“The best way to reduce illegal immigration is through a comprehensive federal approach, he said, and not a patchwork of state laws.”

Did John Morton say that verbatim?

Let’s assume he did.  Look, coming from the left, hear me out. I’m not even going to agree with him and say he’s right.  Based on these words alone, I think even he is missing the big picture and the underlying issues here.

* * * *

The problem with Arizona’s recent posturing, whether legal, nothing new, or completely comprehensive, it’s still fundamentally flawed and here’s why.

Sure it might be unfair to accuse Arizona of being “racist” or something equally as exaggerated.  However, here’s why their stance and recent actions are nonsensical and why they’re being commercially boycotted and critiqued by many separate and individual bodies naturally and not by a disproportionate rebuttal from the left.

“Illegal immigration” is a complex problem and therefore does not require a simple solution.  It’s not just a matter of nefarious ”illegals” purposefully “jumping the border” to intentionally or indirectly exploit our system.  It’s more complex than that.  

First off, a general intent by the majority of these illegal immigrants should not be regarded as malicious.  That’s one of the key problems.  You take an impoverished individual that has the choice of working really hard his or her entire life to remain in his same impoverished state, supplemented with the fact that his or her daughter could very easily be kidnapped and sold as a sexual slave and/or his family be randomly murdered by gangs in a turf war VERSUS moving easily to America (as many from his country can, and have previously, easily have done), then what course do you imagine that person would take.

Second, that’s a general regards to “why” someone might weigh his or her options to migrating to the “land of opportunity”.  However, a general regards is generally not accurate.  Complexity is the truth of the matter.  We don’t have a handful of families of illegal immigrants.  We have legals with illegal spouses.  We have veterans with illegal spouses.  We have illegals sending money back to their country for ailing relatives.  We have two generations of legal citizens taking care of illegal grandparents that live in their household.  We have educated, working legal immigrants whom are faced with a guaranteed years long process of obtaining legal status for their children who cannot leave their original country until said status becomes official, we have legal American citizens who could not bare to be away from their children from upwards of six years or more who have their children live with them illegally and must now worry of having their children taken from them and never being allowed to be citizens in this country (therefore ending any chance of their family remaining in this country even though the parents are legal, educated, contributing citizens), and the list goes on.

A simple, and need I say “tough-love” aggressive, solution is not the answer to such a complex situation.

Another very important, ultimately crucial aspect of this “problem”, is the fact that our country (more specifically, corporate America) is not only responsible, but a direct enabler of illegal immigration.  This isn’t just a matter of negligence on the part of the reinforcement of law, this is equally a matter of corporate bodies being directly responsible for coercing the impoverished from other countries to come over (as it is so easy to do) and would be guaranteed promising employment.  Did you know some companies advertise (yes, flyers and traditional classifieds) open employment to potential illegal immigrants.  It’s not just a matter of negligence on our part; we’re the culprits.

Really, the two main problems with Arizona’s new posturing are 1.) the disregard to the complexity of the issue of “illegal immigration” and resilience towards dissecting the diversity of the situation case by case as well as 2.) the psychology of the posturing (“they” are “them”, “they” are criminals and exploitative; “we” are “us”, “we” are being exploited).