Thank goodness for my friend, whose name I won’t reveal, as she is the one doing my grocery shopping and delivering the bags to the house which I share with one other family.
My regular visit to WalMart? No way – large numbers of people in one place are too attractive to poorly trained guys with guns eager to earn their $50,000 paycheck by showing how tough they can be apprehending defenseless people.
It makes no difference that I miss going to my favorite restaurant; it closes completely when warned of a sweep being conducted in the area or when there are no customers, even for take out.
I tell my family they can wear their dirty clothes another day, or more; laundromats draw too much attention from the guys in masks, often without the body cameras they are required to wear.
Our church becomes a Bible, not a pew. And maybe I turn to some WhatsApp exchanges with people who are praying the current reign of complete unease/terror/overreach by the government will subside as more people object to the way immigration policy is being implemented. (Some would substitute “executed” for implemented given the number of deaths associated with ICE.)
I do have a court date; my lawyer advised me to stay put and let her plead my case. There are too many instances when a person showed up for a court date and was grabbed on the way out.
With assistance from an organization which helps immigrants, I have filled out notarized guardianship papers in case I am taken and my adult son, legally here, has to take charge of his siblings. His father left the family a long time ago, claiming it would make my case less difficult for me to pursue. Who knows in this environment.
I’m obviously not a lawyer, but with help from a member of the community who is chagrined/appalled by the tactics of the administration, I filled out another form, a power of attorney. This was done in the event that my son gets “accidentally” swept up in the administration’s lust for a big body count irrespective of a person’s existing legal status.
A while back, I sent some money I had saved (after paying my taxes I assure you) to a member of my extended family back in the country I left behind — I do not say “my home country.”
“The United States is now my home country” is something I have said for many years, even as people I know still use the latter part of that phrase to refer to where they are from. I understand and appreciate the emotion, but changing my life is why I am here, why I want to be here, why I have kept a clean record since taking the “scenic route” to get here a great many years ago. Iwould welcome the opportunity to pay a fine for my civil violation.
Now, I have to admit, this identification of “home country” is in conflict and I am being forced to re-think what it means the longer I am afraid to open my front door. I wonder, not only when, but if, my life can revert to what I thought was normal before I heard that the big black cars were in town.
Every day I ask myself, “when can I leave my house?”
This essay was inspired by a brilliant book with a quirky, but accurate title:
“One Day, Everyone will have always been against this.” Published in 2025, the author is Omar El Akkad.
**
Lacking the requisite skills, I have made no attempt to differentiate speech patterns among the various participants in this essay. The setting is ordinary: a family dinner, and the people are similarly ordinary, regardless of their accomplishments.
Any discussion about politics or Jews is fundamentally about personal convenience or impact.
The content itself is a series of excerpts from a much lengthier conversation.
*****
A weekly occurrence, the family has gathered for an evening meal at Hans’ expansive house in the outskirts of Munich.
Henry is 40, a rising bank executive. His wife Agnes, same age, is a homemaker, focused on raising their two children: Carl (14) and Clara (7). Carl is in a Youth Group, learning about the importance of German culture and the maintenance of its purity against the invasion of Jews.
Agnes has no interest in politics, shuns the subject completely. She is however quite annoyed at the price of groceries. Henry is exercised about rising interest rates and the impact on the housing market; his bank makes a large number of residential mortgages.
Henry’s brother Ben, older than Henry by a half-dozen years, is a carpenter, skilled at the joinery technique of making coffins. Long since divorced, his current in-home paramour is a Lufthansa flight attendant supervisor, Bertha.
Hildegard, sister to Henry and Ben, is a retired librarian, pleasant company for the siblings she loves, unlikely to be initiating a troublesome topic of conversation. Her husband Albert is a perfect complement, content to be her partner. He too no longer works, after thirty-five years atthe telephone company.
Hans, father of Ben, Henry, and Hildegard, is a retired military man, a veteran of WW I, with a ready supply of opinions on all matters political. He was an outstanding Engineering major at his university long ago, a fact of which nobody around the table is unaware. The family does not know exactly what he does currently in the military, although a majority believe that in truth he does nothing. His certificated commendations are quite dated. While his house is adorned with Nazi flags, that is not terribly meaningful when so many homes have such flags.
Hans has been at it so long you would think if he was active military, he would have been posted somewhere, but that has not happened. Apparently his skills were in demand during the last war,but do not meet the current aggressive standard required by Hitler’s Organization Todt. And so he continuously relives his memories of being a valued person.
Hans wife Judith passed away several years ago, the victim of a drunk driver who immediately left the scene and has never been apprehended. The absence of justice closure weighs on the family, especially on their annual remembrance day.
**
Knowing that Hans is eager to shift any conversation to the subject of politics, Agnes preempts him.
Can you believe the price of sausage … or eggs! They’re up 20% in the last month alone. We may need to cut back.
Henry: And interest rate increases are killing our residential mortgage business. Maybe we should give away sausage and eggs for every new mortgage that our salesmen bring in. Or maybe Agnes , your clothes shopping expeditions could be reduced to monthly instead of weekiy.
Ben: My friend Dietrich’s ammunition business is booming of course, thanks to our leader and his goal of having our flag flying in more countries — you know, what he said when he was elected five years ago. He has already followed through on his promise to boot the bad guys running Austria and Czechoslovakia and manage those nations himself.
Hans: He is cleaning things up right here. You know that many Jews have been here for a long time without getting an ID card. Now he has cracked down on these criminals, kicking them out of jobs and actively encouraging them to leave. Maybe Austria or Czechoslovakia would take them.
Ben: I had to give the heave-ho to a Jew at the factory last week, orders from the government. He supposedly wanted the workers to form a union and push for higher wages. I will miss him; he worked harder than most of the locals, many of whom are actually prisoners required to work at this factory and other places in the city.
Agnes: Speaking of Jews, our pediatrician is nowhere to be found. It’s irritating of course but I’m sure we’ll find another one just as good.
Henry: And she will be German, not a Jew.
Clara: What’s wrong with Jews? One of my teachers is Jewish. She said she has been here for ten years and never has committed a crime.
Ben: Does she have an ID card?
Clara: I don’t know. Who cares.
Hans: You’re too young to understand how Germany has been mistreated and why Germany must be strong and pure. Please pass me the potatoes.
Hans: Carl, how is it going with your Youth Group?
Carl: We have our uniforms and our list of Hitler approved books. You can tell that the boyssense of national pride has grown since becoming members and reading only the right material.
Hans: Good, we need more up-and-comers. What if Hitler wants to add Poland next year and France the year after.
Carl: I will still be too young to serve.
Hans: Oh yes, I got carried away. But you can do what your father does, and your grandfather, identify Jews without ID cards and notify the authorities.
Agnes, alarmed, turns to Henry: Have you been doing that? Is that why we lost our pediatrician?
Henry: Didn’t you say, we could easily find another one?
Agnes: Well yes, but I did not realize you were the reason for her disappearance.
Ben: Let’s face it: Jews are everywhere, taking jobs which belong to Germans.
Hans: Well said . I’ll let you in on a little news flash. Hitler will, shall we say, “incentivize” Jews to leave Germany and live elsewhere.
Ben: Bertha, what do you hear on your international flights to the USA?
Bertha: Americans are constantly discussing the country’s economic problems; there are almost no comments about Jews being moved around.
Hans: People everywhere are jealous of our strength, our insistence on maintaining our own culture. And they are envious of our ability to say things outright that secretly they want to say.
Ben: There is a rumor that late this year Hitler will come to Berlin expressly to rename the Opera House with both his name and that of Wagner. Snivelers are saying that Wagner is not the right opera guy (I have no idea myself) and designers will quibble about having two names on an Opera House building, but that is not the point.
As Heinrich Miller put it, “The core issue in society and human relationships is power and the requisite display that attaches to whoever has that power. Do you think a court will say,
‘No, you cannot do that renaming.’ Hah, a judge put in place by Hitler!
Hildegard shifts the conversation. What do you see in today’s newspaper, Albert?
Albert: I did hear that Moise’s kosher restaurant on Olympics Avenue had lost its windows in the recent high wind and gathering of emergency military personnel – that it was going out of business, but I saw nothing in the paper.
Here’s an interesting piece. “A group of Jews were moving slowly to the place designated as their new home. Their pace was unsatisfactory to a seemingly slightly inebriated soldier, who kept yelling obscenities at those who were not only walking in a slow, reluctant manner but were lobbing back some aggressive words of their own. One of them broke from his friends and ran screaming toward the soldier; a shot rang out and the protocol violating Jew was dead. His group paused, torn between wanting to retrieve the deceased individual and wanting to avoid more shooting by the soldier, counterintuitively a skilled sniper with experience in battle, not a recently drafted kid.”
Albert changes the subject, softly inquiring of Hans, “What is Organization Todt?”
Hans: Fritz Todt is the driving force behind many of the country’s building projects, from the Autobahn to Hitler’s plans for huge edifices everywhere. Munich itself might be redone eventually. Remember, Hitler wanted to be an artist or an architect himself.
Albert: Does he use Jews?
Hans: He uses whomever he can get –Jews, prisoners, skilled, unskilled. Many are obligated by the government to work for Organization Todt so it does not have to concern itself with working conditions. Todt himself is quite talented I hear, an engineer of note, and completely devoted to carrying out Hitler’s infrastructure wishes.
Enough chatter. I must leave in a few minutes. Could we have dessert now!
Hans departs shortly after consuming a large strudel. His family knows he is headed to the local inn to drink beer and talk about WW I and soccer with whomever is around; always there are friends in attendance. His family looks on him, despite his medals and certificates, many of which they believe were picked up at various flea markets, as being relatively okay, not sufficiently mentally imbalanced to require serious attention. They treat him more like an ordinary old man, albeit one with an irritating conversational passion, than an important man whose every word must be reflected, and acted, upon. (Perhaps this juxtaposition is valid in many households, where facts, opinions, and portions of familial love are mixed in various degrees of comfort and discomfort.)
**
Were the author of “One Day” to eavesdrop on the conversation in this essay, he would not be surprised by the absence of commentary that might be construed as concerning ethics or moral obligation or a requirement to take action. He would see the ordinary person focused on ordinary concerns, ceding the decision-making about the use of power to those who have seized the opportunity to wield it in whatever manner they and their advantaged colleagues see fit.
For this essay, these lightly edited excerpts from “One Day” come to mind:
*What good are words, severed from anything real? The necessity is action, rude that it may be. People must be uncomfortable.”
*Walking away from hypocrisy, from evil is not nihilism. It’s a form of engagement more honest, more soul-affirming than anything the system is prepared to offer. “
*The real crime is that they have violated the bounds of their nonexistence. They could perform labor and be paid wages but as vessels of agency they simply did not exist.”
*There will be those who say it was all the work of a few bad actors, people who misled the rest of us well-meaning folks. Anything to avoid the possibility that all this killing was the result of the system functioning exactly as intended.”
P.S. To quote Shalom Alexander (Op Ed piece “They were ordinary Germans. We are ordinary Americans”) in the New York Times, January 15, 2026:
“Past or present, it’s not the leaders who disappoint me. It’s the led.”
“And I wonder if someday … a young man will chance upon an old iPhone from 2026 and scrolling through it … will wonder how this unbothered American went about his normal life as the country was descending into fear-induced psychosis at the hands of an autocrat. ‘Thank goodness, he will comfort himself, ‘we’re not like them.’”
Let’s say that Bill, Richard, Joe and Tom –average white Americans — had dinner at Bill’s house. They are polishing off a slice of chocolate cake with their coffee and for some inexplicable reason (or perhaps there was a television talking head in the background) the conversation moved past football and the cost of living to that of immigration. The first result of that shift was that Tom immediately remembered he had somewhere to go, something to do, and exited stage left.
