5 ms·

It's also frustrating that every common term for some concept can easily acquire connotations that suggest a particular affiliation. For example, there's no eas

by schoen 6y ago

It's also frustrating that every common term for some concept can easily acquire connotations that suggest a particular affiliation. For example, there's no easy way to refer to people who are present in a country in violation of its immigration laws without either conveying a connotation of sympathy or hostility toward them. "Undocumented immigrant" is criticized by anti-immigrant groups as (maybe intentionally) implying that someone's unauthorized immigration status is a mere bureaucratic oversight or accident, while "illegal immigrant" is criticized by pro-immigrant groups as (maybe intentionally) denying someone's personhood or inherent worth (as if there were something inherently illegal about the person). I think I've seen someone try to use "unauthorized migrant" but there is even a prospect of getting pushback from people who hear this and assume that it must have been chosen in order to avoid showing support for their own "side". This difficulty repeats itself a lot!

manicdee 6y ago
"Illegal immigrant" is quite plainly an anti-refugee phrase that was invented to criminalise people seeking refugee status. It's never been used otherwise. "Undocumented immigrant" does technically describe a person's status but it's only used in relation to certain types of foreign visitor. Across the white English speaking world we'll almost universally use "undocumented immigrant" to refer to brown-skinned people, while we use "visa overstayers" to refer to white-skinned people. Some guy from India comes to work for a cousin's business on a sponsored work visa and stays a week too long? Undocumented immigrant. Some white woman from the UK comes to work for a major tech company and stays a few years too long? She just overstayed her visa. Then to round of the discussions about words changing in meaning over time, remember when holding thumb and forefinger together in a circle was just "the game" and you'd do things to get your friends to look — at which point they'd lose "the game"? But these days, it's only a white power symbol, thanks to some anonymous idiot on 4chan. It's a crazy world that changes so quickly. I can understand why some people want the world to stay just the same for a decade or two. But that can't be done. We have to adapt or die.
- BeetleB 6y ago
  > It's never been used otherwise. Absolutism will not get you anywhere. You're not omniscient, and do not know the minds of (literally) millions of people who use the phrase.
- luxuryballs 6y ago
  > “is quite plainly an anti-refugee phrase” legally speaking a refugee is not illegal, “illegal immigrant” is just a term for a person who enters through the border illegally in a country where there are both lawful and unlawful methods of entry, refugees are accepted by law also, and if accepted through the defined process of law are not “illegal”
  - lazyasciiart 6y ago
    But we're talking about vernacular usage, not legal.
- natchy 6y ago
  Although I think there’s some merit to your comment, I don’t think it’s racial, I think it’s cultural or classist. A black English actor (like Idris Elba) would be “overstaying his visa” as would a wealthy Indian tech CEO. People coming from another country in the anglosphere are viewed differently because there is a shared culture. There’s a huge venn overlap in race between these countries but that’s because they were English colonies. All-in-all your comment seems a little hostile. We’re all learning. Even you don’t have all the answers, surely.
  - ALittleLight 6y ago
    I think class is part of it, or it makes us assume motivations, but I think the differences in terms actually describe what's being done. If you move to a country to live there from now on, in violation of the law, you're an illegal immigrant. If you visit temporarily with a visa, but overstay or violate the terms, without intending to become a permanent resident, then you are overstaying your visa. We probably assume something about the rich actor versus the poor janitor, but if we knew their intentions I think we could describe them accurately. I also don't think there is anything wrong with the term "illegal immigrant". We have terms for crimes that are frequent or frequently talked about, e.g. drunk driver, deadbeat dad, arsonist, whatever. Immigrating, in violation of the law, is illegal and the people who do it are fairly called illegal immigrants to differentiate them from those that don't violate the law. I think insistence on "undocumented" is more of a rhetorical use from people who think immigration should be more permissive.
nkurz 6y ago
> It's also frustrating that every common term for some concept can easily acquire connotations that suggest a particular affiliation. Upvoted, but for sake of example I'll mention that your use of "anti-immigrant groups" can be one of those loaded terms. While there likely are some people who are actually against all immigrants, the more common position is to support legal immigration (with differing opinions on how restricted this should be) while being against illegal immigration (with differing opinions on how those who break these laws should be treated). Since there aren't mainstream groups who think of themselves as universally "anti-immigrant", it tends to be used only as a pejorative. I think a reasonable general principle is to try to use terms that people choose to apply to themselves. On the other hand, I don't know that there is an equivalent descriptor that everyone would consider fair. Language is hard!
- schoen 6y ago
  Yes, I realized that this was also a problem but couldn't think of a better way to refer concisely to people who favor more enforcement of immigration laws! I understand that many people favor immigration but also want laws that restrict it to be enforced. I was thinking of giving an example about abortion and realized that even talking about "pro-abortion people usually call themselves 'pro-choice' and anti-abortion people usually call themselves 'pro-life'" would also have the same problem, because some people who favor legalized abortion also want to discourage abortion or reduce the number of abortions that occur, so they don't agree that they are "pro-abortion". In college I strongly favored drug legalization while also strongly opposing drug use, which makes it unclear to what extent it would have been appropriate to call me "pro-drug" or "anti-drug".
  - x3n0ph3n3 6y ago
    > I understand that many people favor immigration but also want laws that restrict it to be enforced. Too often the xenophilic restrictionists are left out of the conversation of immigration and coerced into one camp or the other.
  - jrowen 6y ago
    The suggestion made in the article is to ditch the bid for brevity and just use the more verbose forms, i.e. “people who favor more enforcement of immigration laws” or “people who are present in a country in violation of its immigration laws.” The idea would seem to have merit as you ended up needing those anyway when the more concise forms were inadequate.

