JackalTalk — JackalWorks Blog

The Immigration Debate (Part 1)

A few years ago when I was tearing through research material for my dissertation, I stumbled (because that is what often happens inside my head, stumbling) across an interesting idea.  The subject of my research was a priest near mid-fifty who had been commissioned as an Army Chaplain in the 80s, 1880s that is, and sent to eastern Montana to serve at what was then Fort Keogh, near what is now Miles City.  Father Lindesmith was his name, and he left behind a rich trove of evidence describing his experiences.

As a doctoral candidate I quickly learned to appreciate the gift Father Lindesmith, unbeknownst to him, had left for a graduate student seeking to close one of the final steps of his graduate student career.  In essence, what he had done was provide a lot of the material that I needed to complete a substantial historical narrative.  Father Lindesmith had left for me 90% of the grist I needed to make my mill work.

My challenge was twofold.  The first was obvious: how to organize the narrative.  The second was less obvious: how to examine Father Lindesmith’s evidentiary opus and place it in a broader historical analytic framework that addressed ongoing social science discussions and debates.

In my graduate school curriculum I had navigated through an interesting and compelling (at least for a nerd like me) array of topics: gender, race, ethnicity, class, etc.  I had viewed these topics in what would end up being the fields for my doctoral work: modern U.S. history, immigration history, Modern Mexican history, and anthropology.

Dumbarton House

We went to Dumbarton House in Georgetown today and earlier had walked along Q and R Streets on the sidewalks shaded by stately oaks.  The weather was hot and muggy but the calmness of the neighborhood and the cool of a light breeze seemed to make the temperature feel less oppressive.  A few blocks away on Wisconsin Avenue the mad crash and din of traffic no doubt continued, but for about an hour it seemed like it didn’t even exist.

Is it Just Me?

Or is the U.S. really getting bogged down in Afghanistan?  We’ve heard the explanation before: “We just have to win their hearts and minds.”  But obviously it is not that simple.  Warlordism, Pashtun custom, and religion seem to form the crucible that creates an elusive and resilient foe in the south and east.  How can we expect young men, who live day-to-day at the instinct level, to not exhibit instinctual behaviors?  Chauvinism, territorialism, and pride cloaked in the notion of honor, provide the foundation for an especially potent warrior cocktail.  Firearms, explosives, and the aforementioned provide the finishing touches.  Hearts and minds are alien concepts where crushing destitution rules.  We can’t win hearts and minds where people are truly struggling daily to obtain basic subsistence.