According to a Los Angeles Times report, the Library of
Congress will no longer use “illegal aliens” as a bibliographical term, stating
that the once common phrase had become offensive. The Times stated that the
library will now use “noncitizens” and “unauthorized immigration” when
referring to individuals and the larger phenomenon of people residing in the
country illegally.
Not
surprisingly, the library decided to make the change after a group of students
from Dartmouth College urged it to do so. The group, known as CoFIRED (for the
Dartmouth Coalition for Immigration Reform, Equality
and DREAMers), was assisted by the American Library Association.
I’m not
sure what function “DREAMers” serves, it seems nonsensical, unwieldy and out of
place in this context, though I’m sure the students think it’s perfectly
appropriate. Much as they believe it’s appropriate for them to determine what
terminology the U.S. Library of Congress uses. The Library of Congress is a
respected institution that plays an extraordinary role worldwide. Its subject
headings are used by libraries around the globe, so the DREAMers at CoFIRED
have essentially unilaterally imposed their will on the rest of the planet, albeit in the most inclusive, open,
tolerant, validating manner, I’m sure.
In
actuality, one student was behind all
this. Melissa Padilla, a student in her last year at Dartmouth, “decided to
explore [her] identity as an undocumented immigrant” while a freshman at the
school. While researching the topic, she realized she frequently read the words
“illegal alien,” so, offended, she contacted fellow CoFIRED members, and they
subsequently made their appeal to the Library of Congress in 2014. “I think a
university should be free of the racist phrases I heard growing up,” Padilla
said. And so they shall, Melissa.
The
Library of Congress’ executive summary sited the April 2014 announcement by the
Associated Press that they would no longer use ‘illegal’ as a descriptor for
any individual. Well, isn’t that special? The next time a policeman or state
trooper tells me that speeding is illegal, I’m going to tell him or her that
that term is offensive and hurtful, and suggest he or she instead use the
phrase “unauthorized rate of travel.”
Some who
pushed for- or helped implement- this change claim one of their goals is to
make the language more precise. This is patently absurd. Entering the country
without authorization is by definition
illegal. “Alien” appears in the immigration code. Truth be told, their intent
is actually the opposite. We glean less from
the term “noncitizen” than from “illegal alien,” precisely because it is less precise. It is broader and vaguer,
so it carries less weight.
If we
are too craven and p.c.-addled to say “terrorist,” “Islamic terror” or “illegal
alien,” then we are as the drunk alcoholically-challenged person who
refuses to admit he has a problem.
And our
future will be no brighter.
(Yet we
use the phrase “invasive species” ad
nauseum. This seems harsh…and hypocritical. Another one of nature’s myriad life
forms arrives on our shores to strengthen us through diversity, and we make it
sound like an invasion? Does this mean war?).
No comments:
Post a Comment