Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we think about

by f0035y1

We have all heard the phrase “think before you speak.” The words we use hold power; power to uplift and power to dehumanize. Change the Subject is not just about dropping the ‘i-word’, it is about consistently reaffirming the humanity of those who are targeted by xenophobia and racism within the United States.

 

WORDS MATTER

(Click on image to see video)

In this clip from HBO’s Real Time, TV host Bill Maher refers to people as “illegals” and reacts flippantly when Jorge Ramos retorts that no one should be called ill*gal. Ramos argues that companies who hire undocumented immigrants should also be referred to as ill*gal. Maher agrees, but he does not then address the issue of calling people ill*gal.

Jorge Ramos is an Mexican-American, Spanish language news anchor. Bill Maher is a late-night comedy host known for his political satire, and has hosted a show called “politically incorrect.” In the context of Maher’s controversial persona, the video clip highlights a generally problematic trend of people embracing “political incorrectness” for the sake of free speech, without fully considering the repercussions of language. Maher’s exclamation that he is “always saying the wrong thing” indicates that he may be vaguely aware that his words are offensive. However, his laughter and comedic tone suggests that he does not seriously consider the importance of respectful language. Media discourse is especially important because it shapes the way viewers think, reflecting more intimate day to day conversations that impact immigrants’ lives.

 

MISCONSTRUING LEGAL TERMINOLOGY

Ann Coulter is an American conservative media pundit whose facts have oftentimes been misleading or incorrect. In this tweet, Coulter lists several U.S. Codes that supposedly use the term ill*gal alien thus justifying its usage by the American people. However, looking into the codes Coulter listed shows only 6 USC 240 and 8 USC 1365 as using that term. Even then, USC 240 never defines the term and uses it in relation to trafficking and smuggling. USC 1365 offers us a definition of ill*gal alien as “any alien convicted of a felony who is in the United States unlawfully” thus limiting its usage to only those people who are convicted felons. This definition is much different than how it’s used by those who defend the term, applying it to all who enter the United States without documentation instead of, specifically, convicted felons. The argument that their use of the term is justified by it being in the federal law code is inaccurate. It’s also worth noting that the definition offered in USC 1365 is contained within a subsection regarding Cuban nationals, clearly codifying the term ill*gal alien within racial and ethnic boundaries. Legal terms vary and the political actors who are writing and enforcing our laws use different terms as well. The law and the government do not provide a coherent answer on the question of immigration terminology and therefore cannot be used as a justification of using outdated and harmful terms.

PERSONAL EFFECTS OF LANGUAGE

 

… the term is a microaggression where you’re kind of getting constantly reminded that you are an outsider, and that this is how people view you…

– Melissa Padilla 2017

 

In her interview for the documentary Change the Subject, Melissa Padilla comments on the weight of the term “illegal alien.” She compares what the term meant for her when she lived in Georgia to what it meant in Hanover. Melissa argues that calling someone an ill*gal alien is a form of dehumanizing undocumented immigrants. It effectively establishes a divide between undocumented immigrants and “regular people” while undermining the struggles of undocumented immigrants. From her interview, one can learn that undocumented immigrants have the same fundamental fears as regular citizens, such as their childrens’ safety, education, and jobs. Calling them ill*gal aliens takes away from the legitimacy of their opinions, despite their similar values to other Americans. She uses anecdotal evidence to support these claims, saying that despite receiving a green card, hearing someone say “illegal alien” would provoke the memory of constantly living on edge when she was undocumented. She offers insight by explaining that the i-word is a subtle reminder that undocumented immigrants are not considered part of the American collective. Additionally, she reflects on the childhood naivety of using the “i-word” as a nickname. By doing so, she demonstrates that, if left unchecked, the term “illegal alien” can start as a way to degrade undocumented immigrants and become a way to degrade Mexicans or the Latinx community in general.

