Introduction:
The recent presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump in Philadelphia on September 10, 2024, shed light on the contentious issue of immigration. While Trump perpetuated racist and false claims about immigrants, Harris failed to counter his sentiment, instead upholding the right-wing belief that immigration should be stopped. This narrative of immigration as a social ill or criminal endeavor dominated the debate, with both candidates failing to address the complexities and humanitarian aspects of the issue.
The Right-Wing Lie:
During the debate, Harris echoed the right-wing lie that immigration, particularly the migration of poor people, should be halted. This narrative disregards the fact that many individuals are fleeing violence, repression, economic devastation, and climate catastrophe in their home countries. The focus on criminality and the portrayal of immigrants as threats obscures the reality that they are seeking safety and better lives in the wealthiest nation on earth.
The Border Crisis Narrative:
The debate moderator, Andrew Muir, set the tone by framing immigration as a crisis for the U.S., rather than acknowledging the plight of the desperate individuals who have fled their homes. Muir’s question to Harris about the Biden administration’s response to illegal border crossings reinforced the narrative of a “border crisis.” Harris, in her response, treated migration as a problem of criminality to be policed and fought, emphasizing her past experience prosecuting transnational criminal organizations.
The Draconian Border Bill:
Harris mentioned a border security bill that she supported, which would have increased the number of border agents and aimed to stem the flow of fentanyl. However, this bill was one of the most draconian in recent memory. Harris’s only issue with the legislation was that Trump’s allies in Congress killed it. Furthermore, Biden’s executive order effectively closed the southern border, even to asylum seekers, echoing Trump’s ban on asylum.
The Human Cost:
The debate failed to address the human cost of hardened border policies. Over the past decade, as many as 80,000 people have reportedly died trying to cross into the U.S. through the southern border. The focus on criminal elements and the absence of discussions about the nation’s responsibility for the political turmoil that drives people to flee their countries further dehumanizes immigrants.
The Need for Comprehensive Immigration Policies:
The debate highlighted the lack of comprehensive immigration policies that consider ethical, humanitarian, and economic factors. Harris, as a centrist Democratic candidate, did not mention the economic and social benefits of welcoming migrant workers into the U.S. as the existing population ages and the need for workers in sectors like healthcare grows. The race to the bottom on border rule and the adoption of harsh policies by Democratic administrations, including the Obama and Biden administrations, have only strengthened far-right leaders and parties.
The Racist Myth and Violent Afterlives:
Trump’s racist myth about immigrants from Haiti eating people’s pets perpetuates a legacy of vile slander faced by Haitians in the West. This myth plays into the violent afterlives of racist backlash. The debate failed to challenge such dehumanization and instead contributed to the portrayal of Black and other migrants of color as de facto criminals.
The Global Perspective:
Contrary to the rhetoric around the “border crisis,” the pressure of global migration is not solely bearing down on the U.S. The overwhelming majority of displaced people in the world are internally displaced or reside in refugee camps near their countries of origin. While settling millions of newcomers into a country requires resources and work, it is a question of resource distribution priorities. The billions of dollars spent on immigration enforcement agencies and deterrence strategies like barriers and walls could be better allocated to prioritize economic security and the well-being of both citizens and immigrants.
Conclusion:
The presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump highlighted the prevailing narrative of immigration as a social ill or criminal endeavor. Both candidates failed to address the complexities and humanitarian aspects of the issue, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and dehumanizing immigrants. Comprehensive immigration policies that consider ethical, humanitarian, and economic factors are needed to move away from the race to the bottom on border rule and prioritize the well-being of all individuals involved.
