The event was during civil rights day on specific occasion of martin Luther king junior day. A pro immigration movement wanted to use this day to address the plight of immigrants in America. This came at the height of anti immigration movements in America who believed that immigrants are the sole cause of social ills experienced in America. Extremists had been on the verge of frustrating efforts to accord immigrants respect they deserve as equal human beings. There was a pro migration rights movement which was there to prove that there is no illegal human being whether he or she has crossed borders through smuggling and human trafficking or through what are said to be legitimate means. The heated topic is whether immigrants have equal rights of employment, representation in court and protection of government like any other citizen in America. Should immigrants have the same right as citizens? Do they deserve the harsh treatment like those of slaves of unjustified deportation and harassment from the general public? It was a high political event which was poised to persuade more people to join their bad wagon of championing for the rights of immigrants in America against the frustrations made by the extremist and anti immigration movements.
According to Powell (2006), immigrants were not doing well in business because of historical structure restrictions embodied in immigration related laws, policies and other social restraints. In the mid 19th century Chinese born Americans were seen as intellectually inferior, they were also considered incapable of participating in western type democratic social life. Thus the laws of the day banned them from educational and business opportunities and prevented them from being integrated into mainstream society. Until 1970s these people had a disadvantage due to the nature of oppression they were accorded by the American authorities. 1960s was a mile stone in for the freedom of black American immigrants when martin Luther junior rose up against black oppression. The struggle was successful in 1970s when black Americans were given the right to participate in elections and later other Chinese and Asians immigrants were incorporated in main stream economy. However due to dynamism of immigration patterns more immigrants have found their way to American economy (Powell, 2006).
According to Bascio (1999), today Asians and Chinese are no longer reason of much attention in the immigration feuds. Despite strict immigration laws America is one of the countries which receive flood gate of immigrants from all corners of the world. This is prompted by the ethnic and racial veracity of American population. Since enactment of the law of citizens provision that every child born in America is a citizen of America, United States has taken responsibility of many children from citizens of other countries. More so due America been considered as land of opportunity and security many people especially from central and Latin America have fought to grab an opportunity to reside in America. As North America entered 21st century, there was little doubt that flow of migrants would continue, but were questions about the magnitude of future migration flow. More than 12million immigrants are in America most of whom are from Mexico. Immigration make up 12% of the U.S population, and current rates of immigration add just over 1 million immigrants yearly to an existing base of about 37 million. Human rights Issues of 37 million people should not be put at stake (Bascio, 1999).
According to Ramarkrishan (2005), there is social, political and economical intolerance to the immigrants in Americas. Elites and extremist who are anti immigrants have squarely blamed immigrants as the perpetrators of murder and drugs barons. This prompted human right organizations to hold persuasive campaigns to ease the situation. The audience was the general public through public lectures and conferences. However this essay would give an evaluation to the event held on martin Luther king junior day in line to championing for the rights of immigrants in America (Ramarkrishan, 2005).
This persuasive debate was be done during a major civil rights day during Martin Luther king junior commemoration day. This awareness was to be done through conferences in different states of America. Pro immigration movements attached them to the martin Luther king junior foundation to persuade more audience to attend. As indicated by McGuire, (1994) media is a major communication channel which can be persuasively used to woo audience. Two months before the event there was extensive advertising through print media and audio visual media where famous figures were used as advertisers there was also advertisement through social network of face book to give the event a wide coverage of audience. The conference was a three day event where many speakers were invited to make speeches on behalf of the immigration movements in order to persuade the publics to generally accept that immigrants are equal human beings with equal rights to life, freedom, health and service from the government. There were slogans like no human being is illegal, immigrants rights are human rights, great land of freedom like America should show the world high tolerance to immigration plight. On the eve of the day selected things like marching were done to prepare people psychologically on the importance of the day. Hand outs were given out with information of what would be expected of the event and the issue at hand during the conferences (McGuire, 1994).
On the day of the persuasive talk, levered orators were in invited each with a topic to discuss. They respected the Aristotle way of explaining persuasion whereby he believed in ethos. According to Harper (2006), ethos theory of the modes furnished by spoken words is three kinds. First kind depends on the personal character of the speaker. This was well taken care of because speakers who were chosen in the event had undisputed record in making in public communication. They are said to be champions of microphones in their respective field. Personal orating powers of the speakers were beyond reproach. The second is putting the audience into certain frame of mind. The correlation of martin Luther day with the event put the audience in a frame of mind on the importance to address the underlying issues of immigrants plights with the same amount of passion the issue of black movements was addressed. The final level is the content of the words spoken by the speaker (Harper, 2006).
