The second essay question asks about the various public policy issues discussed in class in second half of the course. The three readings I will be referencing are Ayers and Lutz on the military and Latinos, also I will reference the “Without Immigrant Labor, The Economy Would Crumble” by Tamar Jacoby which focuses on the reliance on Immigrants in the U. S economic structure. The first article, “Military Recruiters are Using and Abusing our Kids” by William Ayers, focuses on military recruitment in schools.
The article starts by giving examples of people who have been in the military and share their experiences with the process of becoming a soldier( Ayer,14-15). Some of these men and women come from rough childhoods and have left for the military in order to get out of their own situation(Ayer,15). The article then delves into the portion that connects the military recruiter to the youth in schools that are in poorer areas( Ayers,16).
These recruiters target schools like this because there’s a better chance of getting recruits then say, recruiting in a wealthy area. The article states that schools within wealthy areas are not viewed as good prospects, because those teens are usually going to head on to college(Ayer,17). While this might come off as taking advantage of an area that fosters a lower quality of life, which will then produce more teenagers who feel as if they need a way out, It’s simply the recruiter being more efficient with his time.
They are basically a salesman offering things like citizenship for illegal immigrant children who had come over at a young age, or guarantee of college after service. Some lie though, saying things like leaving the military if you want to is easy, even though once you arrive at basic training, there’s no way out (Ayer,18). The age group also is ripe for the recruiting, these teenage men are somewhat aggressive, belong in a group atmosphere, and desire to fit in (Ayer,15-16).
Not only does this help recruiting, but the JROTC programs within high schools are a perfect way to satisfy some of these traits while also slowly pushing them towards a military career. Around 40% of JROTC members go on to join the military, meaning out of the 9,000 members, around 3500 will join up. So recruiters are going after these poorer areas, these areas that are predominantly minority because it’s just better to do. Is it wrong? Perhaps a bit, but the military is undermanned, according to the Latino military Caste video watched in class.
It’s almost a necessary evil, without troops we can’t protect our nation’s interests, or play the role that the U. S does on the world stage. The second article, “Who Joins the Military? A look at Race, Class and Immigration Status” by Amy Lutz, looks at the ethnic groups within the military. The article looks into the various ethnic groups within the military and their history of the groups service within the U. S. military. Latinos have a long history within the military; having served since the war of 1812(Lutz,169).
The research shows that Latinos are the smallest group within the top 3 of Whites, Blacks and Hispanics, they are also not represented as high as blacks and whites within the military when compared to their percentage of the general population(Lutz,177). They are however overrepresented in areas where personnel handed weapons and underrepresented in technical operations(Lutz,170). The numbers also lead the author to conclude that members of lower socioeconomic classes are more likely to join the military, structed on these class lines (Lutz, 185).
The higher the income within the family, the lower the likelihood of service(Lutz,179). This ties into the previous article which showed the focus on the low income areas. This information leads to the conclusion that We should see a rise in Latino participation in the military with the enhanced focus on the areas where they are the dominant race. With the more data heavy The articles show that the military issue in relation to Latinos negatively influence Latino political attitudes.
To reflect, the focus on low income hispanic families is apparent, The Latino Caste system video showed families who had lost their children due to a recruiter taking advantage of their background. A lot of this falls upon the simplistic need for bodies, the need to fill in positions, do grunt work, and more. Latinos are seen as a growing minority ripe for the taking. Not only does the Latino lifestyle, which is considered more family oriented then the norm,foster better soldiers; soldiers who are somewhat better at following orders.
Add on the allure of free college or a path to citizenship, and you will have Latinos lining up to participate. But the Latino men and women who stay at home, the parents of the young men and women who join the military,the ones who are the embodiment of the Latino political attitude, shy away from these alluring benefits, as they see that it is nothing more than a ploy to take advantage of a group of people who are trying to find success in a country where they embody many of the lower end areas.
They are being used by the government. The second issue that will be addressed is Immigration, specifically Tamar Jacoby’s “Without Immigrant Labor, The Economy Would Crumble”. This short but information intensive article focuses on Immigrantions hold on the economy. The author makes verbose claims that Immigrants are the only cheap labor available to do unskilled jobs (Jacoby,1). This is supported with the fact that in 1960, half of native born men were dropouts who wanted to work in cheap labor, but today less than 10% do the same.
By pointing out the decline in able bodied native born men who filled the unskilled jobs that are the backbone of the American economy, the author points out that the jobs these immigrants are doing support the lower income jobs that native born americans are doing, Jobs such as a waiter or foreman (Jacoby,1). The article also denies the claim that Americans would pursue jobs that immigrants are occupying by proving that in order to properly provide a good pay, they would put themselves out of business (Jacoby,1).
Simply, other countries would be able to out do American business and farm owners because they have much cheaper labor. So in a sense, we are lucky to have these immigrants, they do the jobs that Americans won’t, they are the support beams of the economy, working the lowest jobs, but does it positively or negatively influence their own political attitudes? Positively, is what the influence should be, while at the moment, immigration itself has been thrown on the national stage with talks of build a wall, it’s actually beneficial rather than detrimental to the economy.
Previously in the essay, the policy recommendation which called for the destruction of the “Illegal Alien” needed data to back up the claim that immigrants are essential. With this article being proof, it should only be a matter of time before the social stigma toward this illegal alien stereotype will be abolished. The U. S. citizens must be shown that Immigrants are good thing, rather than bad. This is why it’s a positive influence on Latino political attitudes, because once they are accepted into American culture, access to things provided by American Social Services should come.
Along with perhaps, a possibility of citizenship via a certain amount of time spent doing labor work; an evolved form of a work visa. While yes there are some criminals that come over from Mexico and other Latin American countries,the effect is miniscule, there are bad apples in every society and you cannot expect to receive 100% proper immigrants with nothing but good intentions. Therefore, in the long run, the Latino political attitudes should improve once the social stigmas held against them are abolished by data and facts that show they are huge benefit.