 

RACIST RHETORIC ON CAMPUS: STUDENT COMMENTS

 

This “Bored @ Baker” post showcases how students at Dartmouth were speaking in a public forum about the issue of the “I” word. While most comments were negative, this specific comment stood out because of its use of Spanish: “la ley es la ley,” or in English “the law is the law.” Our topic, “language,” can be interpreted as specific word choice, but it can also extend to question the impact of using different languages such as English and Spanish. The use of the Spanish language to validate anti-immigrant sentiments is interesting because of the normative casting of Latinx/Hispanic subjects as the typical “ill*gal” immigrant. 76% of all undocumented immigrants are from Central America, South America, and the Caribbean, where Spanish is the dominant language. Due to this presence among other factors, the conflation between Spanish-speakers and illegality is strong in mainstream U.S. society. This post shows how, ironically, Spanish is being used to shame undocumented immigrants. In the context of our theme, language, this post demonstrates the politics of language, specifically between Spanish and English. The Spanish-speaker here is validating traditionally racist and xenophobic viewpoints of undocumented immigration. It is important to note that the identity of the Spanish speaker is hidden, so whether they are a native speaker is unclear.

 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS: RESPONSE

In 2016, the Library of Congress announced that the heading “Alien” will be revised to “Noncitizen” along with related headings and subdivisions. Along with other relevant headings, the heading “Ill*gal alien” will be cancelled and replaced with “Noncitizen” and “Unauthorized immigration” which may collectively “describe resources about people who are in a country illegally.”  While “Unauthorized immigration” accurately refers to what has been described as “Ill*gal immigration,” “Noncitizens” also encompasses Legal Permanent Residents and is not a synonym for “Ill*gal aliens.” In a potentially inconsistent approach to synonyms, in 2014 the Library did not approve a change from “Ill*gal aliens” to “undocumented immigrants” because the phrases are not perfect synonyms.

The Library of Congress acknowledges that a rationale for terminology change is to distinguish the description of an act as illegal from the description of a person as ill*gal.The Library also asserts that the term ‘Alien’ is “often misunderstood.” While the Library of Congress acknowledges that ‘Alien’ has become pejorative, alleging that the term has been misunderstood implies that the word was not intended to have a negative connotation. The press release very neutrally states that “Alien” in the subject heading context refers to “persons who are not citizens of the country they reside in.”

 

IT’S NOT JUST A WORD, IT’S HATE 

In 2018, the Justice Department instructed U.S. Attorneys to use the term “illegal alien” instead of undocumented immigrant when referring to a person as “to clear up some confusion and to be consistent in the way we draft our releases.” This is another blatant anti-immigrants attack from the Trump administration. Earlier in the year the Washington Post did an analysis on Trump’s use of the term “illegal alien” and found that he had been using this term at an increasing rate. At a time when there has been an effort to move away from this offensive term, President Trump seems to be on a dedicated mission to bring it back. It is clear, that this is not about “confusion” as the Justice Department but a purposeful attempt to spew hate and push forth xenophobic policy. We all understand the power of words, and the decision to persist in using this term continues to show how this is not just a word. This term carries hate and xenophobia, both of which President Trump seeks to increase and unmask in this country.

MOVING FOWARD: APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE

Identifying language as harmful and understanding its impacts is incredibly important, but so is finding new alternatives that are appropriate and empowering. Language changes over time and often due to concerted efforts such as the activism seen in Change the Subject. A constant effort must be made to learn new language, and unlearn outdated and harmful terms such as “illegal.” Freedom for Immigrants, a women-owned organization aimed at abolishing U.S. immigration detention, provides a glossary of immigration terminology for both legal and colloquial use. Currently, “undocumented immigrant” is the most popular choice among the immigrant community and its advocates for a person who has crossed the border without documentation. Another term, “unauthorized immigrant,” is also suitable, and provides a more bureaucratic term and indeed is often used in academic settings. The term “noncitizen” can be used, but cautiously, as it also refers to many documented immigrants that simply do not hold citizenship status, such as Legal Permanent Residents. The most important thing to remember in the discussion around language is that the identifying terms are empathetic, humane, and validated by the communities they describe. These terms will inevitably change in years to come, and we must embrace those changes when they do.

This website is 1 of 5 analyses of the Change the Subject movement undertaken by 25 Dartmouth College undergraduate students for Latino Studies 3, Latinx Lives in the United States, during the Fall term of 2019. The other 4 analyses can be found here.