After some extended back and forth, Joe announced that he too must leave, but for what it was worth before departing would, ala a good interviewer or reporter, summarize some of the questions and observations he had heard:
*Isn’t it true that when a “Jim” loses his job, he alleges that “Juan” took it, even though the connecting dots between the claim and the fact are impossible to discern.
*Because a given illegal immigrant committed a heinous crime, we must tighten the border. If this were a logical reaction, from the individual to the group, we would have to tighten county borders throughout the country.
*Do we really want to boot people from the country who have been here many years not only without disturbing our lifestyles but actually enhancing them through the many services often provided by these individuals?
*Is it true that the resident population of the USA is not growing, that we need more people?
*Why can’t people enter our country the “right way?”
*Are conditions really that bad in the countries people are leaving?
*Are we talking amnesty again? What happened to Reagan’s promise?
*Doesn’t the Statue of Liberty say something about taking in troubled people?
And then, as Joe is leaving, Bill’s son Frank, your standard directionless eighteen year-old, his video game finished, pops his head in to announce, “Hey, I can make $50,000 plus bonuses if I become an ICE agent. How cool is that!”
Bill and Richard struggled to respond to Frank and his uncomplicated exuberance. When Frank had grabbed a sandwich and a bottle of beer and returned to his room, Bill expressed the thought that perhaps it would be helpful to have a “Meet your Illegal Alien Day.” Richard had no special reaction but he agreed to meet Bill the following morning to see what he had in mind.
Bill decided to structure the day in the following manner:
STOP ONE: MAIN STREET CAFÉ
Bill: Good Morning Richard. We have a full day ahead of us. Did you have your coffee?
Richard: Yes. It was delicious.
Bill: Was it Colombian or maybe from Venezuela?
Richard: Not sure.
Bill: Do you know if people working on the coffee plantations earn a living wage?
Richard: Darned if I know. Are some of them crossing our border without papers?
Bill: Who knows, but we do like their coffee.
STOP TWO:
Bill: Are you ready for our meeting with the Shotwell Roofing Company?
Richard: Yes, my house definitely needs a new roof, otherwise my insurance will skyrocket.
Bill: Where do you get your roofers, Mr. Shotwell?
Shotwell: They’re mostly from Central America. Okay, before you ask, many are undocumented.
The white guys we tried were terrible about showing up on time and doing a full day’s work.
Is that a problem, Richard?
Richard: Nah; I must have a new roof.
Shotwell: Here’s the paperwork; we’ll get started on Monday
STOP THREE:
Richard: Hey, I’m starved. Let’s go to that Mexican place for some tacos.
Bill: Didn’t it get raided recently?
Richard: They took a cook and a dishwasher. No big deal. Easy to replace positions.
Bill: Okay, let’s go.
(After the meal) Richard: Man, that was delicious.
Bill: Even the lettuce picked by the Mexicans in California? Just kidding. I got the check.
Server: ICE grabbed two people who had been in the country for 12 years, zero criminal record, married, kids in school.
Richard: I thought they only were after the bad guys.
Server: Calling earth!
Richard: I’m stuffed. Let’s go.
STOP FOUR:
Bill: We have to talk with your landscaper about the area around your pool. What’s his name?
Richard: Uh, let me think. Probably Jose.
Javier: Hello Mr. Richard.
Richard: Who are the other guys?
Javier: Juan and Camilo. They’re my crew.
Richard: OK. Modelo for everyone if you are done by 4pm.
Bill: How did you hear about your landscaper?
Richard: My friend Sam. He’s the owner of Essential Parts, a local factory that employs 85 workers, a large percentage of which are Hispanic, many new to the country.
Bill: Does he discriminate?
Richard: No way. He always gets their names and social security numbers.
Bill: Where do his parts go?
Richard: Electronics, phones, defense, airframes – they all have an Essential Part. Sam is so proud of coining the company name.
STOP FIVE:
Bill: Time to go; we are scheduled to visit the Anywhere Engineering facility.
Bill: Hi Adrian: good to see you are alive and well after that dust-up with your credentials. Say hello to my friend Richard.
Adrian: Hello, Richard. It was no fun Bill, a complete run through of walking into the USA, studying English, eventually getting a job and a teacher’s credential, then later starting this business. It was only when Boeing, one of my big customers, threw its weight around that I was free of harassment. By the way, did you check the background of Nobel Prize winners in the scientific categories: there is a heavy representation of immigrants attracted here for education, study, and accomplishment.
Richard: That’s all above my head. How do you feel about cracking down on alleged criminals?
Adrian: All for it; if due process finds them guilty, lock them up.
STOP SIX:
Bill: Last stop, Richard, I want to get inside that beautiful house of yours and see if Maria did a good cleaning job. You’ve been bragging about her.
Richard: She’s great. I’ve used her for over a year… trust her completely. She now has a key.
Bill: Where is she from?
Richard: Merry Maids sent her.
**
Excluding Bill and Richard, whose families (like ours) presumptively came to this country some years ago, which person referenced above, directly or obliquely, should be labeled
an “Illegal Alien.”
Which of them should be deleted from any interaction with the four guys around the table?
Which should be apprehended by Frank — who is being paid by you?
Fiction; written in 2025 pre-the ascendancy of Trump, by an Anglo Friend
In 1990, my father Carlos came to the United States from Colombia.As we say within the family or with trusted friends, “he took the scenic route.”
Like the vast majority of those attracted to this country for many years, Carlos wanted to work andsave enough money to bring my mom Angela and my sister Marianorth to live with him as a family.
By 1995, from his job as a factory supervisor able to accrue overtime, he had accumulated the necessary funds, with full recognition that Mom and Maria would be taking a morecircuitous and expensive path to reunite with Carlos.
Not long after they arrived in the USA,Mom became pregnant. I was born in 1996, an American citizen from my first breath.
Economically, our four-person family unit was self-sustaining, as much a function of motivation as any special skills other than the experience gained by Carlos. We always believed that in the USA, if you want a job, you can become employed. Issues of whether the wage is fair we left to others.
Culturally it was a struggle to find our footing. My parents were content with paying the bills, relaxing with Spanish television, with nary a thought of trying to fit in with those outside their increasingly Hispanic neighborhood. My sister Maria and I encouraged them to sample the many, and more diverse, places accessible on the subway but mostly they were uninterested.Their lack of confidence in using English was certainly a factor; neither their jobs nor their limited socializing required speaking English.
Maria, who was born in 1988,was able to enroll in non-credit ESL classes at the local community college, eventually earn an Associates degree in Liberal Arts and obtain an okay job in an office. She was convinced that being fully documented would have meant a position more consistent with her capabilities. She was right for sure.
From the outset there was pressure on me at home to learn Spanish. At the time, I did not understand why: school was almost entirely in English. Down the road, I understood: they wanted me to always appreciate their culture, or is it “our” culture? Besides, being bilingual would be an important advantage in the future.
I went to a neighborhood public school that, to my parents, did not seem very demanding. They thought about sending me to a private school, but that cost too much, or to a more rigorous public charter school, but the teachers union’s political allies had prevented the latter from obtaining a charter to open up nearby.Truth is, like most guys I hung out with,I drifted through school, especially high school – if I got my homework done and did reasonably well on tests, I knew I would pass with a decent GPA. Soccer and girls were my true points of focus.
To my parents, neither of whom had advanced beyond high school, my attending college was a given, even if they knew little about the American education system other than whatMaria had experienced.Looking back, perhaps if I had a high school guidance counselor who actually knew me and to whom I could have gone for advice, things would have been different.
As it was, my first awareness of the whole college admission process was coupled with serious sticker shock. The bottom line was simple: going to a public college was financially mandatory, as was lessening the overall high cost by attending a community college for the first two years.
At times, community college felt like grade 13. Nonetheless, the academic requirements were a clear step up, with another jump when I transferred to a four-year public university.I knew, without much research, that a Bachelor’s degree with a Business Administrationmajor was what I and my parents wanted.
Following graduation in 2018, I did not immediately get a job that I mistakenly thought came attached to a college diploma.It is an understatement to say this was a big and painful discovery. So I did a little of this and a little of that. I was hard-pressed to understand why I was not more gainfully employed. If it was having gone to a public university, having a nebulous major, and recording only a 3.2 GPA were the reasons, then why were classmates with comparable credentials moving into decent positions.
Then, in 2021, after George Floyd was murdered, the Human Resources door in corporate America opened wider for minorities, admittedly moreso for African Americans than for Hispanics, but still there was interesting activity on the hiring front. I reactivated my dormant application effort and landed a job as an assistant to a project manager. Part of me realized that the interview was a bit on the soft side, but you did not hear me complaining.
It took a while, a couple of years in fact, but I came to realize that my ostensiblepeers in the company had attended much better schools for their K-12 education. And they had degrees from better known universities. Not only did they know stuff that was not immediately recognizable by me, I was not receiving any training to pull me out of my deficit. Moreover, the cultural awkwardness evident from the first time I walked into ameeting where I was the sole Hispanic showed no signs of dissipating. Even in non-job conversations, I could not mesh with those around me.
In year three, it was clear that the corporate commitment to DEI had waned; with hindsight, the earlieractivity, including the hiring of yours truly, seemed like a check-the-box exercise.
By this time, I had come to dislike my job – even with its nice paycheck—and with it,corporate America in general. I quit … and nobody at the office cared.
Neither did anybody I know get in my face and push me to apply someplace else. I guess my attitude was that companies were all alike, which, in retrospect, is not something I could possibly have known considering my limited experience.
In my defense – if you think my action was rash – I have asked myself whether additional credentials were needed: CPA, law degree, certificate of some sort, etc. And yes, I probably should have majored in something more specific than Business Administration, something which could connect with adefinable/portable skill set.
Considering the distaste I had developed — maybe prematurely — for corporate life and not being eager for another dose of institutional learning, the above education paths were not appealing to me.
Instead, I went back to some of my side hustles — I did Door Dash and Uber for a while. Was it enough to live on? Only if I lived at home and was frugal, not easy to accomplishwhen you are feeling a bit depressed and tempted to drown your sorrows.
I could have gone on FanDuel I guess and bet on soccer matches. I could not trade stock options (something a classmate had told me about; it sounded like a way to win only if you could afford to lose, not my situation) or I could have peddled drugs and been disowned by my family. In a positive vein, I could have become an ESL tutor, or a mentor to an aspiring Jose, while trying not to be openly disappointed in mysituation.
Did my parents understand my decision to give up a good salary, a number that was a multiple of their combined earnings? No. Do they constantly ask why – periodically, not daily, thank goodness.
There are times when my father, who has been relatively tight with his money, talks about opening a small restaurant, staffed entirely by our family. He means well, giving me a productive occupation, but all I can think about is why did I go to college if this is to be my job. Maybe I could persuade him to buy a fixer upper that could be a combination of our own residence and a rental unit.
Both my sister Maria and I think that Carlos secretly would rather put his savings aside for an inexpensive retirement home back in Colombia. Mom would rather be here with her grandchildren, of which currently there are none, much to her dismay.
In addition to Maria’s job situation, more or less a consistent source of irritation for her, my sister’s emotional state includes trying to figure out where her heart and head are concerning the American she has been going with for the past two years. Is she attracted to him for all the “normal” reasons or as a way to resolve her status — for free as a loving wife,or is it more like a philosophical statement on behalf of cultural diversity. Mom is eager to hear Maria’s wedding bells, while trying not to show it so explicitly that everythingcould boomerang.
