[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Nope, my point is immigration legal or illegal is accepted right up until the point we don’t want immigrants flowing into the country or the wrong immigrants are flowing into the country. We usually reach that point we feel the government might be treating the immigrants with too much like the rest of us, we think the immigrants are making too much progress for our liking or we just get scared of the foreigners.

Sorry, I re-read the section again and it's either my reading comprehension or its yours. I don't know how you extrapolated that Bracero program section to the entire paragraph above regarding legal vs illegal.

If you keep the "illegal" and remove "legal" wording from your paragraph above, yeah then I can maybe see it.

I highlighted the Bracero program it involved Mexico and it highlights many of the same issues of today. But the 1891 Immigration Act is right there. The 1924 Immigration Act is right there. The Emergency Quota Act is right there. Things like Operation Wetback and the walk around program along the tragedy that was the St Louis voyage and more recently policies like wet foot, dry foot policy are examples that show how unimportant the distinction of legal and illegal really is when we talk immigration. When we are tired of people or certain people immigrating to the country legally, we make it illegal for people or certain people to immigrate to the country.

The program was to allow "guest, temporary, legal" workers into the US back then. It talked about some resistance and then delved into illegal immigration spiking when the program ended. It then talked about how US tried to remove the illegals and some effort to expand Bracero to alleviate the illegal situation.

Or put it in another way. Was there a concerted effort to remove legal immigrants? If so I didn't see it. The thrust of the section was dealing with illegals, with a sprinkling of legals being treated better.

But if you think I'm wrong, feel free to specifically post quotes from the Bracero section to rebut me. BTW the National Quota Act, 1891, or 1924 Acts were not in the Bracero section which you asked me to read.

Hence, my position below

I am saying its important to make a distinction between legal and illegal immigration because one is more significantly accepted than the other which, in theory, translates to the media, public awareness, and politics.