You make a great point, and one I’ve been saying for years. There are, in general, three classes of illegal immigrations. There is the criminal class - drugs and kidnapping and so on - the gimme class - those who came for free benefits - and then those who came to work labor.
All 3 are equally illegal, but they are still different. They have different impacts on our culture and society, they have different incentives to come here, and so on.
Then I would also point this out: While there is Joe Legal and Jose Illegal, there are also a lot of Jose Legals and a fair number of Joe Illegals. Sometimes I think some of the posters here kind of have as an underlying assumption that all Hispanic laborers they see out and about are illegal. It’s just not the case.
All 3 are equally illegal, but they are still different. They have different impacts on our culture and society, they have different incentives to come here, and so on
That is an astute observation, and as far as the impacts on our culture and society, i see as a key aspect is to whether a person or culture has been seduced by the victim-entitlement mentality, which the liberals use to get themselves elected as the saviors of those who are oppressed by the established class.
The latter of which have a status and benefits attained by lawful means and principals under a system that rewards merit, while the liberals basically contend that all have a right to the same benefits regards of merit, and incite class warfare to attain it. Which is the case under Communism or American liberalism.
Of course, while the liberal elite, who see themselves as uniquely worthy to run the country, attain position by presenting themselves saviors of the oppressed (making merchandise of valid grievances), the end result of causing those in business class to divest their seats for those in economy class, the end results is that all basically end up in the cargo hold in service to the liberals and in utter dependence upon them.
Of course, this is nothing new, as the original occupy movement and share the wealth campaign was the devil selfishly seeking to climb up some other way than that is is lawful, seeing him as fit to be as God. (Is. 14) And being abased due to his self-exaltation, he next sought to seduce Eve into subscribing to the "share the wealth" idea, that she presently was being unjustly deprived by God of something He possessed, and which was her right to have, and to act unlawfully to attain it. (Gn. 3)
Note that claiming one has a right to that which others have is not the same as holding they have a right to attain such by merit, and is contrary to grace, in which one benevolently bestows benefits to victims and even those who deserve the contrary, and which is an incentive for the recipient to likewise become a blessing to others by bettering themselves, and is not meant to subsidize indolence, etc.
The working Central Americans that I know do not seem to subscribe to the victim-entitlement mentality, though most vote Democrat due to seeing them as economically in their favor (PR's are more likely to subscribe to the welfare state). But most oppose homosexuality and overall are more conservative than the "natives" around here, and get along better, with a "live and let live" attitude overall, and are much less likely to really complain versus being congenial, and are far far more likely to be Christian. You can ride the same crowded bus for years and never see a real problem, which is not the case with the black culture, while the native commuters have blank stares.
These are some of observations after 20 years in a predominately Latino city in which i am the minority (and still speak very little Spanish).