On occasion, we all debate immigration policy, not a surprise. Carlos, who worked long hours and waited many years to get documented, is dismayed that current border crossersoften can readily get free benefits – debit cards, food, lodging, maybe work visas — not available back in the day. My mother does not disagree. My sister is more sympathetic, and simultaneously irritated at me, in her words, for not taking advantage of my birthright.
As for me,I read an immigration descriptor as being a “trilemma:” the majority of peoplewant an enforceable border, businesses simply want workers for economic reasons, and humanitarians want to help those in need, whether it be economic or personal safety. Try to create an immigration program that embodies all three components and satisfieseverybody!
***
Enough introspection: I close with the typical query, “now what?” That is both my question and that of my therapist as well. (Don’t ask if the latter is money well spent and please do not tell my parents that I am seeing a shrink!)
Comments by the Writer:
We know that irrespective of future immigration, Jose’s story is one component of the big picture of important demographic change in this country. The projected crossover year when there will be no ethnic majority is 2045, not far away.
You would think this unfolding future would cause companies, and organizations in general, to gradually become more diversified in their employment, matching what is already happening with their customer/patient/client list.
Maybe this will happen but how many minorities find themselves in Jose’s position: frustrated thinking about past decisions and circumstances that are not rectifiable, with a clear experienceof being uncomfortable in corporate America.Will demographic reality as a force for broader change,inclusive of corporate/organizational training commitments that would be pertinent to a Jose, remain less attitudinally meaningful than the existingimbalance in wealth. Older white people have the lion’s share and probably are not eager to see, or advocate for,generalized acceptance of the new demographic world.
As somewhat of a digression, since what follows is not directly connected to demographic numbers, I am struck by the accuracy of the statement which speaks to the qualitative nature of change,“Education is the Civil Rights issue of our Times.”
Ignoring higher education (of all types), it is obvious that K-12 education, and the funding thereof, is critically important. If we caredabout the education being received by students in urban public schools, which are heavily minority, we would provide more AP courses and a greater number of skilled guidance counselors.
If Jose had received acompetitive K-12 education – which should be that civil right,had a better understanding of college pre-enrolling, and had an appreciation (from somewhere) of the world of corporate America, including its uneven commitment to both training and DEI, maybe hewould be a different person today.
Then too, perhaps Josesimply lacked the work ethic of his father.
Should he have persevered at his corporate job, including identifying a colleague who could have counseled him on how to fit in the system, how to avoid the loneliness which Jose undoubtedly was feeling.Shouldhe have been more curious as a young person, become more aware of ways of thinking not inherently part of (or maybe simply not apparent) his immediateneighborhood?After all,to echo sister Maria’s point about not having taken advantage of his circumstance, Jose was free of documentation issues, unlike her.
Jose might respond, “I am not free of being a minority.”
This is a true and important statement, and equally true, it does not come close to fully explaining his individual situation.
Nor can society avoid major criticism for its dysfunctional K-12 education system, or corporate America, for its lack of training.
The subject of immigration always has enough moving parts to fill an entire shelf of books at my favorite café, aka Barnes & Noble. Nonetheless, in the current environment, attempting to persuade kangaroos to march in line is easier than writing a cogent, comprehensive, readableessay about immigration, the initial challenge being the selection of focus.
Should it be a factual demolishment of the immigrant falsehoods perpetuated by the terrible trio of Trump, Miller, and Homan (T3) or should the tack be a personal history piece, my interaction with and thoughts about immigration. I have chosen the latter, coupled with considerablecommentary on the contemporary immigration situation.
(As a procedural confession, I remain addicted to reading, every day, the physical versions of the “New York Times” and the “Wall Street Journal.” I could cite articles for some of the information to follow; if this were a scholarly treatise, I would do so. I note as well that T3 provides so much “writing material” on a daily basis that this essay is sure to be missing points of interest which feed the inability to remain calm in the face of the T3 onslaught.
Some Personal History
For three decades, I have been involved with the issue of immigration, in part because our WKBJ Foundation has assisted many Hispanic young people to pursue their educational aspirations. Weonly cared about documentation because of its financial and practical ramifications, nothing else. Early on, I made the admittedly glib statement that “we are all immigrants. I just came earlier.”
Our MADE in Dover program (late 1990’s) once devoted an entire issue of its MIDtropolisNews publication to the many components of immigration. Students came to the office and did their research and writing on the same day, an uplifting experience. Later (c.2010), we initiated Project 2050; at the time, 2050 was the projected year (it is now 2043) when this country wouldbecome one of multiple minorities, probably a first such circumstance in history and an immensely laudable accomplishment. The demographic story was quite clear, based on solid math, including birth rates for different ethnicities. It was not a function of future immigration patterns.
When Hispanic young people were made aware of this demographic expectation, I always followed with, “the only question is whether power will transfer peacefully.” There was a logical hesitancy as to whether that would be the case, a fundamental political/cultural uncertainty having nothing inherently connected to whoever occupied the White House.
As a relevant sidenote to the issue of power, over the years, when students indicated that their parents believed all government agencies shared information, I said, “not the IRS. Besides, filing a tax return is a small statement of wanting to be in this country, so please do it.” Now, years later from my messaging, the parents may be proven right.
During the above period, as an Opinion Shaper columnist for the “Daily Record” newspaper, I frequently wrote about immigration. On one occasion, I sarcastically noted that affluent people could easily rectify the situation if they checked the credentials of every landscaper, restaurant employee, childcare staffer, household cleaner, and construction person they employed and refused to do business with them if they did not have papers. But of course that would never happen, the collective “we” want people who meet our needs, when we want them, irrespective of legal status at that moment in time.
My understanding of immigration dynamics has been buttressed by travel to multiple countries in Central and South America, sometimes staying in normal houses (excluding razor wire) with people I know and sometimes in a hotel where those seeking financial help were at the corner traffic light, juggling a soccer ball or holding a baby in their arms.
In addition, I have spent significant time in Texas. While some on the left regard that state as an outlying planet of wrongheadedness, local viewpoints on immigration can be appropriately more nuanced, historically influenced, and realistic than many of the thoughts put forth by those who pontificate from comfortable locations far from the border.
