Nativist — the new political slur

“When facts and logic fail,
a scoundrel resorts to character assassination.” (Unknown)

A new slur is making the rounds today in the debate over illegal aliens. “Nativist.” It is a favorite of finger pointing liberals and the mainstream media and is designed to label and minimize anyone who objects to giving the illegal aliens a free pass and a short road to citizenship. For them it is intended to connote an ignorant, intolerant, white trash bully thus rendering those with whom they disagree valueless — and their opinions even less.

That seems to be a particular habit of the left for the past decade or so. Collectively, they have been without a solution for twenty years and seem to exist solely for the purpose of criticizing the solutions of others. And one of their favorite tactics is to slander others by branding them with simplistic, but truly ugly, characterizations — racist, sexist, homophobe, and now nativist. It is reminiscent of the bleak days of Joe McCarthy who labeled all those who disagreed as “communists.”

So, in this day and age, one cannot doubt the guilt of the young men from Duke without being labeled a racist. Never mind that the allegations of the stripper reeked of implausibility and the prosecutor reeked of political opportunism. Or, one cannot challenge the wisdom or feasibility of forced bussing of school children without being labeled as racist and elitists. Never mind, that in the end the experiment proved worthless, and in some instances harmful.

And today, in Oregon, one cannot object to the concept of gay marriage or a “civil union” which replicates all of the rights and duties of marriage, without being labeled a “homophobe.” Never mind that no one, particularly those legislators who pressed for its passage, has the slightest idea about the depth of the legal quagmire that they will create.

And if this form of character assassination were not bad enough, those who leap so quickly to its use are also the same people who routinely invent new words and phrases to “soften” the image of those who are actually in the wrong. So “serial sexual predators” become “recidivists”, “terrorists” become “guerilla fighters” and “illegal aliens” become “undocumented workers.”

In the aftermath of the Fresh Del Monte raid, the Oregonian carried story after story about the raid. Most were either sympathetic to the illegals, critical of Fresh Del Monte or denunciations of the federal authorities who conducted the raid. Not one suggested that those here illegally should be held to account. Not one suggested the extraordinary burden these illegals place upon the justice system or the welfare and healthcare systems. Not one discussed the burden imposed on our education system — particularly when most speak little or no English.

If you should you raise those questions, if you should express your dismay, or suggest laws passed generations ago should be enforced then you are labeled a racist — or now a “nativist.” And the reason for such a reaction is clear. Those who use such labels have no answers for these legitimate questions. To avoid the questions they engage in character assassination. By engaging in character assassination, they suggest that neither the question nor the questioner is worthy of a response. How rude is that?

But let’s get back to the new slur — “nativist.” I checked with my old friend, Merriam-Webster and it defines “nativism” thusly:

“Function: noun
1 : a policy of favoring native inhabitants as opposed to immigrants
2 : the revival or perpetuation of an indigenous culture especially in opposition to acculturation”

So do you think that definition applies to those who opposed illegal immigration? Do you think that a nation of immigrants opposes immigration, or do they just oppose illegal immigration? Do you think a nation of immigrants who for generation after generation have promoted assimilation are guilty of “perpetuating an indigenous culture”, that they are trying to oppose acculturation?

The fact that people want their borders protected, want their limited resources directed to their citizens’ health, welfare and education first, want their jails and justice system freed from the burden of foreign felons, and want their election system free of fraud by those who are neither citizens nor legal residents, does not make them “nativists.” It merely makes them rational.

By the way, the author of the opening quote isn’t really unknown, it just makes it look more erudite. I made it up.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 06:15 | Posted in Measure 37 | 13 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Jerry

    Right on Larry. Just like they label a “woman’s right to choose” rather than murder of an innocent unborn.

    • ro993ck

      m572k

  • CRAWDUDE

    Well, Bush and his liberal buddies are going to flood the airways with bogus and ebroidered stories about how the illegals somehow put more into society than take out.

    That useless rag called the Oregonian had an article stating that illegals put in 7 billion a year into Soc. Sec. (using SSN’s from legal citizens, dead people……etc…)

    They are trying to sway us into believing that the illegals give more to society than take away. The 7 billion they put into SS is a drop in the bucket compared to the 10’s of billions they take in forms of School benefits, welfare, food stamps, affordable housing, emergency room care, incarceration costs , etc…Not to mention the vast majority don’t pay taxes they steal our ID’s and make up their own ID’s.

