How the term “invasion” divides the GOP when it comes to discussing immigration

NEW YORK CITY – As immigration remains a key issue ahead of the 2024 general election, Republicans have intensified their rhetoric against newcomers. But despite their campaign message – the most intense of which is shared by presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump – One particular term seems to divide the party The hill.

The term “invasion” has become a prime example of Republican rhetoric leading up to Novemberbut its use as a descriptor for the current migrant crisis has been portrayed as inaccurate and inflammatory, even by groups like the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and NumbersUS and the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

The three groups were founded directly or indirectly by John Tanton, a Michigan ophthalmologist who promoted an unorthodox view of population control and environmentalism through reduced immigration, who has been widely labeled a eugenist, according to The Hill.

The networking groups are funded in part by the Colcom Foundation, which calls for immigration restrictions so that “the US can stabilize and gradually reduce its population, thereby reducing its environmental footprint.”

During the Trump years they were known for providing much of the ideology and inside information the government used to restructure the immigration system, the outlet added.

Now that an unprecedented influx of migrants has entered the U.S. through the southern border, these groups — which have long promoted immigration restrictions — are publicly denouncing the painting of a perceived invasion by foreigners.

“There are two questions here: the first is whether this is an actual invasion,” said Eric Ruark, director of research at NumbersUSA. “The first part is that it’s hard to argue that it’s an invasion if they’re invited, right? First of all, people don’t show up armed at the border.”

The second part is about the increased tensions between migrants and the border patrol. “There’s no widespread attacks, you know, they turn themselves in, they’re fingerprinted and then they’re released even if they’re inadmissible. but it is not, in our opinion, something that would be called an invasion,” he said.

Regardless of their ideas, tThe Tanton Networks do not engage in the political use of invasion language and do not disown politicians who use this language, but remain wary of possible consequences. De Heuvel reports this.

Other organizations outside the Tanton network believe that the current situation is inaccurately depicted by the use of the term “invasion.” Some are particularly concerned about the potential hatred and violence that use of such terms can bring.

“They’re out of their depth and they’re doing damage to the country, not just in terms of policy, but in terms of their rhetoric — and it’s no coincidence that the El Paso shooter, the Buffalo shooter, the Pittsburgh… all cited invasion rhetoric in their pre-shooting manifestos and social media posts,” said Mario H. Lopez, chairman of the conservative Hispanic Leadership Fund and a longtime critic of the Tanton Network.

Other Republicans, however, egged on by former President Trump, who has been using the term in the immigration context since 2018, are all about calling migration “an invasion.”

Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.), a potential running mate of Trump, used the term in a statement on Friday social media message blaming President Biden for the number of people who entered the United States through the southwest border.