By Larry Thornberry on 11.28.06 @ 12:07AM
What do we mean by "Native Americans," "Hispanics," and other officially sanctioned terms?
TAMPA -- Tony Hillerman's mystery novels take place in the wild
and beautiful American Southwest and authentically portray the
local Indian tribes. They're worth anyone's time to read.
Hillerman's stories are compelling, his series characters
sympathetic and complex. His treatment of themes and character and
local people make him more than a genre writer. He's a first-rate
craftsman who expertly tells part of the Great American Story.
The accurate and sympathetic way he portrays Navahos and other
tribes has earned him the respect and appreciation of Indians,
including Indian tribal officials. As a result he's often invited
to be a guest at tribal and inter-tribal gatherings.
In his very readable 2001 memoir, Seldom Disappointed,
Tony describes an evening when he found himself at a large
inter-tribal meeting shortly after the language nags decided that
American Indians should henceforth be called Native Americans. He
was curious about what his friends, regular walking around Indians
who'd never been to Washington and had never felt compelled to join
an indignation group, thought of this label. So he just came out
and asked.
The boys kicked the question around the room for a while, coming
to the consensus that as most Americans were born in America, and
were therefore native Americans themselves, it made little sense to
apply this name to American Indians. It was a category that didn't
categorize.
Most in the room said they preferred to be called by their
tribal affiliation, i.e., they thought of themselves as Navahos,
Apaches, Kiowas, Arapahos, Zunis, etc. One guy -- can't remember
which tribe because I'm paraphrasing this from memory -- summed it
up by saying, " I don't mind being called an Indian because
Christopher Columbus went looking for India and got lost. I'm just
glad he wasn't looking for Turkey."
Me too. How much fun would it have been as a youngster to have
played cowboys and Turkeys? And somehow those great cavalry movies
of the 1950s would have lost a little if they had to rely on such
stirring lines as, " Look, Lieutenant! Coming over the ridge. A
whole s---load of Turkeys!"
The Duke would have gagged.
All of this, of course, brings us to Mel Martinez.
OUR MEL, A CUBAN-AMERICAN and a freshman U. S. Senator from
Florida, will soon be the Republican National Committee's Vice
President for Making Hispanics Vote for Republicans. (Very possibly
a no gracias job.)
The problem is already obvious. Hispanic is as big of a
horsepucky word as Native American is. It's a category that
categorizes very little beyond language background and some tenuous
connection, no matter how dated, with Spain. The Census Bureau came
up with the category and the word during Tricky Dick's
administration in order to, well, in order to do the busybody stuff
that they do (most of which we could do without -- budget cutters
make a note).
How many citizens of Mexico or Peru think of themselves as
Hispanics rather than Mexicans or Peruvians? And Americans from
these parts, if not yet comfortable with just plain " American,"
prefer the name of their former country and the hyphen to Hispanic,
a word invented by document-stampers and hijacked by political
casuists.
The word Hispanic doesn't describe much, the differences among
and between these folks far outweighing the similarities. It does
parse a tendency to vote Democratic, perhaps because so many are
recent arrivals and still on fairly low rungs of the economic
ladder. Some studies show that a majority of Americans with Spanish
last names continue to vote Democratic even as they become
economically successful. As these folks are a growing portion of
the electorate, Republicans need to earn their votes, but no more
than the votes of anyone else. Republicans would be better off
fashioning policies that appeal to all conservative,
family-oriented Americans, as people of Spanish background tend to
be, rather than pandering with all sorts of special treatment to
folks whose names end in a vowel.
Exhibit A in this foolishness is W's and the Republican Party's
refusal to do anything about the problem of illegal immigration
from Mexico, a problem Americans have made it clear they want
something done about. This abject failure has two causes -- W's
eagerness to please his corporate and chamber of commerce chums who
want cheap labor, and fear that Latino voters will stiff
Republicans at the polls if Spanish-speaking immigrants are
prevented from coming to El Norte or, God forbid, if they are sent
back home after they get here.
The Senate, with considerable help from Martinez, coughed up a
hairball of an immigration bill last year that would have made it
even easier for those who've entered the U.S. illegally to stay
here for the duration. It would have done nothing to improve border
security and would not have obliged anyone to return home.
Fortunately, the House declined to go along with the gag, and the
bad bill died at the end of the last Congress.
THE LATE BUT NOT LAMENTED Senate bill was in many ways a
politician's dream. That is it was a complex proposal that would
have given the impression a problem was being addressed when in
fact nothing would have been done at all. The bill would have set
up a Rube Goldberg system of dealing with the (use your preferred
number) million illegal immigrants already in the country. Most by
paying a small fine and some back taxes could just stay. But the
bill did not provide for the bureaucratic infrastructure necessary
to find, keep track of, and collect fines and taxes from the
millions of new American residents it would have created. The
immigration system is already drowning trying (mostly
unsuccessfully) to keep up with people here on tourist and student
visas and the people applying to enter the country legally as
residents.
An almost comical aspect of the bill was that it stratified the
way illegals would have been treated based on how long they have
been in the country. The bill's authors must be under the mistaken
impression that illegals have their hands date-stamped when they
sneak across the border.
Illegal immigration is a serious problem that Americans want a
serious answer to. Borders are an absolute requirement of
sovereignty. They're not a hate crime. The government of the United
States needs to decide who enters the country and under what
circumstances, not employers who want cheap labor or cheeky
demonstrators from other countries who seem the think the U.S.
Constitution confers rights on them and that American citizens have
obligations toward them. (We have enough people with an exaggerated
sense of entitlement born here, thank you very much. We don't need
to import more -- or just allow more to come here when the mood
strikes them.)
It will be more difficult now with Democrats ascendant in
Congress, as they have no more stomach for dealing with the
immigration problem than do Republicans. But if Republicans want to
ever be the majority party again they'll have to get serious about
this one. If they continue with the opera buffa approach they've
used in the past, it will be Martinez and the Republicans who are
the turkeys.
topics:
Taxes, Movies, Constitution, NATO, Immigration