by schoen 6y ago

manicdee 6y ago

"Illegal immigrant" is quite plainly an anti-refugee phrase that was invented to criminalise people seeking refugee status. It's never been used otherwise. "Undocumented immigrant" does technically describe a person's status but it's only used in relation to certain types of foreign visitor. Across the white English speaking world we'll almost universally use "undocumented immigrant" to refer to brown-skinned people, while we use "visa overstayers" to refer to white-skinned people. Some guy from India comes to work for a cousin's business on a sponsored work visa and stays a week too long? Undocumented immigrant. Some white woman from the UK comes to work for a major tech company and stays a few years too long? She just overstayed her visa. Then to round of the discussions about words changing in meaning over time, remember when holding thumb and forefinger together in a circle was just "the game" and you'd do things to get your friends to look — at which point they'd lose "the game"? But these days, it's only a white power symbol, thanks to some anonymous idiot on 4chan. It's a crazy world that changes so quickly. I can understand why some people want the world to stay just the same for a decade or two. But that can't be done. We have to adapt or die.

BeetleB 6y ago
> It's never been used otherwise. Absolutism will not get you anywhere. You're not omniscient, and do not know the minds of (literally) millions of people who use the phrase.
luxuryballs 6y ago
> “is quite plainly an anti-refugee phrase” legally speaking a refugee is not illegal, “illegal immigrant” is just a term for a person who enters through the border illegally in a country where there are both lawful and unlawful methods of entry, refugees are accepted by law also, and if accepted through the defined process of law are not “illegal”
- lazyasciiart 6y ago
  But we're talking about vernacular usage, not legal.
natchy 6y ago
Although I think there’s some merit to your comment, I don’t think it’s racial, I think it’s cultural or classist. A black English actor (like Idris Elba) would be “overstaying his visa” as would a wealthy Indian tech CEO. People coming from another country in the anglosphere are viewed differently because there is a shared culture. There’s a huge venn overlap in race between these countries but that’s because they were English colonies. All-in-all your comment seems a little hostile. We’re all learning. Even you don’t have all the answers, surely.
- ALittleLight 6y ago
  I think class is part of it, or it makes us assume motivations, but I think the differences in terms actually describe what's being done. If you move to a country to live there from now on, in violation of the law, you're an illegal immigrant. If you visit temporarily with a visa, but overstay or violate the terms, without intending to become a permanent resident, then you are overstaying your visa. We probably assume something about the rich actor versus the poor janitor, but if we knew their intentions I think we could describe them accurately. I also don't think there is anything wrong with the term "illegal immigrant". We have terms for crimes that are frequent or frequently talked about, e.g. drunk driver, deadbeat dad, arsonist, whatever. Immigrating, in violation of the law, is illegal and the people who do it are fairly called illegal immigrants to differentiate them from those that don't violate the law. I think insistence on "undocumented" is more of a rhetorical use from people who think immigration should be more permissive.

nkurz 6y ago

> It's also frustrating that every common term for some concept can easily acquire connotations that suggest a particular affiliation. Upvoted, but for sake of example I'll mention that your use of "anti-immigrant groups" can be one of those loaded terms. While there likely are some people who are actually against all immigrants, the more common position is to support legal immigration (with differing opinions on how restricted this should be) while being against illegal immigration (with differing opinions on how those who break these laws should be treated). Since there aren't mainstream groups who think of themselves as universally "anti-immigrant", it tends to be used only as a pejorative. I think a reasonable general principle is to try to use terms that people choose to apply to themselves. On the other hand, I don't know that there is an equivalent descriptor that everyone would consider fair. Language is hard!

schoen 6y ago
Yes, I realized that this was also a problem but couldn't think of a better way to refer concisely to people who favor more enforcement of immigration laws! I understand that many people favor immigration but also want laws that restrict it to be enforced. I was thinking of giving an example about abortion and realized that even talking about "pro-abortion people usually call themselves 'pro-choice' and anti-abortion people usually call themselves 'pro-life'" would also have the same problem, because some people who favor legalized abortion also want to discourage abortion or reduce the number of abortions that occur, so they don't agree that they are "pro-abortion". In college I strongly favored drug legalization while also strongly opposing drug use, which makes it unclear to what extent it would have been appropriate to call me "pro-drug" or "anti-drug".
- x3n0ph3n3 6y ago
  > I understand that many people favor immigration but also want laws that restrict it to be enforced. Too often the xenophilic restrictionists are left out of the conversation of immigration and coerced into one camp or the other.
- jrowen 6y ago
  The suggestion made in the article is to ditch the bid for brevity and just use the more verbose forms, i.e. “people who favor more enforcement of immigration laws” or “people who are present in a country in violation of its immigration laws.” The idea would seem to have merit as you ended up needing those anyway when the more concise forms were inadequate.