![]() |
"Sparrow and Hibiscus" by Utagawa Hiroshige (Metropolitan Museum) |
Math might be hard to focus on with Texas soldiers prepping to wander wandering the streets of Chicago, cosplaying an occupying force. Practicing scaring people, so they'll be ready come the 2026 elections.
But I've been fiddling with numbers. Specifically related to crime, since tamping down immigrant violence is the pretext for bringing in soldiers to help kick them out.
Looking at numbers underscores the lies we are being fed by the Trump administration. Since I don't want to drown you in figures, and I know MAGA sorts read this and are easily confused, let's consider just two groups: babies and immigrants.
Republicans love babies. In their constant effort to drag America back to a 1950s Eden that never really existed, they push for more kids.
Are babies dangerous? Yes, they are. Why? Because they grow up into adults. And how dangerous are U.S.-born adults? According to the CATO Institute, about 1.2% of U.S.-born citizens in their 30s have been incarcerated at some point, compared to 0.6% of immigrants without legal status undocumented immigrants and 0.3% of immigrants with legal status.
How can that be? In case you have trouble grasping the complex math outlined above, allow me to offer a helpful metaphor.
Imagine that if you are caught speeding, say going 45 mph in a 35-mph zone, you could be arrested and deported to a country you left as a toddler. You'd drive slower, right? That is the simple explanation for the lower immigrant crime rate. I only wish everybody was, you know, capable of absorbing new facts and altering their opinion based on those facts. I can; it's a beautiful thing.
So to summarize, while Republicans push having babies and demonize immigrants, it is the babies who'll more likely turn into criminals, at a rate between two and four times the immigrants.
Why isn't this more generally known? Because our leaders try to frighten us by waving specific cases of immigrant crime, as if that were proof. An example or two is not proof or — warning! foreign language ahead! — as the Germans say, "Eine Schwalbe macht noch keinen Sommer," or "one swallow does not a summer make."
The phrase scans better in German. Because in English, "swallow" has two meanings. Primarily an action causing something to pass down the throat — either literally, like swallowing gum, or metaphorically, like swallowing a load of hooey because Fox News tells you over and over that it is true. In German, the word for swallow, in the gulp sense, schlucken is very different than swallow in the return-to-Capistrano sense, schwalbe.
In English, only as an afterthought does "swallow" refer to the bird, and so the confusion that we are obviously prone to can occur. Does "one swallow" refer to ingesting, either food or nonsense; or a member of the family of songbirds with thin, streamlined bodies and long, pointed wings, suited to hunting insects, long-distance migrants who can cover ... ?
Oops, I said a naughty word, didn't I? "Migrants." My apologies. Please stop gnawing the doorjamb. Although, let's go with that. The avian swallows in Illinois migrate from South America. It's almost as if nature herself dictated dictates immigration as an adaptive plan to encourage survival. Which, spoiler alert, she does.
To continue reading, click here.
Speaking of math, per Wikipedia and elsewhere, the Chicagoland area comprises of nearly 11,000 square miles of contiguous suburbs, hundreds of such towns. How realistic is it for 300 Whataburger-fed Texas National Guard to patrol such an area? Granted they will have advanced weaponry, but seems like such a pointless PR stunt to even pretend that they will do much other than frighten a few.
ReplyDeleteWell, the ICE / National Guard presence in LA only took up 1 1/2 square blocks - of a metro area of 33,954 square miles. BIG help. And, of course, they never went near the gang areas ... Might get hurt there.
DeleteGood one Neil. Too bad the people that should read this won’t understand What you’re saying at all.
ReplyDeleteYeah, that's a safe bet. But then, I don't write it for them; I write it for you.
Deletelol, true
DeleteThe people that should read this won't read it. Period. And even if they did read it, they would not understand it, mostly because it makes too much sense.
DeleteIn addition, what common sense and vision they do possess is simply blinded by the light...harsh and intense...from the orange spotlight. Which also turns them orange.
I really appreciate this piece, Neil.
ReplyDeleteIt's so important to see rational, common sense, sane commentary on the lies and misinformation we face constantly.
Yes, thank you for this today!
DeleteThank you, Neil.
ReplyDeleteSome days you're a sociologist, some days a statistician. Other times a political scientist, or an anthropologist. It's incredible the wealth of knowledge one man can have. Such a gift. Very impressive.
ReplyDeleteThe research and investigation required to gather this information must take up a lot of your time.
Then you write books , obituaries, and reviews.
Thank you Mr Steinberg for sharing often obscure details of the world and people that surround us with such clarity and eloquence.
We are lucky to have you here in Chicago plying your trade.
Keep up the good work.