Immigration in North America: Canada and the United States - Case Study Example

Immigration in North America: Canada and the United s From the Anarchist versus the Fascist Perspective s Name Course Name Due Date Introduction North America and its two major countries, Canada and the United States, have the highest immigration numbers than any other countries in the world. They are, both, countries of diversity, particularly ethnically speaking. Canada welcomes as many as 250,000 immigrants into Canada per year, and has done so since 1990.("Immigrations Watch Canada") The United States has and continues to be a country open to immigrants to find work, a future, or live the “American Dream.” There are positive and negative elements to continuous and open immigration. Canada, generally, views immigration as a positive force in Canadian society, however not all Canadians share that belief and feel that new reforms are now needed and have been for some time. In America the extreme openness to immigration does have a tremendous downside. Because America has rather unrestrictive and varying immigration policies the result is an enormous population of undocumented immigrants residing within The U.S. borders. That said, finding a solution is no easy task. Finding a balance between ethical and beneficial solution for, both, the undocumented immigrants and the country as a whole is at the core of many heated debates. Some Canadians and Americans alike are beginning to wonder if their governments have not been negligent. However, there are multitudes of political ideologies that have very concise and clear interpretations about the correct way to conduct the topic of immigration. Fascism and anarchism offer extreme and diametrically different beliefs and approaches to the function of society, government, and the individual. . Background The Canada and the United States are similar in some ways, but in others they are quite different. The United States is decidedly a republic democracy, while Canada is a social democracy. A social democracy, which is not the same as a socialist country, blends the socialist concepts like universal healthcare, but maintains a free-enterprise and capitalist economy.("Social Democracy") Immigration to Canada and the United States throughout the proper processes has and continues to be the means by which they open their arms to immigrants from all over the world. While Canada approves the inclusion of 100,000s of immigrants through the prescribed legal means, in America, not every immigrant who wishes to go there follows the proper channels. Illegal immigration has become a serious problem that raises a number of ethical, logical, and real concerns that do require serious consideration. There are currently 11.5 million people in the United States who are not legally authorized to be there.(Ewing 3-4) The number one ethnic group in question in relation to undocumented immigration is presently Latin/Hispanic immigrants from Mexico or the offspring of undocumented parents. Canada does not have an issue at all with illegal immigration, primarily because of its location. Canada is essentially blocked by the United States, lowering the likelihood that anyone would keep going to reach the Canadian border.("Economist" 1) Canada welcomes immigrants, but that does not prevent them having a stricter admittance policy for immigrants than the United States. In Canada you must submit to medical and criminal background screenings before you will be considered, also, immigrants must pass a language proficiency, which makes transitioning to Canadian society easier. The United States has always had relatively open immigration. For a short time the government began implementing stricter immigration regulation, including an immigrant and ethnic quota system. Latin/Hispanics were never part of that quotas system until 1970s. The year that Latin and Hispanic immigrants were included in the quotas was, also, the last year that the quota system was imposed.(Ewing 4-5) One of most prominent differences between The United States and Canada is their perception of immigration. Canada encourages the immigration of skilled and college educated individuals, considering them an essential and beneficial element of their society.(Mac Donald 1) However, Americans have an often different response to immigration that is sometimes anything but positive. In fact, it would be safe to say the country is torn in relation to this topic. The undocumented immigrant issue has only been made all the worse due to myths and fears that are not entirely true. There are rumors that cause a lot of the American disdain is the idea that immigrants, particularly illegal immigrants, steal jobs, income, and are burdens on the country, the reality is somewhat different. Although the immigrants that come to America are unskilled, unlike Canada’s skilled, immigrants that seek the benefits of America without following through on the legal requirements, however, they do not necessarily steal jobs. These ideas have created tension and, in some cases, even hatred of undocumented immigrants. However, researchers point out that the U.S. economy and the Mexican economies have become rather interconnected. America has become dependent upon the Mexican migrant, undocumented or not, workers to fill labor positions. Businesses encourage this by offering a very low wage for the work, American citizens refuse such an inadequate wage, but a migrant worker may not. The overall cost of illegal immigration on the U.S. is actually rather small, it is not, nearly, as costly as the monies being spent in the continuous inefficient attempts to find, apprehend, and deport undocumented immigrants. (Hanson 8-9) Recently, some Canadian citizens have began to point out that, although immigration is not a negative thing, the numbers that have persisted since the 1990s is just too much and is no longer in the best interest of the country. They propose reforms and the lowering of the number of immigrants legally received per year, the reduction of the number of immigrant work permits that they approve, and a revisiting of policies that they claim are outdated.("Immigrations Watch Canada") In recent years, in the United States, the Arizona state government has opted to enforce new and stricter immigration legislature that allows law enforcement to stop, detain, and ask for all identification documents at all times of any person in the street. At the same time, President Barak Obama forced an executive order, which bypassed congress, and put the Dream Act into effect. This act will allow the children of undocumented immigrants, who meet certain criteria, to be protected from legal entanglements, including deportation; ideally children should not be held accountable for their parents’ actions. Whether you support stricter immigration laws and stronger controls or the unrestrictive opportunities provided by policies like the Dream Act, it is obvious that immigration, in general, remains an unresolved topic throughout North America. Political Ideologies Fascism Fascism began during WWI by “Italian syndicalists,” who combined left wing politics with right wing positions. Some would define Fascism as the most radical form of authoritarian nationalism; it also, represents complete totalitarianism. There are certain elements that are needed to be present in order to call a system fascist. First a fascist system believes in an extremely involved and controlling government.(Anesi) Fascists follow a single, all powerful leader, whose authority is ultimately absolute. Fascists are opposed to, both, Marxist ideologies, as well as, all forms of capitalism. Capitalism, in the eyes of a fascist, represents the encouragement of individuality and materialism; quite the opposite of fascism. Third way economics, is a companion of fascism, where businesses are encouraged to earn profit, but their companies and products must be approved and beneficial to the country as a whole.(Miller) Between the nationalist need to favor the country’s culture and identity above all else and the totalitarian disdain for ant sort of outside influences, it leaves little room for diversity. Also, the strength of governmental rule and a single leader has bred the power hungry ambitions of tyrannical leaders like, Hitler in Germany and Stalin in Italy. Supporters feel that the concept of fascism has been inappropriately, but irrevocably, linked to the fascist leaders of history whose behaviors are infamous. Present day supporters of fascism believe that the ideology is, both, misunderstood and gained a negative reputation it does not deserve. Fascism is a free-trade enterprise with 2 major distinctions. The first is that a fascist government only allows a business to open if it meets the moral standard and they are beneficial to the people and country. The second is that a fascist government would never allow or want jobs to be shipped overseas. What is often referred to as conformism, fascists call patriotism and honor. Anarchism Anarchists believe in the complete and total absence of government and institutional control. All of the crime, violence, social unrest, and inequalities on society are caused by the interference and restriction of the government.(Zimmer) They perceive the fall of the all governments as a wonderful miracle that is eagerly awaited. Not only do they denounce governmental institutions, but, also, social ones. Marriage is considered a delusional relationship, often unhappy, that oppresses one gender over another. They are also opposed to organized religion because it can be restrictive and conformist. This political system that promotes an “anti-system” was first conceived long ago in response to the feudal systems that were practiced all over the world. It is, however, William Godwin, who lived from the mid-1700s to the, nearly, mid-1800s, who is credited with being the founding philosopher behind the ideology of anarchism. He believed society should be completely egalitarian, denouncing all institutions as corrupting humanity, never placing power in only a few hands, and that, once freed, humanity can then focus their “free” existence producing happiness for themselves and the world around them.Today the ideology of anarchism remains alive today. Many Americans, in these economically troubled times, feel deceived and disenchanted with the state of the government today; for this reason, anarchism is still, by some, considered a viable option. The elements of anarchism that are appealing are primarily the placing of control into the hands of individuals. However, eliminating a structured government in exchange for the absolute freedom would be difficult. It is, also, criticized for having far too much optimism in the nature of human beings. Ideally, a free anarchist environment, involves, free people choosing to do the “right” things and contribute to the “happiness” of all. Unfortunately, one cannot guarantee that. Anarchy is not chaos, but it can lead to it. Applying the Political Ideologies Immigration from a Fascist Perspective Fascists practice, both, nationalism and totalitarianism ideologies. Neither of these are immigrant friendly philosophies. Fascists yearn to protect what is theirs, what is familiar, what is a part of them. For this reason fascism breeds and encourages conformity in form and thought. Totalitarianism is a disregard and disdain for what is foreign or from the outside. They fear outside influences and representations. This thinking can ultimately lead to a xenophobic mentality.(Anesi) No immigration would be encouraged or tolerated. It is a trademark of fascism to be suspicious of outsiders and often use any immigrant populations as a scapegoat; placing whatever negative social issues or governmental failings onto those immigrants. This is not unlike the suspicions and loathing expressed by Hitler’s fascist regime against the Jewish people living during WWII. Illegal immigration would be less present for two very important reasons. Once a country becomes unwelcoming to immigration and the possibility of work for the migrant workers becomes unavailable, such a country would no longer be a potential destination for immigration. Also, because fascist rule exist in an anti-immigration state, anyone caught attempting to enter the country illegally or caught living in there undocumented the penalties could be quite harsh and, possibly, unethical by many people’s standards. The same would apply to Canada. The openness and appreciation of diversity and immigrant benefits would be a thing of the past. This too, would discourage immigrants from even considering the United States or Canada and, eventually, the United States, Canada, or the whole of North America would become exclusively closed to outsiders. Immigration from an Anarchist Perspective It should be abundantly obvious that the anarchist perspective is basically antithetical to fascism. In this issue it is no different. To anarchist topics involving immigrations of peoples and policy intended to monitor and control such things is a moot topic. Anarchists do not believe in centralized government structure, borders, policies, visas, and all related concerns would no longer exist. Anarchism perceives itself as the ultimate equalizers. Without class systems, economic organization. Canadian, American, or immigrant, all are intrinsically equal. If either of these countries allowed an anarchist society, it would, likely, become the destination for many people who are disillusioned with other forms of world governments. However, this, in an anarchist viewpoint would not be considered “immigration” it would simply be “people.” If they are dissatisfied they are, always, free to move on to other horizons.