Ivory Dome

In the midst of all this debate about how we’re to handle immigration, it suddenly occurred to me that I was once a guest worker myself – in Poland.  This was back in 1992 and 1993, right after I had retired from the Army.

At the time, Poland was emerging from over forty years of communism and, in trying to integrate into the economy of the West, had the foresight to set up a network of Teachers Colleges of Foreign Languages (Nauczycielskie Kolegium Języków Obcych – NKJO), primarily for English, but also for other Western languages, such as German and French.  After applying to several NKJO’s, I was invited to be a lecturer at the NKJO located at the University of Szczecin, in nortwestern Poland.  Shortly after arriving in Szczecin, I filled out a form that was registered with the local police (and, I assume, was forwarded to the appropriate national authorities).

I didn’t go there for the money (I earned less than $300 a month), or to escape economic or political oppression (I’m a native-born citzen of the United States).  I didn’t go with the intention of bringing my family later (I was single at the time, and after I got engaged to a lovely lady from Amarillo, she didn’t want to live in Poland).  I didn’t go to change the Polish culture or to commit acts of terror (I had learned to love Poland and the Polish people during my first visit the summer before).  I came with credentials that were sorely needed and in short supply in Poland at the time – I was a native speaker of English with five years of experience in postsecondary foreign language teaching experience and a Master’s degree in teaching foreign language.  I stayed for one academic year, and I’d like to think contributed something positive to integrating post-communist Poland into a reunited Europe by training English teachers who then taught more and more Poles English.

So what does all this have to do with immigration to the United States in 2007?  Aren’t my experiences in Poland and the experiences of today’s immigrants to our country apples and oranges?  In many ways, yes.  But here are some lessons to be applied to today:

1)  I asked if I could work in my adopted country and didn’t arrive until I had a invitation to do so;

2)  I learned the language of my hosts before I arrived and made no demands that they accommodate me linguistically;

3)  My talents were matched with a specific need before I left;

4)  I crossed the border at a designated customs point and submitted my passport to the proper authorities;

5)  I registered with the authorities after I settled in and made no attempt to conceal my whereabouts; and

6)  I acknowledged that my presence was at the pleasure of my adopted country and was ready to leave if that status were to change at any time.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable that the U.S. immigration policy firmly establish these six points (i.e. for two to five years) before anyone already here is awarded indefinite legal status.  We all saw what happened when amnesty was granted in 1986 with only a vague promise of border enforement.  If enforcement isn’t established first, we’ll have another repeat of amnesty 20 years down the road when another cohort of millions sneaks across the border.

Border enforcement first – after that, everything else is on the table.

This entry was posted on Sunday, June 24th, 2007 at 12:28 pm and is filed under Immigration, Personal. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.