-col-xs-4">
</div>
<div class="gmail-col-xs-1">
<a href="mailto:?subject=Hot Air story&body=No%2C+we%26%238217%3Bre+not+%26%238220%3Bweaponizing%26%238221%3B+immigration+language https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/03/no-not-weaponizing-immigration-language/">
</a></div><div class="gmail-col-xs-1"><a href="mailto:?subject=Hot Air story&body=No%2C+we%26%238217%3Bre+not+%26%238220%3Bweaponizing%26%238221%3B+immigration+language https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/03/no-not-weaponizing-immigration-language/">
</a>
</div>
<div class="gmail-col-xs-3">
</div><div class="gmail-row gmail-button-span">
</div>
<div class="gmail-row gmail-article-image">
<div class="gmail-col-xs-12">
<img src="https://hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/DeportationICE.jpg">
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail-row gmail-below-content gmail-clearfix">
<div class="gmail-col-xs-12 gmail-article-text">
<div class="gmail-salem-content-injection-wrap"><p>As we prepare for the debate over a possible DACA bill, <a href="http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-chavez-chain-migration-20180131-story.html#nws=mcnewsletter">Leo R. Chavez takes to the pages of the L.A. Times</a>
this week, not to complain about any of the specific policy initiatives
under discussion, but about “the language” we’re using to talk about
immigration. Apparently we’re <em>weaponizing the languag</em>e to make
immigrants look bad… or something. It’s a strange line of attack to
choose, particularly when it’s been liberals and progressives who have
raised the practice of distorting words for their own purposes to an art
form. </p><p class="gmail-see_also"><span class="gmail-text-uppercase">See Also:</span> <a href="https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/05/trump-little-adam-schiff-must-stopped/">Trump: “Little Adam Schiff … must be stopped”</a></p>
<p>There are clearly plenty of words and phrases to choose from in this
debate, and honestly, I was a bit surprised that Chavez didn’t take a
swing at the term illegal alien. Of course, that’s a tough case to make
since the words come straight from the Constitution and centuries of
federal law. Instead, the author spends much of the column space he was
allotted to talk about “chain migration.” It’s a hot topic which even
showed up in the State of the Union address. It’s also been around for
decades, but now it’s being deemed racist and offensive. </p>
<div class="gmail-row">
<div class="gmail-col-xs-8 gmail-text-center">
<div id="gmail-div-gpt-300x250_1" class="gmail-ad-300x250"><div id="gmail-google_ads_iframe_/6177/slm.hotair/articles/300x250_1_0__container__" style="border-color:currentcolor;border-style:none;border-width:0pt;display:inline-block;width:300px;height:250px"></div></div>
</div>
<div class="gmail-col-xs-4">
<div class="gmail-in-article-trending">
<span class="gmail-widgetheader gmail-text-uppercase gmail-center-block">TRENDING:</span>
<h5>
<a href="https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/05/trump-little-adam-schiff-must-stopped/">Trump: "Little Adam Schiff ... must be stopped"</a>
</h5>
<div class="gmail-sharing">
<div class="gmail-share-count"><a href="https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/05/trump-little-adam-schiff-must-stopped/" class="gmail-share gmail-fb"><i class="gmail-fa gmail-small-fb gmail-fa-facebook-official gmail-fa-fw"></i></a><a href="https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/05/trump-little-adam-schiff-must-stopped/" class="gmail-share gmail-tw"><i class="gmail-fa gmail-small-tw gmail-fa-twitter gmail-fa-fw"></i></a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote><p>Chain migration is not the only academic concept or
demographic reality manipulated to sound threatening in public discourse
about immigration.</p>
<p>Chain migration has, since the 1960s, referred to the process by
which migrants from one city or town follow each other to a new
destination, possibly in another country. Thanks to chain migration,
even low-income families can create or maintain social networks and
access a wealth of social capital. Early arrivals support newcomers with
a place to stay, resources and information about the local labor
market, schools and culture. Chain migration facilitates cultural
integration.</p>
<p>Chain migration happens in part because we allow immigrants into the country on the basis of family ties.</p></blockquote>
<p>Curiously, Chavez seems to shoot his own argument down a bit later in
the essay while criticizing the President’s use of the phrase. He
complains that it, “<em>evokes unwashed masses invading the country — one person after another in an unbroken chain</em>.”</p>
<p>Well… <em>yes</em>. It does evoke precisely that image because that’s
exactly what we’re talking about. Of course, it’s the author, not
Trump, who chooses to add the phrase “unwashed masses” which could make
it sound significantly more derogatory I suppose. But it’s obviously a
description of a “chain” of people who arrive based on their “links” to
the first person to make it safely over the border. Also, and somewhat
ironically, choosing unwashed masses takes what was historically a
pejorative term and spins it into a mashup of a couple of references
from <em>The New Colossus</em>. (“Huddled masses yearning” and the visuals of, “wretched refuse of your teeming shore.”)</p>
<p>Also note that Chavez, along with too many others in this debate, refers continuously to “chain <em>migration</em>.”
It’s an interesting choice in this context because migration simply
implies movement. When you describe migration, be it by humans, animals
or chemical compounds spreading from one medium to another, all you’re
really talking about is relocation. It could be applied to
hunter-gatherers fleeing a drought stricken area for a region with more
rainfall. But what we’re really discussing here is chain <em>immigration</em>,
and that’s a very different word with specific legal connotations. It
shares little in common with simple migration and obviously involves
something more properly described in terms of being a chain.</p>
<p>Chavez also takes issue with the concept of “anchor babies” as being
clearly racist or some other “ist” on a long list of sins. That’s a
separate part of the immigration discussion (and a worthwhile one to
have), but it’s also not weaponized language. It’s a description of a
process. And much like the venerable term illegal alien, it serves a
purpose in communicating clearly. Attacking the words being used doesn’t
move the conversation forward or offer any new solutions. </p>
</div></div></div>
<br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+<br><br> Harold F. Schiffman<br><br>Professor Emeritus of <br> Dravidian Linguistics and Culture <br>Dept. of South Asia Studies <br>University of Pennsylvania<br>Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305<br><br>Phone: (215) 898-7475<br>Fax: (215) 573-2138 <br><br>Email: <a href="mailto:haroldfs@gmail.com" target="_blank">haroldfs@gmail.com</a><br><a href="http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/" target="_blank">http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/</a> <br><br>-------------------------------------------------</div>
</div>