Illegal immigrants

Illegal immigrants

            Immigration has been and continues to an economic, social, and political threat to the United States. The US registers the highest number of immigrants from Mexico. The trend of immigration began many years back and since the government has been trying to contain it and deal with illegal immigrants. However, the population of undocumented grew into millions and organized themselves into unions. In this paper, I argue that real exclusion, support from organizations, and local communities sparked mobilizations by undocumented immigrants in the US.

Some of the economic conditions that worsened conditions for low-income immigrants in US cities are restrictive policies and gentrification of cities. There was a lack of political goodwill to support the economic endeavors of illegal immigrants in the cities. The Federal and local governments were hostile and unreceptive to the immigrants. Business politicians opposed the employment immigrants as day laborers because they offered cheap services, thereby denying locals the opportunity to get employments. The politicians, therefore, pushed for the adoption of discriminative and strict rules against the immigrants. Denying them the opportunity to work and licenses to operate business worsened conditions for low-income immigrants in US cities. The gentrification of cities pushed low-income earners from cities. Authorities began the gentrification of cities to increase taxes and cope up with harsh economic conditions. Also, landlords wanted to make more profits by elevating their houses to higher social status. By doing so, houses that were affordable to the immigrants became costly worsening conditions for low-income immigrants. Most of them move out of cities since they could no longer afford rent and the soaring cost of basic needs.

The gentrification and hostility from the governments made the immigrants feel excluded. The exclusion of the immigrants created grievances. Most cities and towns selectively unconstitutional restrictions and violated the immigrants’ constitutional rights to education, employment, and the right to own property. As a result, they felt dehumanized and started to express their grievances through protests (Nicholls & Uitermark, 2017). Organizations that were sympathetic to them offered them technical, legal, and financial support. The supporting organization informed them of their rights and provided them with the means to express themselves. The day laborers shared the same problems. Therefore, they constructed bonds, and with the resources from organizations and support from local communities, they formed unions (Nicholls & Uitermark, 2017). Religious groups, social services organizations, liberal residence, and other human rights advocates played a significant role in the mobilization of the immigrants.

The mobilization of immigrants strengthened and gave them a voice to speak in unity about their grievances. They became stronger and stronger and gradually grew into a political group with high mobilization capacities in Los Angeles. The cohesion of organizations facilitated the development of union mobilization into strong political entities (Urban Movement, 2020). Several innovative organizations began to flourish in Los Angeles. Conditions and growing interdependencies encouraged cooperation amongst various immigrant groups. Therefore, the small immigrant organizations became together and developed into a single large entity. They developed strong ties through critical campaigns such as immigration reforms, a living wage, and many others (Urban Movement, 2020). Also, as the more organizations joined together, they developed robust infrastructure and great mobilization capacities.

Moreover, they began getting the attention of the media and support of local communities all over the country (Nicholls & Uitermark, 2017). They piled pressure on the national government, giving them access to key political figures. Consequently, the local, poor, and small social movements transformed into a large national political entity.

The issue of immigrant mobilization was not only in the United States but also in Paris, France. However, in the United States, the mobilization transformed into a huge political movement while in France, it did not reach that level. In the US, the government fuelled the mobilization by developing and implementing discriminating policies against immigrants. The policies were unwelcoming and accommodative (Nicholls & Uitermark, 2017).

Bottom of Form

The Federal immigration restriction and denial of undocumented immigrants attracted the sympathy of liberal locals, national organizations, and churches. As a result, the mobilization shifted from the local level to the national level since the main threat was the Federal government. However, in France, the government dealt with immigrants at local levels. They integrated immigrants into the country and allowed then to work and live in the country (Nicholls & Uitermark, 2017). By absorbing the undocumented immigrants, their numbers significantly reduced. The government then focused on sealing the entrance of new immigrants. Therefore, the mobilizations did not reach to the national level as it happened in the US.

Indeed immigrants pose grave social, economic, and political threats to the host countries. Therefore, countries such as the United States implement restrictive policies that affect the livelihood of immigrants. However, immigrants feel that they have rights, just like the locals. Therefore, they mobilized themselves into groups and fought for their rights. Restrictive laws denying immigrants recognition and access to emplacement sparkled the mobilization. They received financial, intellectual, and moral support from organizations and locals. As a result, the local social immigrants’ movements developed into a national political movement.

References

Top of Form

Nicholls, W., & Uitermark, J. (2017). Cities and social movements: Immigrant rights activism in the US, France, and the Netherlands, 1970-2015.

Urban Movement. (2020). [Class Handouts]. Lecture, week 10.