I know people who have taken the “scenic route” to get to the USA; that is, they walked in. One is now a judge. Two people of my acquaintance years back received deportation orders on the same day. One immediately returned to his home country. One got married to a woman whose beauty and personality took second place to her legality.
Remaining on the subject of travel for a minute, overstayed tourist visas have always been a relatively quiet source of non-documentation, at least until T3 wanted to seize upon any transgression to fill a deportation quota. The valid observation that some immigrants want to become fully legal primarily because it makes it easier to go back and forth to their former home country is not important in the total picture. They are still contributors to the American economy when here.
Students who invest time and money to come to the USA for their education should be treasured, not given the third degree over every line item on their visa application or social media post. Check the resumes of those leading companies where engineering expertise is the sine qua non. How many were immigrants, became educated here, and started pathbreaking businesses.
As a final, current thought on travel, for those who have thought about going to Nicaragua, it has received a Level 4 warning from the State Department. This means do not travel there because of arbitrary enforcement of laws, risk of wrongful detention, and limited healthcare. The USA itself clearly clicks on the first two criteria and, without stretching it too much, the third as well.
The Los Angeles Protests: ICE+++
Suffice it to say that I have heard a great many immigration stories; the underlying facts of today’s trials and tribulations are not fundamentally new to my ears. However, there are two big differences. First, those facts are accompanied by a generalized fear of T3 run amuck. Second,on-going immigration stupidity by T3 has become a trigger point for protests that have been magnified in scope by an outpouring of antagonism toward virtually everything Trump.
The protest turnout may have been bolstered by high unemployment for teenagers and a high chronic absenteeism rate in the underperforming public school system that pretends to educate a 75% Latino student body. Those high school graduation ceremonies which took place after the first protests were subdued, a particularly painful blow when those walking across the stage may have been the first in their family to do so, even though 58% of Hispanic noncitizens in Los Angeles have been in the USA for at least twenty years.
An additional influence of significant magnitude in the protests was the SEIU’s (Service Employees International Union) newfound love for immigrants as it seeks to boost its union membership. Its leader managed to get arrested, a favorite photo op of politicians since the camera was invented. And, still again, T3’s bully boys at ICE fed the narrative with strongarm tactics. (Will more troops be called out when Los Angeles is the site of several World Cup matches in 2026, and it hosts the Summer Olympics of 2028 as well. Lots of fun coming up or will it be total chaos.)
Being pro-immigration, including personally funding said belief, is not inconsistent with wanting the creation, at the federal level, of a sensible, sustainable immigration program. When was the last time you saw a comprehensive immigration proposal coming from the ranks of immigration advocates?
“Defund ICE” is not exactly a plan; neither is “No Human is Illegal.”
Nor does being pro-immigration mean acceptance of every tactic used by immigrant advocates.
For example, flying the flag of a different country at an immigration protest is basically a political gift to T3, especially the amoral, vindictive Steven Miller (what happened in his childhood!) as he continues to back the falsehood that the country is being invaded.
By flying their country of origin flags, they may raise doubts as to their allegiance, Perhaps they look at the USA as a big ATM, perpetually useful because economic conditions in many Central and South American countries are not sufficiently robust to provide employment commensurate with educational attainment for those without connections. And often the places of origin for immigrants are not safe as well, in important part because of the American addiction to drugs.
I would prefer having every protestor wave an American flag. It sends the message: “we are all Americans, regardless of the paperwork. Treat us like Americans.” Have signs encouraging the deportation of criminals. Polls have always shown that more than 75% of people want a path to legitimacy for undocumented Americans, while simultaneously getting rid of the bad guys.
Having made this observation about the protests, it is clear that the overboard nature of T3’s immigration activities has resonated; while 55% say Trump is the right person to handleimmigration; the same percentage disagrees with how he is doing it. The average person is against raids of school, church, and hospital areas in particular. Activists have been incentivized by Miller’s cruelty to assist those going to immigration courts with legal guidance, information fliers, and moral support.
If you want to be even more alarmed, Miller, attached to Trump since 2016, has a staff of 30 and influence beyond immigration. He leads the charge of those who say, “f… the courts; keep pushing the legal envelope.” And SCOTUS has said, “yeah, it’s okay to deport immigrant criminals to any country where a transaction can be consummated.” A Miller moment for sure.
We should be in the immigrant detention business: cut corners on construction, food, and air conditioning and smirk all the way to the bank. The inmates at the Delaney facility in Newark, for example, have all been arrested for weapons possession and other crimes, so according to the T3 reading of our constitution, it means they have no rights.
Years back, when I was a member of a general partnership, the head man had a partner he used as a punching bag. After a while, I mentioned to the former that if this other fellow did not exist, he would have had to invent him. Today, the Democratic Party is so devoid of a program that if Trump did not exist, the left would have to invent him.
The saving grace for the Democratic Party is that Trump provides so much fodder for anger that the former’s weakness stays off the front page, except for that of the “New York Times,” which talks to itself a lot. Stop the presses: riding to the party’s rescue (?) in New York City is the newest iteration of Robin Hood, a socialist born in Uganda of Indian parents. Zohran Mamdani advocates draining the pockets of the wealthy to provide a list of free services to those with thin wallets.
Among other impacts, the political void in the Democratic Party (apologies to Mamdani and AOC) means that people not in favor of many things done by Trump have nowhere to go. Moreover, there is no cohort of level-headed Republicans acting to rescue the party label fromwhat one Republican said was “the treachery, poor political judgement, and cowardice that characterizes its leadership.”
For the historically inclined, there is a question to be contemplated: which was worse: Watergate or Bidengate, the coverup of the latter’s cognitive decline that led to Trump’s return to power.The same diligent analyst might re-examine the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill. As I recall, the two criticisms of it were: it was complicated and it was bipartisan (a negative? Yipes!)
