Julia Preston\u2019s piece in Foreign Affairs was a damning indictment of Trump\u2019s migration rhetoric and a warning of what would come with his election. It was written in October as a plea to not underestimate the danger of a Trump presidency or to discount his nativist rhetoric. It\u2019s a bit surreal reading it now, two weeks after he was elected. It feels like we\u2019re marching towards an abyss of fear, chaos and uncertainty. How are we meant to be, as journalists and as people, in a society where truth seems to make no difference?
Preston\u2019s piece was one of countless pieces outlining the blatant mistruths spread about migrants and about Kamala Harris\u2019 record. \u201cIn a relentless barrage of mistruths, Trump insists that the influx of undocumented migrants under Biden is on the order of 21 million people, a wholly made-up figure,\u201d Preston wrote. But none of it pierced through or seemed to make a difference. I admit to feeling pretty lost \u2013 how do we move forward if the truth doesn\u2019t matter? What is the role of journalism if calling out blatant lies and hatred doesn\u2019t seem to make a difference?
On a more tangible note, I thought that Preston made a concise and compelling explanation of how devastating mass deportations would be on every level. She spoke of individual trauma, family separation, community destabilization, and the incredible blow to the economy. She wrote of how Harris had planned to build legal pathways \u201cfor undocumented immigrants, especially the farm workers who make up nearly half of the nation\u2019s agricultural labor force.\u201d In research for my sociology class, I stumbled upon a staggering figure: one out of nineteen civilian workers in the United States are undocumented (Gleeson). \u201cTrump\u2019s plan to shrink the country\u2019s labor force, Posen wrote, \u201c\u2018is both broadly and deeply self-destructive,\u2019\u201d Preston wrote.
Another important part of Preston\u2019s article was on the total dysfunction of the asylum system. The system was created in the 1980s, and was \u201cnever designed to handle large numbers of migrants,\u201d Preston wrote. Before hearing Preston speak at the church in New York, I had no idea of the history of the asylum process. Speaking with her has emphasized how important it is to understand the history, intention, and practice of migration laws \u2013 a daunting task given the extreme vagueness and complexity of the system. \u201cSince 2010,\u201d Preston wrote, \u201cchanges in the populations that were migrating, and the failure of Congress to update the system with new legal channels for refugees and laborers, have made asylum the default access for migrants coming to the southwest border.\u201d The border crisis is fostered and fed by dysfunctional and destructive immigration policies that were not designed to deal with migration as it is today.
The next four years under Trump are terrifying \u2013 I hope we finally start to take him seriously now that he\u2019s been elected, for as David Graham wrote, \u201cIf personnel is policy, as the Ronald Reagan\u2013era maxim states, then the president-elect is deadly serious.\u201d<\/p>\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Julia Preston\u2019s piece in Foreign Affairs was a damning indictment of Trump\u2019s migration rhetoric and a warning of what would come with his election. It was written in October as a plea to not underestimate the danger of a Trump presidency or to discount his nativist rhetoric. It\u2019s a bit surreal reading it now, two<\/p>\n