I continue to use the "in your home" analogy for illustrating the disconnect between what we say we want and what we do with respect to the "assimilation" problem.

But first I have to utter the usual acknowledgments and disclaimers. Yes I am the grandson of LEGAL Spanish immigrants. Yes, I understand that part of the problem is in our diplomatic molly-codling and corporate back-scratching with Mexico.

On to the analogy: I have always felt that it was internally consistent for me to lock my door at night and regulate the flow of visitors to my home while simultaneously advocating a responsible immigration policy for the nation. Would I simply invite any one, at any time, into my home for a meal? To work on the plumbing? To perform family functions? No, we must draw lines, or boundaries, in order to preserve the integrity of our home and family and our experience of self and society.

That is not to say that I would not have visitors or frequent social events or even broaden the family by adopting children or renting a room to friends in time of need. When allowing for such assimilation, I would of course first consider the time-frame and duration for such major adjustments. I would have to look at the physical carrying capacity of my home and the other functions and processes that make a house a home. I would need to discuss with my current "family".

Why would I then disrespect the integrity of my larger home, the "state", by not considering the impacts of unmitigated assimilation?

In the past it has been relatively harmless to ignore illegal immigration since this was a big country well endowed with resources and a population that believed its institutions were sound. Indeed with such firm belief in our virtue and affluence it was more or less our duty to help those in need, even if our government was a little slow to recognize the needs of illegals that managed to escape the harsh conditions in their home countries and find inconspicuous niches within our own.

But now our resources, our affluence and our virtue seemed to have found their bounds. Our systems are seizing up and carrying capacities are in question. The demographic shifts have been documented. It is past time to look at the ways in which immigration abuses have played a part in the relatively rapid deterioration of our experience of "home". We need look no further than our schools, our state-dependent populations, our highly stratified economies (see, Ginni coefficient). We must also see that myriad dysfunctional behaviors arise from the spectrum of human capacity for coping and compensating in stressed and complex societies, and; that corporate business models, themselves dysfunctional, can never address the intrinsic regulation of personal or demographic boundaries, integrity of home, family, or even culture and society.

So, assuming that we are all housekeepers, what should we do? Do we assimilate without mitigation ALL those who wish to enter our home just because they have needs that governments and corporations cannot appease? We may understand that government and corporate growth based models must make up for the low native birth rates by importing population from over the border. But if we do not feel the harm this is doing then it is us housekeepers who are dysfunctional or co-dependent. (re the psych-jargon: I have been told it is not polite to use "schizophrenic" as a synonym for "dysfunctional" or "co-dependent" since former is a medical condition related to the brain while the later are behavioral)

Now comes the big confession! During the 80's and 90's I dabbled in a bit of Organic farming. I would have farmed until all the money was gone. And I did. And my wife left too. Fortunately I woke up and decided to sell my equipment and go back to school. It was when my "home" fell apart that I realized the business I needed to take care of had less to do with the farm produce and more to do with my intrinsic produce.

The other lesson from the farm exercise was what labor means to a business. I, of course, figured out that the most sucessful farm businesses either have a specialty niche or like most big bsuinesses, are making their money off the labor factor. The price you get for your product and the non-labor costs of production are all static and pretty much established by what the largest producers, who dominate the market, are doing. So, of course, a small operator will need to make do with less or have some other compensating factor in their favor.

My compensating factor was that I was in it for the glory. I was going to do the right thing, grow organically, the right way. So I paid my help $6 an hour-- which was more than I was netting from the business. $6 an hour was more than the going rate at the time, which was the $4.25 minimum wage. But hey, I would make it up by working 80 hours a week and sacrificing my family life.

I was also keen on not abusing the immigration system. I hired young Americans interested in learning organic agriculture to work with me. These folks were usually white and educated, but not always very efficient workers. As the old saw goes, farm work is hard, for long hours and a drudge. Young white kids are not so enthusiastic about such work and inevitably I needed to hire additional help to get the job done.

By the last year of farming I had learned a lot about what to grow and how. It was pretty apparent that I needed to become more efficient to survive. I was making more money than ever, and working a crew of six undocumented workers (I hope the statute of limitiations has expired). But there was no more glory in it! I was not doing it the "right way". Even though I was still paying them all $6 an hour. Now it just felt like guilt money.

I had, and still have, nothing but the greatest respect for the undocumented workers who worked on my farm. Its true that it is near impossible to find citizens of this country willing to work that hard for so little pay. And that is the lesson I learned: we give so little to people who work so hard because we are dysfunctional or co-dependents of a dysfunctional system.

Nonetheless, agriculture is a noble pursuit, and I will be a practitioner at some scale until the day I die--hopefully, barely able to stand up, in my garden, doing one final chore.

Charles, I recall the piece in which you (or was it one of your contributors?) described the labor list for a wheat harvest on one of Jefferson's fields. That was so beautiful to contemplate. The integration of the community in that self-sustaining act was poetic to say the least. Would you someday repost or re-point?

CHS note: Here is the Readers Journal essay by Eric Andrews: A Rising Standard Lifts All Boats: Employment and a Better Life (Feb. 2008)

I make wine with a large group of friends from the bay area (you should see what a waste is involved in defending the price point of all the "over-bearing" bordeauxs in Napa--there are no shortages of high quality fruit). When we do it right, it is a blast. We pick the grapes and crush them in a day and then have a party at the end with food and music and merriment. The trick for me, I have a bit of an A-type personality, is always to plan more for the merriment than for the efficiency of the wine production. And, if an undocumented worker were ever to be invovled, which has not happened yet, what the heck? There are no paychecks or taxes involved, just wine.


For more on a wide array of other topics, please visit the oftwominds.com weblog.