(Preston) Illegal immigration, like all immigration, would cease to exist in practice. A person cannot be illegally present if there is no longer a government to enforce immigration law. Anarchists are clear that referring to people as “illegal” and “undocumented” are tools of racism used to maintain fear of differences and those leaders’ power bases. People would no longer be limited by the restrictions and rules of a few, but free to be completely individualized. Immigration or migration would be neither discouraged nor encouraged; it is each person’s choice to live as they see fit. (Preston) Comparably of the Perspectives It is easy to see the differences between fascism and anarchism. Both form their basic belief system and their perspectives on what is the best for humanity within a given society. Immigration is presently such a serious concern, with arguments and debates unending in all sides of the issue. Fascism would be ideal for people who support a strong government presence; a potential government that controls through censorship and discourages the inclusion of individuals from other cultures and environments. However, for people who favor the absolute freedom of anarchy, no government, no policy, where immigration would be a word and concept of the past. All people are free to come and go as they please. The extremes of both ideologies have merit, at least in the eyes of those who support them, as well as, failings that have prevented their overall success throughout history. Choosing either of these philosophies and applying it to immigration has solutions for the issue but also, side-effects that could be far worse than the issue it was intended to solve. For example, anarchy, ideally, holds that given the opportunity to live free of government, they will act ethically, compassionately, and functionally without restriction. However, that may not be the case. If human beings, even a few, choose to take advantage of those weaker, threaten, manipulate, and bully in attempts to gain control; the country could go from a completely free nation to a frightening “pseudo-apocalyptic” chaos; not unlike the reality depicted in films like “Mad Max.” However, fascism will guarantee order, control, and organization; of course, there is a point where the individual and the government become fused. History has already shown us that it is very easy for a single ruler in a fascist system to take full advantage. When so much power is placed in any system those involved can take full advantage of those beneath them. When so much is entrusted in a single individual it is very easy for these leaders to become fixated less on the country and people and more on themselves. It would seem as different as these two political approaches are, they both, rely heavily on human beings; individually and on mass, doing the “right” things in order to make the systems work. Fascism requires an honest leader that will not become drunk with power and makes sound decisions for his/her country. In anarchism it relies on human beings easily adapting to the dismissal of all government organization and they would flourish with one another. This powerful and innate human decency and the optimism in their potential behavior are misplaced. No one can guarantee the actions of all human beings within a society, regardless of the level of government influence, or lack thereof. Ideally, the United States is desperately in need of immigration reform, but finding that solution, for this or any other social, political, or economic issue, through either of these ideologies is completely unwise and poses great risk and are all too extreme. Conclusion Canada has had a tremendously successful integration of immigrants into their society and the United States was founded by immigrants and to this day, immigrants play an enormous role in the economy of the country. The U.S. may presently be struggling economically with many Americans have lost faith in the existing government to protect our needs and interests and Canadians are restless, claiming that their economy is rough, as well, and want less immigration to accommodate. However, I feel, that realistically the government that each country has now fundamentally still offers more opportunities for solution than either fascism or anarchism. They both seem like such extreme measures, that would inevitably lead to far greater social issues than any we are currently seeking to address. Immigration, particularly, illegal immigration, is an unbelievably serious issue that definitely needs to be addressed. Finding fair, ethical, agreeable balance between government structure and policy interventions that are beneficial to the countries, but, also, to the immigrants who seek to make Canada or the United States their home. Works Cited Anesi, Chuck. "What is Fascism?." Fascism: The Ultimate Definition. Chuck Anesi, n.d. Web. Mar 2013. . Ewing, Walter A. "Opportunity and Exclusion: A Brief History of U.S. Immigration Policy ." Immigration Policy Center: American Immigration Council. (2012): 1-7. Web. 2 Mar.2013.. Hanson, Gordon H. "The Economics and Policy of Illegal Immigration in the United States ." Migration Policy Institute. (2009): 1-16. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. . Mac Donald, Heather. "Canadian vs. American Immigration." National Review Online 15 Nov. 2010, 1. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. . Miller, James L.. "What is Fascism?." Immigration, Globalization, Political Correctness: The Jewish Attack On The Western World. James L. Miller, 5 Sep 2011. Web. 2 Mar 2013. . Preston, Keith. "A Calm Anarchist Look at Race, Culture and Immigration ." Attack the System. American Revolutionary Vanguard , n.d. Web. 2 Mar 2013. . Zimmer, Kenyon. " “The Whole World is Our Country”: Immigration and Anarchism in the United States, 1885 - 1940." University of Pittsburgh. Kenyon Zimmer, n.d. Web. 2 Mar 2013. . "Immigration: United States v Canada." Economist. 20 May 2011: 1. Web. 6 Mar. 2013. . "Immigrations Watch Canada." IWC. Canadian Web Hosting, n.d. Web. 6 Mar 2013. . "Social Democracy." Merriam-Webster. Merriem Webster Incorporated, n.d. Web. 6 Mar 2013. . Read More