Critical addressing of the information by levered public figures
The first speaker was critical of the legitimacy of immigrants presence in America. America civil liberty union believes that every person in America has rights regardless of his citizen status. According to Zargas (2010), the fundamental civil liberties protections of the Bill of Rights and Constitution should apply to all persons not only to the citizens. Immigrants should also have fundamental rights to life, right to fair trial, right of counsel representation, and freedom of speech including right to own properties. Immigrants are subjected to unfair searches of private properties which do not augur well with democracy. The speaker categorically that immigrant should be accorded the same fundamentals. These basic principles should generally apply regardless of an immigrant’s citizenship status (Zargas, 2010).
It is unfortunate that under the law, non-citizens do not have the same right as citizens to enter or remain in the United States. The Supreme Court has ruled unfairly to the foreigners because it holds that persons seeking initial entry to America do not enjoy constitutional rights like citizens. This ruling has given leeway for illegal immigrants to be treated as lesser persons since are not to enjoy the same rights. Persons who are said to be deportable have right of due process of law. But the legal frame work provides that they should be treated as non citizens though physically present in the country. This is highly discriminative law in the world of globalization where human trafficking and smuggling is a reality. If all these The ACLU believes that the regulation of immigration can be achieved with respect for individual rights equal protection and due process of constitution imposes limits on the governmental action regardless of the citizenship status or physical location of the affected individual. This implies that rights are not an issue of citizens but decorum which must be observed by every person. Because America is a testimony of a well organized social fabric of human rights it must observe the tenets of human rights to the latter (Zargas, 2010).
The second speaker talked about employment and how immigrants have being exploitation of big companies in the name of unskilled employment. There is high rate of exploitation of unskilled labor in America. Immigrants have been subjected to poor working conditions with very low salaries. According to Sidlow and Heschen (2004), everybody screams about how illegal immigrants overburden schools, social amenities and health schemes. But they need to know how illegal migrants operate before they jump into wrong conclusions. As they operate through stolen identities and collude with many Americans who do not want to work to use this means that they are working and yet not enjoying the benefits of having to claim their taxes at the of the year. The Americans heavily benefit from these dealings yet they claim that social ills are caused by the immigrants. The speaker argued that, Illegal immigrants usually accept low salaries. Immigrants without proper working documents are not allowed to work in America. Companies help them to acquire illegal documents with a plan to exploit them because they are prone to threats of deportation and court processes. Since these people are illegally in the country, they cannot complain. Because the illegal employees are being paid low salaries, the consumer benefits from low, competitive prizes. Isn’t that “help” to the country of destination. This means that there is contested urge for the plight of illegal immigrants to be addressed (Sidlow and Heschen, 2004).
The third speaker was one of the levered human rights activists who touched on the general believe that levels of crime escalate directly proportional to the increased levels of immigrants in the country. According to Ramarkrishan (2005), it is prudent enough to tell that immigrants are the most law abiding citizens in the lane. The fact that they are desperate for help they would not be ready for collusion with the authorities. Authorities are well aware that the only crime that these people have committed is been illegally in the country. This status makes them to feel insecure in the country of destination. They are affected by the trauma of illegality of their presence in the country. Hence they are bound to do every thing to remain lawful. The belief that they are the root cause of general unlawfulness is out of the context. The cause of UN documented migration is strict immigration laws in the country. It is basic knowledge that when human beings are restricted by legal means they ought to use the illegal means to achieve their ends. These cases are bound to escalate as long as there is no legal frame work to arrest it. Most of deportations done by the government to immigrants are not a question of unlawfulness it is a question of relationship between the employer and the employee. Employees who sometimes defy draconian orders from the employers receive threats of deportation and legal action if they do not comply. Deportations have been used as conduit of labeling immigrants rogue and a tool of enforcing illegitimate conditions. Many records of deportation do not reflect the correct data of crimes Committed by aliens. This can be supported by the fact that unskilled labors have a higher record of deportation than skilled laborers. Most of these things are done by insensitive people who have routine of unethically gaining from desperation of others. This speaker was so much critical in his explanation that he persuaded a large number of attendances to such an extent that he was very much hailed at the end of his speech .this was due to his ability to frame the audience in a mind set which he could well ground his arguments as an authority in that field (Ramarkrishan 2005).
Persuasive approach of the event
Credibility of the source and ethos theory was highly effective in considering the models of messages and position of the audience. According to Burgoon & Miller (1985), who ever deliver the information that there was such an event was very important. There was use of celebrity and key public figures in the print media to persuade the audience to make first initiative of listening to the advertisement. Advertisement using key social figures was a great step towards realization of targeted goals. Persuasive advertisement nature was reflected in the turn out where many people arrived to listen to the campaign against oppression of immigrants. It was not only characterized large turn out but also by other key figures in the public domain (Burgoon & Miller, 1985)
Article Directory: http://www.articletrunk.com
The author is associated with
Please Rate this Article
Not yet Rated
The Article Source