This evening I listened to Esmeralda Arrizón-Palomera speak about undocumented experiences and how they are presented in the political landscape. The categorization of an undocumented person criminalizes them for existing in a nation-state that is not “theirs.” The Dream Act shifted this criminalization to the parents of undocumented people because, as the narrative goes, the child did not have a choice so they were not at fault. This perspective is problematic because it makes an assumption that there are no extreme or special circumstances that can justify the illegal act of crossing a border.

The Marxist view of criminality asserts that criminal acts arise from necessity borne out of being in a disadvantaged position in society and that the motives of selfishness come from the very behaviors that capitalism reinforces at a broader level. The first prong in this Marxist view effectively captures the reasons why many people come to the United States knowing that this is an illegal act.

For example, in various Latin-American countries, it is well-known among scholars that US intervention is the reason for sustained instability. Though there are others some examples include Guatemala, Honduras, and Ecuador. This sustained instability encompasses political, economic, and social factors that threatens lives. This atmosphere has been extreme enough to lead to mass genocide by US-backed leaders. In effect, the US has profited on the exploitation of Latin-American countries and then subsequently denied immigrants entry for refuge. With deportation on the rise, people are being sent back to their countries and being viciously murdered within days.

The evisceration of a country by another seems to me to be the “necessity” from the Marxist interpretation of criminality. People subject to US interventionist policies have no other choice but to escape for themselves and for their families. For this reason, the narrative that certain undocumented people “deserve” to be in the United States more than another is problematic. How can someone assign value to one life over another?

Capitalism combined with imperialistic motives caused the encroachment of the United States into countries to exploit their labor, their capital, and their citizens and led to many deaths, egregious labor violations, governmental corruption, and so on. How can someone value a border more than they value the right to human life?

On the construction of borders, who enforces them? why are they enforced? With increasing globalization it would be advantageous to start deconstructing these borders and question the motives behind restrictive immigrant policy and examining the histories behind them. This might be difficult to unpack when undocumented people continue to be marginalized by society and unscrupulous employers exploit undocumented immigrants here in the United States in the search for ultimate profit maximization.