An Anthropological Explanation Of Why We Must End The Humanitarian Crisis At The Southern Border
We are told by cultural anthropologists and those who study prehistory, that we all share common DNA with an extremely limited population of humans, Neanderthals, and other prehistoric species of man. In essence, we are a species that are closely related to one another regardless of whether we live in the United States, Uganda, Italy, China, or any of the nations that make up the current panopoly of countries in the world. On the most basic level, we are all cousins. Our relationship may be distant, but it is there.
What makes that important? One of the things that we understand as humans is that familial association tends to make people more likely to empathize with each other. We often see family as more important to our species survival than our friends or strangers. We tend to be more protective of those who we are related to. We protest louder when they are abused. We fight harder when they are in danger. We risk more when they are in untenable positions.
But it seems that we have forgotten that our species is familial. We have determined that mankind falls into a we versus they dichotomy although our genetics tell us differently. We see the color of our skin as proof that we are totally different sub-species. Blacks and whites are different. We've heard that argument through the years of slavery, through the Hitlerian eugenics and "master race theories, through innumerable racial exterminations. We see the difference in religions and beliefs as proof of difference. Christians are different from Jews who are different from Muslims, who are different from Atheists. We even see language as a potential proof of difference. Babel makes us a set of species.
But no matter what we think, we are all related. That which binds us is much more important than anything that separates us. We are ultimately one people, one race. Our borders are artificial {though at times necessary}. We have a moral and ethical obligation to be family to all of us. It is what really makes us human.
It is exactly for this reason that so many people find the actions of our government relating to the separation of children from their parents so abhorrent. These children are ultimately all of our children. They are innocent pawns in a political game of "gotcha". They could be any of our children being manipulated and traumatized for reasons that they do not and can not understand. The question here should not be whether parents and children who are seeking asylum and protection in the United States should be treated like criminals {asylum seekers are not criminals, illegal immigrants are guilty of only a misdemeanor}. The question should be how can this country save those who need to be saved? How do we insure that our cousins are safe and the criminals, terrorists, and gang members that are terrorizing them can be effectively dealt with?
These people are our relatives. They are our genetic cousins who are seeking a better life. It is only because they were unlucky enough to be born into a hell that is not of their own making that they need our help. I ask every American.....what if the mother and child who were at the border, fleeing from the cartels and gangs, your sisters and nieces and nephews? Would knowing that they were your close relatives change your view of whether they should be allowed into our country? Let's stop being partisans on one side of the political spectrum or the other and start acting as if these people are really our genetic cousins. Let them in and work together to solve the real problems that are causing this mass exodus.
Tags
Who is online
47 visitors
Which people?
It can't be the bleeding heart Leftists of the United States because you won't find a single one stepping up to invite "all our children" into their own homes. And you won't find a single one volunteering to pay for housing and food out of their pockets. They want the government to take other people's money to pay for it. The truth is the political Left is only trying to win the next election.
It can't be the Mexican government (or El Salvador, or Honduras, etc.) because if they were genuinely outraged, they'd be doing something to help their own citizens.
It can't be the leaders of all the other nations of the world, because none of them are stepping up to take in any of these so-called "asylum seekers." In fact, there is a United Nations process for dealing with refugees seeking asylum and no one is even trying to use it.
The truth is everyone expects the United States government to deal with the all of the poor and uneducated people of the Western Hemisphere, so spare me the fake outrage BS.
That's what I would do and I think there are a lot of parallels between the refugee problems today and those during Reagan's dirty wars in Latin America, where it was actions of the US which really were driving the influx of refugees. As a country we made the wrong choices then and now. Another parallel is to the refugees from Syria and Iraq where the US hasn't taken any responsibility for a crisis it largely caused through its invasion of Iraq. All of that was foreseeable and was predicted but the Bush administration really didn't care about the overseas consequences of its vile policies, and they refused to take any responsibility for those consequences because they're on the other side of an ocean and we don't have to worry about those refugees clamoring on our borders or our shores.
But right now we have a xenophobic and reactionary government which lacks both compassion and foresight. THat means these kids and their families are pretty much screwed.
Why should Germany, France or any other country in the EU which wasn't involved in the illegal war against Iraq have to shoulder the burden of the refugees from Iraq and Syria? Shouldn't almost all of those refugees be sent to the US and the UK with a prorated number sent to Poland, Spain and a few other countries dumb enough to help cause a massive refugee crisis?
Thanks, I forget that Australia's right-wing government also helped with the illegal invasion and occupation. So they should get a percentage of those refugees too, but the US deserves by far the vast majority.
No explanation is required, other than basic human decency in my opinion.
Anybody wanting to let more in needs to say what they will give up?
Speaking of Anthropology, there is a good series of lectures put on by CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny and presented by UCSDTV (Go Tritons). and available on youtube.
University of Birmingham (UK) has some similar lectures, also available on youtube.