    Lets not forget that by employing them in the construction business we drive our own construction member into lower paying jobs or even the unemployment lines. By allowing companies to employ them we lose the money they would have to pay into workers comp. unemployment, SS………amplifying the damage they do to our economy!

    A site I belong to warned us that they (bush and his liberal pals) were going to try flood the papers and TV with stories like this to try and sway people to their views. All lies and distortions!

  • eagle eye

    I hear the part about slandering people who disagree with them on immigration. But Oregon sure invites the “nativist” slur. How many times do you hear people bragging about being “native Oregonians”. Often with the implication that it gives them special authority or privileges in determining how things are done here. I’m not the only one who has picked up on this; it’s been noted in national media.

  • CRAWDUDE

    If native Oregonians wanted a say in this state they needed to have asserted their power a long time ago; there are more non-natives here now!

    Ya snooze, ya lose 😉

    Blues Fest. starts on Wednesday, woohoo!

    • eagle eye

      You’re right, it’s mostly a rearguard thing now. You don’t see nearly as many of those “Native” miniature license plates as you used to. I have nothing against the natives myself, except when they act as if they own the place. But by now, anyone can see that they’re history. Anyhow, most Oregonians were always probably one generation away from being outsiders. Except when the Indians, oops, Native Americans ran the place. Even there I’m not so sure.

  • Devietro

    I guess I am a legalist because I prefer legal immigrants to illegal ones. But I am ok with that.

  • Richard

    While it is being the term nativist is used ad hominem, it dose fit the collectivist tendencies of those who oppose immigration. Like other branches of collectivist mainly fascisms and racism the tendency of the Nativist is to believe community overrides individual rights especially that of property, force self sacrifice of the individual and, intolerance of those outside the group.

    • CRAWDUDE

      I would agree with you on your points except for the fact that you lump illegal aliens and legal immigrants as the same, they are not.

      One group (illegal aliens) are criminally in this country after criminally evading our laws by crossing the border. They are subject to cite and release unless they committ the most henious crimes. No legal immigrant or citizen of the US is given that benefit, nor should they be. At the same time neither should an illegal alien.

      The other (legal immigrants) have been screened for both medical and criminal backgrounds to ensure the safety of their new countrymen and fellow legal immigrants. They have also given their word that they will meet all immigration requirements for 7 years. Once it has been shown that they have met all the requirements they promised to then they are granted full citizenship rights under the law, as they should be.

      The difference is legality, we are a country of laws and those laws should be respected and enforced. While some liberals will call people who do not support criminal activity racists’, I do not. I call the liberals fools that can’t tell the difference between a criminal and a citizen because they are so engulfed with their own false sense of self worth that seeing anything in a rational way that doesn’t agree with their political leanings is impossible. Therefore thier opinions on illegal aliens rights are worthless since they are in a very small minority according to public opinion. Even 65% of the legal immigrants polled believe illegals should be sent home and made to immigrate legally, like they did.

      • Richard

        Not I am not because I do not make the distinction between illegal and legal on the basis of individual liberty. If nor other person right are violated then no crime has been committed.
        Further more the Nativist motive for the immigration process is not to allow legal immigrants but to further imped all immigration.
        The only just system is open boarder where all who wish can come are expectantly process in and monitored. It should not take more than 6 months for application and once arriving at the controlled border no more than 36 hours to examine for health and interview and instruction.

        • Captain_Anon

          I really don’t know what you’re trying to say here. you may want to restate it so we can understand it.

          What i CAN gleam from this is wrong anyway. Just because YOU feel the only illegal activities are those that impact someone else’s personal rights doesn’t make that theory correct. you can’t choose which laws you accept and others you don’t. for one, your idea of “personal rights” is very subjective. the whole reason we have a code of laws is to give definition to what is wrong, to make it objective and easily measureable.

          but on that note, my personal rights ARE in fact violated by illegal immigration. here are but a few of the violations on my rights:

