Ignored Reasons for Immigration from Mexico

Here's a letter to the editor I had published in the Lowell Sun about how the United State's policies have largely resulted in immigration from Mexico. Here's the original link.


Absent from the growing debate about Mexican immigration to the United States is the most important question: Why are so many people willing to risk coming here?

Since the enactment of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994 the number of documented and undocumented Mexicans in the United States has increased at a consistent rate, with a slight decline from 2007 to 2008 due to the financial crisis. This correlation is related to how the agreement fundamentally altered the economic relationship between the United States and Mexico. After the agreement went into effect, American-made farm produce (primarily corn) flooded the Mexican market. Mexican farmers are unable to compete with the prices of American corn because the industry is subsidized by the government, which NAFTA explicitly disallows the Mexican government to do for its corn producers.

At the same time that cheap American corn was putting Mexican farmers out of business, American corporations were moving manufacturing plants from the United States (with disastrous effects for many American workers) to Mexico, offering wages far below what would be justified by the profits these corporations were making.

Due to the lack of opportunity presented within Mexico, the prospects of coming to American and working in the service industry and other low-paying jobs seemed worth the risk for many.

It is clear that NAFTA and American corporations have done quite a bit to make the prospects of coming to the United States seem a lot better than remaining in Mexico. So before we criticize immigrants who come to our country seeking opportunity, we should reconsider our government's policies which have had such a harmful effect for many in Mexico.

There's Another Side to Blockade's Impact

Here's another letter to the editor I had published in The Lowell Sun (original link). I'm responding to some points made in this letter.

The author of the letter to the editor -- "Israel's actions to defend blockade justified (The Sun, June14)" -- makes some interesting and compelling arguments about the free Gaza flotilla attack and Israel's policies. Unfortunately, I fear it also reflects some misconceptions.

The author is quite right when saying nobody can enter sovereign territory of an independent state without its permission. However, the flotilla was not trying to enter Israel; it was trying to enter the Gaza strip, which is, according to the U.N., occupied territory. If one considers the blockade of Gaza illegitimate (as Amnesty International and Oxfam among others do), then the flotilla had all the right in the world to breach it.

The author also makes the point "the blockade is against Hamas terrorists, not against people of Gaza." The blockade was indeed put into place after Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza strip from Fatah in 2007. Unfortunately the blockade affects the 1.5 million people in Gaza much more than it affects Hamas. Numerous human rights reports, including the U.N.'s Goldstone report, have enumerated the harmful effect the blockade has had on the people of Gaza.

Responding to a point about United States military aid to Israel, the author rhetorically asks, "So Israel can't use weapons to protect its own border?" Israel certainly does have a right to self-defense against aggression, but when anywhere from 295 (according to the Israel Defense Force) to 926 civilians (according to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights) were killed during Operation Cast Lead by arms largely supplied by the United States, I believe it necessary to question the policy. Palestinian civilians do not deserve to be punished for the crimes of their government any more than Israeli civilians deserve to be published for the crimes of theirs.

The author makes some very good points. This is an important issue, and it is good to know that others are actively engaged in it.