It would be inappropriate, in this article, for me to invoke the “foundational tenets” of the United States. I can’t say with any certainty that this country is founded on the basis of freedom, equality or respect for its citizens. How could I, when on countless occasions in the last 239 years, this has been blatantly untrue?
For example, recently more than half of all U.S. governors opposed Syrian refugee resettlement after the Paris terrorist attacks. I am outraged at the vileness of American Islamophobia, and I am outraged at the nation’s dismal and hypocritical political state. I think we should allow refugees into this nation because it is the right thing to do.
Since we can probably all agree that the “right thing” is the good thing to do and should be done, such a statement should be self-evident. Yet many people would disagree with me. They would and do cite the recent terror attacks in Paris as evidence against the barbarity of Islamic extremists who might, under cover of refugee status, sneak into the United States. I will not argue that extremists are not barbaric; they can be. The recent attacks in Paris, on Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan, were dispiriting atrocities. But — and this is an important distinction — they should not give rise to fear-mongering.
The last few days have been rife with comments like those by Chris Christie, who pledged not to accept any refugees, “not even orphans under the age of five.” In a metaphor that failed spectacularly, Ben Carson likened Syrian refugees to rabid dogs. Other presidential candidates have suggested that the U.S. should only accept Christian refugees. When asked about the logistics of such a policy, Jeb Bush said, “Well, you’re a Christian. You can prove you’re a Christian.” When asked how, he had little more to say than “I think you can prove it.” Donald Trump may or may not have suggested that all Muslims be registered in a database.
Though these sound bytes do little more than represent a series of unfortunate responses to an unfortunate situation, they belie a greater tragedy — the fact that “radical Islam” has identified and capitalized on a delicate division between the “enlightened” and the “suspicious” in the U.S. More than highlight this rift, they’ve proven that it is much fuzzier than we thought. Many normally compassionate people are now supporting a policy that dictates the ousting of thousands of people who, denied the opportunity to come to the U.S., are likely to be stranded in horrible situations, or worse: compelled to attempt a far more perilous journey across the Aegean.
In an age virtually depleted of absolutes, John Oliver of “Last Week Tonight” is always enlightening. Speaking on the generational uncertainty of providing refugees homes in the United States, he said, “Those fears have been broadly unfounded. In fact, there was only one time in American History when the fear of refugees wiping everyone out did actually come true, and we’ll all be sitting around the table celebrating it on Thursday.” Of course, he was talking about Thanksgiving — that legendary occasion for food and family that we forget came at the salutation (and doom) of Native Americans.
The system for vetting refugees is not the problem. The problem is the misguided efforts of those who wish to bar entrance to refugees who genuinely need our help. Terrorists, be them many or few, will not come to the U.S. as refugees. They will come on VISAs, or passports, or will be made from the citizens already living here. So let’s end the persecution of refugees who only need a break. Let’s focus our efforts elsewhere and quit selling fear to the masses under the assumption that we’ll appear strong or resolute.
Let the refugees in, if not under the guise of “American hospitality,” then under the assumption that it’s the right thing to do.