          – stealing from my pocket in order to educate illegal immigrant children. assuming 7500 a year for a kid in school (i know it’s not exact, let’s just use it for assumption purposes) for 12 years is $90,000 per kid. that’s stolen from tax payers AND it’s money that can’t be used for my personal spending OR in other government agencies that NEED the money. such as teh district attorney’s office or the police department. the pie is only so big
          – stealing someones SS number: this can cause havok on thier credit which in turn could affect someone’s ability to get a hosue, or to pay for college, or get credit for any number of things. it can also effect someone’s life later on when they retire and start to receive benefits. if there is a discreprency, then it can cause real problems getting our SS benefits, which are OUR RIGHT to have.
          – illegal immigrants drive down wages. this is a clear attack on the personal rights of many worker groups to be paid a fair wage. i’ve heard several tradesmen discuss how they can’t get jobs roofing, or drywalling because illegals take the jobs at 1/2 the pay or even 1/3rd. that has a drastic effect on those who can no longer get jobs and be paid fairly.
          – it effects those who legitimately need medical help but cant pay for it and get turned away by clinics because they only have enough money to cover the kids of illegal aliens, or even illegals themselves. many health systems are set up to help those here illegally but turn thier backs on legal citizens who truely need help, like my disabled future mother in law.

          you are not qualified to speak on the intentions of the INS or those who guard our borders. we’ve had rules for entry for hundreds of years now. we’ve welcomed in those from around the world, but in controlled numbers to protect us from disease, gangsters, and our economy. allowing too many in at one time would saturate our food markets, housing markets and woudl drive up prices, lower pay, and allow uneducated individuals who would burden our system rather than help it. in light of the current political climate and the threats against us, we have every right to protect ourselves from anyone who may want to hurt us. an open border is NOT going to help us. it is not going to help us thrive. it will bring us down. it would only help those who wish to leech off of us.

          you really think it should only take 6 months to check someone out and see if they are ok to enter the US?? have you tried getting a passport before? it takes a US citizen roughly 2-3 months to get one. there are not enough resources to have such a quick turnaround. especially with an open border policy you advocate. we would be inundated with people wanting in. much more than the current 1 or 2 million legal aliens we let in. if that’s all we let in, i’m not even sure.

          your open border policy is a dream. if violates MY rights and violates all sensibilities

          • Richard

            Why Beat up on the immigrant. So about social security it is ok to steal from the producer and give to the non producer as long as the person is a legal citizenof the united states. You are a fool and a hypocrite. The problem is not the immigrant but the welfare state which enslaves far more citizens than non citizens. . You n do not have a right to social security it is nothing more tahn a government sanctioned Ponzi scam. As for education, I say abolish public education. Leave to private charity or business.

            As for work you have only the right to trade with others value for value. You have no right to a job or a guarantee wage. Jobs are the sole property of to business owner to be traded as he see fit.
            In the end you areproving my point the Nativist are just another for of collectivism just like socialism, fascistism. and communism.

            The rest of your rant is pure anadotical not worth wasting my time on.

          • Captain_Anon

            like it or not, Social Security is what it is, as is the system of our immigration program. I have no problem with those that go through the process to become legal. i have a HUGE problem with those who lie, cheat and steal to get into the US illegally, and then demand to be recognize as legal, expecially before those who are doing it right have been recognized. My family has sponsered a young man from Kenya to become a citizen. so i know full well the system and how it really does turn a blind eye to the illegal invaders from the south. The government spent a year and a half trying to send my african brother back to Kenya were he would have been killed by the political party in power. they made it very clear his life was in danger and yet even with that, the US Government tried to ship him back. However, he went the appropriate route, and won his status as a political refugee. he went worked exceptionally hard at english, and to learn the culture. he’s probably the hardest working man i know. no complaints. just working and getting the job done. he didn’t leech on the system as so many from mexico and south america have. but the biggest distinction is that he went through the process. so, to all those who have come here illegally, go back, and go through the process like everyone else. That’s not beating up on the immigrant, that’s saying follow the rules and dont’ cut in line.

            you may think Social Security is not my right, however, the act of congress gave me that right. Congress did not however, give that right to illegal immigrants. nor did they give the right to steal someone elses’ identity. You try to change the argument from one of illegal immigration and thier burden on our society into an argument against welfare and benefits. but the fact remains that with or without our system of helping our own citizens, the illegal immigrants are still illegal. and education and the government, that argument doesn’t even belong with the discussion on illegal immigration. save it for the appropriate forum so you can focus on the topic at hand – those who break the laws of this land, choose to obey those that suit them and ignore those that are a block to them.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)