That's illegal

  I remember when the big conversation was about black people. The "descriptor" has changed over the years from the "n" word to African Americans, at least in some circles it has. I'm not certain what the politically correct term is today and do think it is dependent upon just who you are talking too. Well, its always been that way really. It always depended upon the circumstance of social standing. But now I keep hearing about the "brown" people. I have heard politicians using that term insisting that Trump is targeting the brown people. I'm assuming they are referring to those from Latin American countries, as well as "Indians" or "Pakistanis." What are those from Somalia? According to goggle they are from Africa but are not black or Asian. It doesn't say what they are called, just that they are an ethnic group. I don't know anyone from Somalia to ask.

  The "brown" people are those in between the black and white people. Their skin tone ranges from light brown to almost black, it also includes those with "yellow" skin. I wonder how black you have to be, to be black. I do recall when I was in elementary school a couple of kids arguing with each other about just that on the playground. They were "colored" kids. My school was fully integrated as I am from the north. But one day these two were arguing, the one saying the other one wasn't black, he was brown. The other kid saying, he was too black, his parents said so. I found that interesting as I had never given any of that a thought before that time. Did the different shades hold any significance? Apparently it did among that community, at least that was the impression I got from that argument. I never asked. 

  Now all these years later the brown people are being discussed. I guess we didn't have any brown people when I was in grade school. At least no one I ever noticed. There was this girl on the bus that looked different, I was told she might be from Mexico or maybe Puerto Rico as she had that long black hair and a darker skin tone, not like a good tan, but tan anyway. I was interested, she was not. 

 The brown people are being deported! Well, could be that is because those brown people came from another country and are not Americans. If I were living in Mexico or India I would expect people to think, he's a white guy, probably not from here. If I couldn't speak the language, or read it, that would be a real good indicator as well. Nothing prejudicial about that, just logical thinking is all. If I want to find a potato, I'm not looking in the cabbage patch. I'm not prejudiced against potatoes, just know where they are most likely to be and what they look like. 

  It's a funny thing these descriptors we use. If you give an accurate description of the individual you are often accused of being prejudiced! You may even be told you are stereotyping people. The police have taken to using numbers, like a number one male. That's a black guy, number two is a white guy. There is no number for the brown people though. No numbers for all the other genders either. Not sure how they report all that on their radio and in their reports, I'd have to ask a cop.

 Consider those black people. They have what type of hair? The official term is type 3 and Type 4, characterized by it being curly and s shaped. Afro-textured in polite company. Is that a stereotype? No, it is just the most common type of hair found in black populations. What about brown people? Google says that is a "racial classification" usually a political and skin based category. Everyone is skin based just not political?  And white folks, why we are just all prejudicial people, we are prejudiced against the black and brown people. What do white people look like? We have white skin. 

  In 1908 a play by Israel Zangwill titled "The Melting Pot" popularized that term. America was the great melting pot. Immigrants came here to assimilate into American society. That was the dream, to become a citizen of the greatest nation on the face of the planet. Those immigrants were well aware of the requirements to be met to obtain that status, citizenship. It began with legally entering the nation, obtaining the necessary documents to live and work here. The objective was to become an American. It wasn't to change American values, traditions, moral or ethical standards or impose their ancestors traditions and customs on Americans. 

 The objective was to integrate those with America. It requires the abandonment of all those traditions and values that do not align with America. The ideal is to have a blended society, all melted together to form one nation. An American society. It may have started out with predominately white people ( Europeans) but has always welcomed anyone that wanted to immigrate here. It's true in 1917 an immigration act was passed to prohibit certain folks from entering the country.  "According to the law, these included “all idiots, imbeciles, feeble-minded persons, epileptics, insane persons … persons with chronic alcoholism; paupers, professional beggars,” and those with tuberculosis and other contagious diseases. It barred felons, polygamists, prostitutes and their traffickers, and – similar to Trump’s ban – it blocked entry to those who “advocate the overthrow by force or violence of the Government of the United States, or of all forms of law” and anyone who would “advocate or teach the duty, necessity, or propriety” of killing of US officers or officials. " 

  I don't know about you, but all that seems reasonable enough to me. We have enough of those born here, we don't need to import any! Prejudicial or just common sense? You decide. In 1882 all Chinese were banned for ten years. That was a reaction to a very high unemployment rate and the Chinese were thought to be impacting that in the mining business. There are other instances and if you read about them they all made good sense at the time and circumstances of their implementation. Remember, hindsight is always twenty/twenty but is often viewed through a different lens. If you were not there to view it you really don't see the whole picture, only what has been reported. I realize it is shocking to some but we really aren't told everything! There are some things that are just none of your business. 

 Prior to 1875 immigration was a state controlled thing. Basically the borders were open and entry was allowed with the various states having different requirements. Then in 1875 the Supreme court decided that immigration was a federal responsibility. The court was predominately Democrats. So the immigration act of 1875 was established. That's the quote I included earlier, about not allowing feeble minded folks and all that into the country. Later, the Chinese exclusion act made it a federal crime to import Chinese people here against their will to work in the mines and railroads, no sex workers allowed and no pimps! 

 Really it was a protection for those Chinese that were being shanghaied and coerced into coming to America. That act was passed by a Republican majority in Congress. Sounds like a good idea to me, to protect the Chinese folks from that. It basically put those kidnappers, smugglers and human traffickers out of business! Yes, I'd say a wise decision, even though it may have hurt some peoples feelings. As for interring the Japanese during WW2 I ask you this, if another nation declared war on us, bombed our land and killed thousands wouldn't you be a bit suspicious of any of their citizens living here? It really is quite a reasonable reaction. It's no different than wandering into the wrong part of town, you can expect to be attacked. You might not, but are you taking that chance? It's called security. 

 The naturalization act of 1790 established the rules for gaining citizenship. There was residency requirement and naturalization was limited to "free white People." Just who was a white person? That wasn't defined and varied greatly from place to place. Today we are attempting to define what a woman is; guessing we haven't made that much progress after all. You don't want to hurt anyone's feelings you know. We feel like we have a handle on the white and black folks, the brown people, not so much. Brown people are just the in-between bunch, not white, not black. We do know that a good number of the brown people in America today aren't here legally. When they can't read or speak the language the suspicion grows. When their names appear on ICE documents for apprehension it's a pretty good bet that they are illegally in the country. 

 It became obvious in 1875 that we needed to control immigration. We really do need to know who is coming in the door. It isn't about race, it is about security. You don't leave your door open for just anyone to wander into your home. No, you want to know a bit about that individual. That's called documentation. Without any documentation you can't know for sure. That's why the bank just doesn't take your word for it when making a withdrawal or granting you a loan. Undocumented withdrawals are called theft! Yeah, robbing the bank. That's illegal. So is being in my country without any documentation of your entry. And it doesn't matter how long you have been here, just like it doesn't matter how long the money has been in the bank. You need documentation! Simple really. 

                                                                              

                                             If you have one of these, you have nothing to worry about.