HOW TO LOSE ME (AND, I’M SURE, OTHERS) IN THE OPENING PARAGRAPH

Here is the first paragraph of today’s editorial at bloomberg.com, which discusses the so-called “Dreamers” – i.e. children of illegal aliens (including adults in their 20’s, even 30’s) whose parents brought them here illegally and who demand that they not be deported/should be given legal status:

President Donald Trump has issued his “priorities” for immigration legislation. It’s a mixed bag that deserves a full debate in Congress. But 800,000 of America’s most productive young people should not be used as bargaining chips in that debate.

Two parts of that paragraph jump out at me:

-800,000?  That is a given?  That is a fact?

How do the editors know there are 800,000?  There are allegations that a great many “Dreamers” did not come here as children, they just jumped the border.  Does bloomberg.com have evidence to disprove those allegations?

-“America’s most productive young people”?

How do the editors know that?  Did they conduct 800,000 interviews to find it out?  Or are they generalizing about an entire group – much as people generalize that all Jews are cheap, all Irish are drunk and all Blacks are lazy?

Do these people have even the slightest clue about what stereotyping is?  That if you say something complimentary while generalizing about an entire group, you’re still generalizing about an entire group?

I read that opening paragraph, and chose not to read further.  Why?  Because it demonstrates to me that the editors at bloomberg.com are not writing a serious opinion piece, they are making a stacked-deck statement of advocacy, based on their stereotyped image instead of reality.

A waste of my time.

I doubt very much that I would be the only one to feel this way.

3 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *