Does illegal mean non-human? Labor and leisure

Hearing media commentators refer to illegal immigrants in the context of debates about immigration reform or healthcare, I am amazed at the fact that the category of "illegals" is treated almost as if it were another species, one that is less than human--- as if they don't have possess basic human rights, or that they make no contribution to society by doing the jobs that no one less will do in America. By proxy, even the children of illegal immigrants, who are US citizens, are also referred to, similarly, as a 'problem population.' The immigration and healthcare issues are complex, and one can take a range of positions on aspects of both issues: but it is perfectly possible to articulate any of these positions-- for or against amnesty, for example-- while respecting the basic human dignity of the people and populations in question.

A refusal to accept or recognize the basic human dignity of all people seems to me to define the attitude of right-wing rabble- rousing riff-raff in the media -- like O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and others of their breed--- toward anyone they deem outsiders or threats to American society. That there is an audience and constituency in America for reasoned conservative positions is a reflection of a healthy and vibrant civil society. That there is a market for the likes of Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly (in short Fox News) is itself surely a disturbing fact. Their views on a large number of categories of people-- including American citizens who are minorities--seem to me to be textbook examples of prejudice. And, yet, American society at large seems unwilling to accept this or call them out on it.

George Lopez has some interesting observations about such and related matters in his scathing and brilliant stand-up special, "Tall, Dark & Chicano". Aside from the immigration issue, Lopez makes a number of telling observations about the unequal distribution of privilege among different demographic groups in the US. He notes that you will almost never see a Hispanic person in the US jogging at 2 pm in the afternoon while listening to their IPod or enjoying a latte etc.

Lopez may exaggerate the point, in keeping with the idiom of satirical in-your-face stand-up comedy. But the larger point remains valid. Having lived for a while now in San Francisco, a city with a large Hispanic population, I can state that, in my experience, this is largely true. In the South Bay and San Francisco, one can find Whites, South Asians, East Asians, and Southeast Asians engaged in leisure activities any time in any day of the week. African-Americans are near invisible in these locations, though more visible in the East Bay. Hispanic communities are sizeable in number but are not proportionately visible in the theaters or leisure activity associated with affluence and privilege.

These are the questions media, policymakers, and academic disciplines seem reluctant to ask, perhaps because they disturb nationally held myths and beliefs, such as the idea of meritocracy so beloved of neoliberals,

Whose labor is it that creates leisure for others?

Hence, in this general sense at least, the continuing importance of Marx