Anyhow, CARTA had a symposium covering human violence during the pleistocene through the recent holocene.
Not a pretty picture in many cases.
The era of the "caveman diet" had some violence which is documented for us in cave art, in particular.
What has been discovered is, there is documented evidence of these ancient peoples not playing well together. Examples include people in horizontal or upside down positions. This equals dead or dying. Then what has become termed "a pin cushion". A horizontal body with a dozen or more arrows or spears in them. Sometimes this scene is accompanied by others standing around the pin cushion holding their bows up in the air. BTW, there is evidence bow and arrow technology existing many 10s of thousands of years ago.
Similar scenes are depicted as recently as when the Egyptians battled the Sea Peoples. Yes, they existed and the Egyptians gave a pretty good account.
Interestingly, studies of isolated tribes in the South American rain forest often reveal violent outcomes when different tribe come across each other.
IMO, humans are still being humans. There can be just as much violence, only these days we are technically more efficient at conducting violence.
Yet there were peaceful people then, just as today. Only, IMO, anthropology may not be the best resource to prove an inherent peacefulness within humans.
JMO
All the above said, the conflation of border security and what happens once someone arrives on our side of the border (Legally or Illegally) is confusing what needs addressing here.
Seriously, border security belongs in it's own box.
What happens to someone once here belongs in a separate box.
Let's try to maintain a discussion that relates to the topic. Should children be used as collateral damage? Should these forced separations be part of a humanitarian system of immigration? Nobody is arguing the need for comprehensive immigration reform. It is necessary......the argument is how we should approach that immigration reform.
There is no debate about what the end result of a process should be..... a fair and appropriate immigration system for the 21st century. It is our politicians who are to blame who want to put ideology in front of humanity. This includes both democrats and republicans.
We need to start with a position that 98.9% of us are immigrants. That is, and always has been, the nature of our nation. Immigration has always helped America grow and become wealthier and more powerful. We have always debated who should come into the country.....we made many mistakes along the way. Some of the mistakes have been horrible {e.g. the turning away of the Saint Louis in WWII which cost the lives of the Jewish refugees on board}, most have been positive. We have been a good and kind nation that has accepted people seeking political asylum or seeking safety from imminent danger.
This current situation is more than just an immigration issue. It is a moral and humanitarian issue. We are conflating the crime {a low level misdemeanor}, assigning blame {when this was a campaign promise}, and using children as hostages.
We are acting like we have no genetic connection, let alone a moral and humanitarian connection to these people. It is a broader question. Refugees are here today and will be here tomorrow. We need a new, proactive, humane immigration policy that the rest of the world wants to emulate. Not one that brands us as violators of human rights with the children as pawns.
We shouldn't separate them right away, we should give them a bag lunch and show them to the Exit and tell them if they come back they will be arrested and separated from their children. These people spend thousands of dollars to get to our border and then say they're fleeing violence. They should have used that money to buy Guns to protect themselves and fight for their future in their own homeland.
I will restate my post based upon anthropological findings. That is, the assertion that close genetic relationships somehow should result in peaceful interactions between human groups is not a very strong assertion. Anthropologically speaking that must be discounted.
Then combining the subject of border security with the subject of how we should treat people, once they are here (legally or illegally) serves neither subject well.
Other than trying to make a statement to frighten future immigrants from approaching our southern border and create a generation of future enemies of the USA, the current policy of striking fear and anxiety into the young children sereves little other purpose.
"There has to be a better way".
It is not easy, because, there are, in fact, bad elements among those coming in. But there still has to be a better way.
Well most wont like my solution to the issue , but here goes.
Once someone is picked up for illegal entry , they can claim asylum, that's fine , nothing says they have to remain in this country awaiting for an asylum hearing , what I heard on the news today is some cases are taking up to 2 years for initial hearings. They CAN very well be deported to their point of entry.
My solution is to do just that , and send their kids with them ( minimal separation required here if at all).
At the initial time they claim asylum, they are and should be given a date for a hearing , they then are deported to point / border of entry , and remain outside the country UNTIL such time as their asylum hearing. During this time they should also be getting all facts and documentation pertaining to their situation , identity , and medical histories together for review, it is no less than what those that attempt to come to this country legally HAVE to do.
Now here is where I will differ from some, most jail time for illegal entry is from 3-9 months , that should be deferred contingent on the fact the person does not try to reenter the country again illegally, if they do it becomes a felony automatically.
IF they have not tried to come back illegally they should then be eligible to be sponsored by a non related US Citizen that signs an afidavid of financial responsibility for said person or persons , meaning no US or state public assistance until AFTER the asylum petition is decided.
Of course they could always go the legal entry route and avoid all the BS.
And I think the above is what I can agree to , people get their day in court , there isn't any jumping to the head of the line for those that break the law , and the taxpayer doesn't foot a good portion of the bill.
Oh and I wont be responding to any comments.