There Are Better Ways to Make Your Point

Oh, this should do wonders for the cause of illegal immigrants -- they've got International ANSWER on their side. As the Washington Times reports, ANSWER is leading the charge for a May 1 boycott from work day. In case you don't know who ANSWER is affiliated with, here's a short list...

ANSWER's steering committee includes the Free Palestine Alliance, the Partnership for Civil Justice, the Nicaragua Network, the Korea Truth Commission, the Muslim Student Association, the Mexico Solidarity Network and the Party for Socialism and Liberation. It denounces as racism attempts to criminalize illegal aliens.

Maybe it's just me, but the Party for Socialism and Liberation sounds like something someone came up with after smoking a particularly bad joint. In any case, Ed Morrissey at Captain's Quarters notes the significance of May 1 to the socialists and their ilk...

Someone should have warned them about the obvious nature of the date, but then again, the I-ANSWER crowd has always worn its love of Stalinism on its sleeve -- right next to the Che Guevara images it wears on its chest.

It seems like a rather stupid idea, anyway, and one almost guaranteed to backfire on its promoters. For one thing, May 1 is a Monday, traditionally the worst day of the week for retail business anyway. Travel will be light, and restaurants more or less empty regardless of the boycott. Most travelers will have checked out of their hotels the previous day. If one could pick a day with the least amount of impact on the traditional job categories for illegals and their interaction with the public, May 1 has to rank in the top three this year.

And besides its watered-down economic impact, the notion that people who entered the country illegally will now obstruct American citizens and legal residents from conducting their business will generate as much sympathy as the sea of Mexican flags did during last week's protests. It will backfire and polarize the immigration debate, generating more calls for strict enforcement and undercutting reasonable compromise. Why? Because most Americans will not back down when confronted with unreasonable demands, and the demands of the I-ANSWER crowd for unlimited and unfettered border crossings, complete with automatic qualification for the entire range of government safety-net programs, is completely unreasonable.

My guess is that ANSWER will claim that the low level of business being done that Monday will be the direct result of their call for a boycott. But the conclusion of the boycotts will not be good for illiegal immigration apologists and the left in general. The fact that immigration is a hot-button issue this year stems from the fact that many people are upset over the government's lack of enforcement of the law at the border, and simply encouraging illegal immigrants to be louder and bolder makes it more clear that the government isn't enforcing the laws. That doesn't help the cause.

There are reasonable alternatives out there that are possible, but the possibility of establishing a guest-worker program or something similar is not helped by protests such as these. I know the left longs for the days of the 1960's, but perhaps they should rethink their plans.

Since the left radicalized in the 1960's, their numbers have dwindled and they've repeatedly lost elections. Even if the electorate votes to put Democrats in charge of the House this fall (and I'm beginning to think this nugget of conventional wisdom may be wrong), the public doesn't want the policies of the radical left. Bill Clinton, for all his faults, was forced by the public and the GOP Congress to govern substantially to the right of any Democratic President in memory. The left has lost these battles, and part of the reason is that their tactics don't appeal to the middle-class. Most of the middle-class works long hours at tough jobs, and they're not likely to be swayed by people marching in the streets for legalizing illegal immigration, or any number of other left-wing causes.