Returning to the current political front, everything immigration in T’s Big (1000 pages, which guarantees reduced readership), Beautiful (not so much) Bill smacks of venal overreach. Complete information will not be found in this essay.
The battle about immigration has reached the point where buried is the unequivocal economic rationale for immigration; without “importing people,” the country will not grow as previously. Illegal immigrants are less than 5% of the workforce overall, but a multiple of that level in construction, landscaping, farming, and meatpacking. After the first wave of huge protests, hebriefly eased deportation pressures in the farming, eatery, and hospitality areas. Was it because of the protests on the street or was it that businesses who voted for him were in his ear.
The non-profit Institute for Justice (I am a long-time supporter), is fighting one of the little publicized absurdities of T3’s approach to immigration: a requirement that businesses in stipulated border locations fill out paperwork for every transaction of $200 or more. Heretofore the threshold was $10,000. The ostensible logic for the change was the battle against money laundering. In practice, those who Maytag money can go elsewhere, whereas damage to a small entrepreneur can be fatal: time not spent with customers but wasted on filling out forms.
Overall observations about Trump at the polls
At the margin, Trump should be losing support. A very partial list of items in no order includes:
• the “big beautiful bill,” now law, has enough irritating parts relevant to most people, with particular pain to immigrants, that it might breathe life into the moribund Democratic Party
• judges are saying no more frequently, although the SCOTUS decision on the use of injunctions is a win for T3.
• his pardoning of the January 6 criminals was not appreciated
• his view on birthright citizenship is a distraction en route to becoming a nightmare
• his confusion over who started the war in the Ukraine has been baffling to most
• his use of the military in domestic disturbances is a terrible optic
• his immigration policy is adversely affecting Silicon Valley (where he has many supporters)
• there is a well-founded fear that healthcare insurance changes will overlap with immigration policies and hurt innocent citizens as well
• the FBI recently has shifted some agents from, not to, immigration duties, a sign of a certain level of independence that could be quietly interpreted as anti-T3.
• the adverse impact on the economy is evident when Hispanic shoppers stay home because they are fearful of raids
• the quality of his cabinet selections is below a passing grade
• closing aid programs with negative repercussions, like life or death, is not a winner
• deleting words and names not in accordance with his twisted rendition of America’s history has to have produced significant voter remorse given his surprising strength among minorities in the recent election.
• more specifically, to say many Hispanics who voted for him would not do so now is not a brilliant insight.
• whether one favored DOGE/Musk or not, it has been a procedural nightmare. Instead of a skillful scalpel, a chainsaw was used, producing a massacre instead of useful change.
• is there a line-up of former staunch allies cheering Trump on, individual “wins” aside?
• denaturalization – to quote John McEnroe, “you cannot be serious!”
• with all due respect to the above list and the poignant plight of immigrants in particular, most people are most impacted by the prices of everyday goods at the supermarket. They are still rising, contrary to T’s promise.
What this all means in the mid-term elections is less clear than the list of negatives. People need an alternative, a party with a platform that is devoid of identity politics, that is respectful of those who differ about lifestyles and those who have no diplomas hanging on their walls.
Epilogue
On several occasions in the first half of 2025, I managed an Emergency Relief Fund (ERF) in Hackettstown, a small community where those from other countries are providing the overallgrowth. The application was simple: name, address, phone number. The words “legal, immigration, and documentation” were never spoken. I did ask for the name of their former country, how long they had been here, what job they had, and did they have children.
As an offshoot of this effort (a lengthier description is in my blog, an essay entitled “In my Shoes,” my intention is to create a documentary entitled “The Ecuadorian Exodus.” Applicants for whom Ecuador has been their home country were surprisingly greater in number than those from any of the other eight countries represented. Moreover, the Ecuadorians have been in Hackettstown less time, a data point consistent with the comparatively recent rise in transnational drug trafficking and associated corruption in that country.
The documentary will be a welcome to Hackettstown Ecuadorians and an encouragement to them to stay, to find employment, get their children educated, and raise their families.
Inevitably, the documentary itself will shed additional light on the many facets of immigration, providing personal testimony far richer than that in any essay.
Why are there two police cars with flashing lights outside the restaurant where I am interacting with people applying for assistance from our Emergency Relief Fund (ERF)? Are they interested locally or are they coordinating with ICE? The latter was in town two days before, at a laundromat and adjacent convenience store. Fortunately, they are not curious about the group directly visible inside the location, a gathering so large as to block the entrance. It is probably only a coincidence that a young boy, waiting with his family in line for an ERF decision, throws up at the same time as he sees the police.
The ERF process took place at two restaurants in a farming community about 55 miles from New York City and 25 miles from the Delaware Water Gap. However, this mileage is basically irrelevant. It is the distance from “home” that in an adversarial political environment produces a need to stay close, to find kindred spirits if extended family is not available. There is no true security, even when one is equipped with “know your rights” cards outlining what to do if there is a knock on the door.
The restaurants are of modest size, 25 seats in one instance and 40 in the other. On both occasions, they were virtually full, almost entirely by people seeking ERF. Only a few had taken a seat to eat the delicious food available.
The majority, it is learned, live within walking distance. They have been here for two months or twenty years, or any length in between. Countries of origin are: Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela. There were no questions asked about the path they took to get here, whether it was through the Darien Gap or a similarly “scenic” route.
When they arrive to this country, they have a phone number, maybe a name – friend or family — who has come to this distant area with a growing Hispanic population.
At times, it is evident that some struggle to read a simple document written in Spanish. A few have their offspring provide translation. There is no algorithm that connects number of years here with proficiency in English. At times, handwriting is indecipherable. Familiarity with checks is sometimes not high. The check-cashing services made serious money from this ERF endeavor.
There are many single mothers, aka fatherless children. There could be a dozen reasons; no questions were asked. With the handful of kids who have come with their parents, a little game is played by me Messi or Ronaldo, math or science, school or soccer, sancocho or cheeseburger.
The jobs represented are primarily construction, cleaning, landscaping, factories, restaurants. The characteristics of such work are physical capabilities and specific skills, plus a willingness to labor for any amount of money (often cash). Essentially they are powerless to negotiate. And adverse weather conditions can mean the loss of a day’s pay.
The home front is analogously less than clear. An apartment previously occupied by four may now have five, to accommodate a new arrival. If it had two wage-earners previously, now there may be an inconsistent three. When the landlord is aware, the rent gets boosted. The rent itself may not be paid directly to a landlord but to the person whose name is on the rental agreement. And the whole arrangement quite likely will be transacted in cash.
Similar to many millions of Americans born here, budgets are presumptively tight, zero to negative amounts at the end of the day. The absence of a day’s pay looms large in that context, particularly since rent is a fixed obligation, whereas other costs can be adjusted, even the heating and electric bills when financial necessity overrides comfort.
It is no surprise then, when the daily newsfeed is of negative events impacting the community, that financial assistance is an integral part of reacting to the mess that is politics. In-depth documents outlining what a potentially affected person/family should be doing to be prepared for various what-if scenarios are on-point. For those standing in line for ERF, however, that is more an exercise for people accustomed to reading through multiple pages of information and advice; the former’s need is emergency money to pay bills, rent and food being the lead categories.
Definitions of what constitutes an “emergency” vary of course. The ERF was not set up to handle large legal or medical bills. It was not staffed to drill down on the information provided by the applicant. Is it likely that truth was shaded in a percentage of instances, yes, but all money-based programs have built-in assumptions concerning accuracy of information. Suffice it to say that the perfect is a negative pursuit if it prevents good from being accomplished.
Addendum One:
Effectively, what took place above was a one-time, unscripted, only quietly announced, unanalyzed, narrowly focused, modified UBI, although unlike the model, funds per person had to be adjusted on the fly, based on the number seeking ERF and the total dollars available.
What then is UBI? Universal Basic Income is an idea that – in the full version — every person should receive a monthly check with no strings attached. In practice, the experiments being run in several dozen cities across the country have various rules about eligibility but the money itself, typically about $500 a month, has no restrictions on how it can be spent. ERF money, a fraction of this amount per recipient, similarly had no restrictions.
The same set of economic variables which can make payment of rent and the purchase of adequate food a struggle for the individuals and the families of those being assisted by ERF are obviously true regardless of ethnicity or arrival date in the USA. Having said that, in this instance, those awaiting ERF decisions are not a diverse group.
Addendum Two:
The opposite imagery from what took place at the restaurants could be the following: an imperious desk spatially removed from the beseeching people; the sole occupant of the desk would be a person whose demeanor is equally imperious and whose sole purpose is to sign checks to people he literally looks down upon.
His assistant, numbed by years of dispensing welfare checks and tearing apart bogus stories, barely looks up as she thrusts a pile of forms to each supplicant. Her instruction to fill them out completely and accurately is accompanied with a threat: one blank answer equals no money.
This is admittedly extreme in its implied description of the existing welfare system, but how many regard our current approach as one built on respect and understanding. Partly because of irritation and partly because of the level of poverty in this country, there has been more discussion of UBI, but it has not gone deep on what would happen to existing welfare programs. Many would argue that UBI should never be discussed without simultaneously talking about how to improve education, reduce the cost of healthcare and daycare, and make sense out of drug laws and the impact of felony convictions.
That analysis is for another day. ERF is a requirement now.
It is a standard question, often dominating political discourse, only taking a rear seat when international escapades and domestic corruption are the front-page stories.
In any case, the question occurred to me when I saw ICE forcibly apprehend the guy who had recently done my roof. Carlos had fixed the roofs for many in the area, for quite a few years in fact. He and his wife and their two children lived in the town a few miles away.
When Carlos was at least temporarily removed from his American life, multiple immigrant advocacy groups quickly attempted to provide assistance.
But I confess, when these people talk about the Constitution or the inscription on the Statue of Liberty or the generalized concept of human rights, it’s difficult for me to stay focused.
I like to keep things simple. If the removal of Carlos and so many other immigrants is to be considered appropriate, should not I benefit?
So I decided to sort through some possible ways this could be true.
*will I feel safer? The crime rate for immigrants is no higher than for the rest of us. *will my aging parents receive better at-home health care? This seems doubtful given the number of immigrants who provide those services. *will my grocery bill decline? With the importance of immigrants to the California agricultural industry, the opposite is more likely.
*will my doctor remain on my case? I should check his complete background, including his visa. *will my favorite restaurant still be in existence? Kitchens and immigrants go together. *will my kids’ schools be improved? I suppose fewer ESL students could make teaching easier. *will there be more roofing business for residents? They do not seem to want hot, dangerous jobs. *will driving become safer? There is no data to support a claim in either direction. *will my taxes go down? I am consistently doubtful that this ever happens. *will my insurance rates be reduced? There is no chance this occurs.
*will the skyrocketing rate of financial scams, something my mom and dad worry about, be cut with the roofer and his compatriots no longer around? This is hard to imagine.
Sometimes, aided by a legal beverage or two, I do think a touch more broadly:
*will the country grow faster? Since the classic growth formula starts with population, fewer people equals slower growth. *occasionally, a complex issue will pop into my head; for example, will the ICE apprehensions help the country to reduce its inequality? That’s way beyond my bandwidth, but I don’t see how it would. *everybody talks about our polarization. I get it; when I asked a neighbor to have a couple of beers and talk about whatever, he turned me down. Perhaps he disapproved of my roofer selection. But if Carlos is deported, does my neighbor actually feel better about his own life?
*will political corruption go down? I am not holding my breath. *will the welfare system be less burdened? The system is a mess, period. Professors can debate when any person is a financial negative to the country and when they become a positive.
Undoubtedly there are other issues, e.g. global warming, which did not make it onto my list. And I suppose that some of the observations above could be open to debate, but
