Read the article below prior to my blog’s analysis for a better understanding of my stance.
The following is an opinion-based analysis of two opposing arguments proposed in the PDF file located above.
By Terran Smith–
Immigration is, arguably, one of the founding principles of our nation. However, in modern society, illegal or “undocumented” immigration is a very hot topic in politics. Although liberals and conservatives both have strong points to contribute to each side of the matter, the debate continues with passionate ferocity. Kurt Finsterbusch’s Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Social Issues presents each side of the immigration debate from two credible, unrelated sources. Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, holds the stance that immigration is a threat to the American lifestyle of today. The polar perspective, advocated by an editor named Jason L. Riley of the Wall Street Journal, bears the encouraging notion that immigration is, in fact, beneficial for the American way of life in the present and the future. Valid points are made from each narrator’s perspective; however, I found the reasoning behind Krikorian’s overall outlook to be the more relevant and longstanding than the opposing excerpt.
One of the recurring themes Krikorian mentions is modern society’s accountability as the key elements preventing prosperity and perpetuating problems from immigration. Unlike many arguments, (both for and against immigration), Krikorian refreshes his side of this prolific political problem by focusing on the modernity of America as the main obstacle toward immigrant assimilation, rather than the weak and, arguably ignorant, blow of blame towards the immigrants themselves.
The American identity is essential to the core of our nation. Because the country was built on shared beliefs rather than shared blood, assimilation has always been an important American value that’s held as necessary to become a part of the unified culture that is this country’s shared identity. As ‘modern’ as Americans may consider themselves, Krikorian claims that societal advances, from technological to multicultural, are all actually making the process of assimilation more difficult for immigrants. Krikorian addresses the obvious inquiry of how immigration economically impacts America’s market individually and overall. While the number of employed persons increases the technical ‘size’ of our economy, the fiscal outcome has shown lowered wages for native employees of equal skill levels, which results in a largely populated economic pool with lowered profit.
Jason L. Riley makes many thought-provoking points while proposing the idealistic assets of immigration today. Riley focuses on the fiscal aspect of this argument for much of the piece. Economic predictions may be helpful when investing in the stock market; however, educated guessing is not, in my opinion, a concrete argument. The fortuitous future Riley believes immigration will provide our economy depends greatly on one of Krikorian’s main issues with modern immigration—achieving assimilation. After he presents the overall necessity for linguistic assimilation for work-related functioning, Riley defends this key conflict component with the lack of evidence that Latinos are against English assimilation. Using the absence of information as evidence for an argument makes me question the accountability of the author, and, unfortunately, takes away from previous persuasion towards said writer’s argument.
I often find myself torn between both sides of the the issue of modern immigration to America; however, in this specific instance, Mark Krikorian undoubtedly made a stronger argument by: focusing on well-rounded representations of unique American characteristics as a society, addressing both sides of the topic without losing focus or merit, and, most importantly, explaining the origin and solution of a social issue without placing blame on the subject or the opposing side at hand.