A mythos is a set of stories which defines the history of some group, putting that often bloody, unsettling history into a light which makes it look really damn good. I recently received a “mythos letter” which nettled me, due to its immigrant-phobic message that is enhanced by its references to mythic elements of American history. For a Snopes.com take on it, see this article. I haven’t actually read the Snopes article, as I wish to react to this sneaky bit of trash without influence. I will omit the pictures and commentary from forwarders.
This was written by Rosemary LaBonte to the editors of a California newspaper in response to an article written by Ernie Lujan who suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because the immigrants of today aren’t being treated the same as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports of entry. The paper never printed this response, so her husband sent it out via internet.
Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people like Mr. Lujan why today’s American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented.
As if the Americans of yesteryear welcomed immigrants with open arms? The fact of the matter is that American history is full of examples of the hatred of immigrants – the travails of the Irish, the Germans, the Polish, and the Africans are well-documented and should not be forgotten.
Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home.
They had waved goodbye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.
Or poverty. Remember the immigrant coal-miners, those stuck in the ghettos of the American cities, those who could not get preferred jobs because of ethnicity?
But more importantly, they did get help. From churches which never failed in their ideal mission, from charitable groups who thought it was their duty to help the new immigrant. The immigrant did have help, because without it they would have died in the dust. This is a group endeavour, folks.
Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. My father fought alongside men whose parents had come straight over from Germany, Italy, France and Japan. None of these 1st generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. They were defending the United States of America as one people.
Unless the writer is black or of Japanese descent, his father did not literally fight alongside Black and Japanese Americans – because in the former case, the military services were strictly segregated, and in the latter case the Japanese-Americans were not trusted by the American government. In both cases, it’s true that they fought in World War II – in their own units, where they achieved distinction. The 99th Pursuit Squadron and 332nd Fighter Groups made up the valiant Tuskegee Airmen (a bomber group was also formed by the Tuskegee Airmen, but never carried out missions), were mostly black, along with some Haitians and a Trinidad pilot. Similarly, several groups within the Army, most notably the 442nd Regiment, were made up of mostly Japanese-Americans in the Hawaiian National Guard, along with some mainland Japanese Americans. This, from Wikipedia, says it all: The 442nd Regiment was the most decorated unit for its size and length of service in the history of American warfare.
The broader point I wish to make is this: we were not some magically homogenous group of citizens during World War II. The white majority disdained those who looked different, discriminated against them, and had to have it proven to them that Americans of African and Japanese descent could fight as well, or better, as the could. Just as in World War I, where the American Commander-In-Chief, General Pershing, earned the epithet “Black Jack” because of his insistence that Blacks be permitted to serve in combat, “Americans” still resented the outsider, the person who looked different – the immigrant. The immigrants didn’t fight because they had magically assimilated – the fought because they wanted to become part of a society that viciously and unjustly thought them unworthy of the position.
When we liberated France, no one in those villages were looking for the French American, the German American or the Irish American. The people of France saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country’s flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.
And here we are with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country.
Yes, indeedy. Except for the fact that this is just like our immigrant forebearers, who clung to the faith of their homelands (or did you think they converted to King Henry’s Episcopalianism on their arrival?), who lived together in ethnic communities that are well known even today (ask any Chicagoan where the Poles, the Blacks, even the Serbians live in the City), who clung to the same food they ate at home – any Minnesotan who recognizes the word ‘lutefisk’ will instantly recognize the truth of what I say.
The “melting pot” is the American ideal rarely, even reluctantly, achieved.
And immigrants do not emigrate because of their hatred for their motherland, but despite their love for it. Oh, sure, we can name men & women with the wanderlust, who have to see what’s just over the horizon – but they are the small minority. Most folks are happy enough to stick to the valley in which they were born. Those who immigrate are often chased out of their country by the many varieties of intolerance. To suggest that it’s wrong to retain the love for the motherland is to suggest that the successful immigrant arrives with no sentiment in his heart, but instantly grows some upon discovering the shores of America.
I’m sorry, that’s not what being an American is all about. I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900’s deserve better than that for all the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags.
And this is the point of the matter, isn’t it? The writer believes she has differentiated today’s immigrant from some mythical heroic wave of “proper” immigrants, and now she’s free to hate on them.
Hate, hate, hate.
And the problem for the writer? I know better from simple personal experience. I’ve worked with many immigrants. Guess what – they speak English! Some really well, such as the Russian who only trips occasionally over the latest bit of slang, and some not so well, as a few Indians who struggle with the accent. But they all speak it well enough to get by. Some love American culture and are deeply embedded in it, while others are more insular and remember their beloved motherland with melancholy. I’m served by them at the restaurants, they constitute 28% of our medical doctors, they pick our food, and, watching them, they work bloody hard.
So, through ignorance or deliberate deceit, the author of this slur stirs up the usual hatred of immigrants that has long motivated the conservatives, that bands them together and puts them in their place, their room of ignorance and group thinking and dislike of those who dare to think differently, where they can be used by their masters. So sometimes immigrants need a little help, especially the war refugees, when they come over. Are we so ungenerous that we’d prefer to hate on them?
And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of Liberty, it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn’t start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.
And, oh, hey. Buddy. The Statue of Liberty is a gift from the French. Perhaps it was a nudge to a country that was going the wrong way from an older, wiser brother.
KEEP THIS LETTER MOVING. FOR THE WRONG THINGS TO PREVAIL, THE RIGHTFUL MAJORITY NEEDS TO REMAIN COMPLACENT AND QUIET.
LET THIS NEVER HAPPEN!
I sincerely hope this letter gets read by millions of people all across the nation!
Sure. And hopefully the readers put more thought into the issues than you did writing it.
