At some point in the last few years, the issue of illegal immigration moved from a being a marginal issue to one of the principle issues in American politics. It has been alleged that the United States’ border policies have aided terrorists and compromised American sovereignty. Others have called for immigration reform with paths to citizenship, and some have come out in favor of amnesty for illegal immigrants. It is a complicated issue, but almost everyone has an opinion.

What amazes me about the issue, is even those who are not directly affected by illegal immigrants think they are affected. In a sense, the question of immigration has become like the question of abortion, in that it is controversial and even those who are not affected by it feel very strongly that a certain policy should be taken. There are many examples of this with the illegal immigration question. The best example, is the tendency of politicians and residents of non-border states to worry about the supposedly negative backlash of the influx of illegal immigrants.

The 18th Congressional District of Ohio is a great example of the hysteria that has surrounded the debate regarding illegal immigration. The district is just east of Columbus and is largely rural. Other than a few isolated pockets, immigrants – illegal or otherwise – have not made the 18th District a home. In fact, the population of Hispanics, who are the largest immigrant group, is still less than one percent in Newark, which is the largest city. New Philadelphia, which has experienced an influx of legal and illegal immigrants in recent years, still only claims a census Hispanic population of barely more than one percent. However, immigration has managed to make it to the forefront of debate in the 18th District. Representative Zack Space, a Democrat, was elected to Congress in 2006 promising to support a fence along the border with Mexico. Several Republican hopefuls for Space’s seat have been even more like Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo in their zeal to support a border fence. This message is resonating with the 18th District’s voters, regardless of the fact that immigration has not by any means been even a slight problem in the district.

It is easy to dismiss this as being simply part of the phenomena observed in a conservative area of the United States, but it merits further assessment than that. As sad as it may seem, fear of multiculturalism and change is the driving force behind much of the eagerness to build a border fence and make it next to impossible to gain citizenship to the United States. There is suspicion that non-European immigrants will arrive, refuse to work, steal goods, commit crimes and turn the area into a slum. Others fear that the culture of the area will be transformed into a Hispanic culture, because they fear that Hispanics will not adopt the social norms of the area. Still others worry that they will have to learn to speak Spanish exclusively. The concerns are diverse and widespread. Even though these fears are large in number and common, they are still unfounded. None of the reasons to oppose multiculturalism are borne out of any realistic premonition.

I believe it is time for people to drop any unrealistic aversion to immigrants that they might have. Reasons for the opposition to easy paths to citizenship are based on distrust, dislike and fear. Reasons for the support of a border fence are based on more irrational fear and egocentric jingoism. It is surprising that so few people do not take the time to ask themselves how their lives have been negatively affected by immigrants, legal or otherwise. If more people would take the time to think, very few of them would fear and loathe immigrants.

Brian Murphy is a senior in political science. He can be reached at [email protected].