Status
Available
Collection
Publication
Dey Street Books (2019), Edition: Reprint, 256 pages
Description
"The movement of people--what Americans call 'immigration' and the rest of the world calls 'migration'--is among the defining issues of our time. Technology and information crosses countries and continents at blistering speed. Corporations thrive on being multinational and polyglot. Yet the world's estimated 244 million total migrant population, particularly those deemed 'illegal' by countries and societies, are locked in a chaotic and circular debate about borders and documents, assimilation and identity. An issue about movement seems immovable: politically, culturally and personally. Dear America: Notes Of An Undocumented Citizen is an urgent, provocative and deeply personal account from Jose Antonio Vargas, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who happens to be the most well-known undocumented immigrant in the United States. Born in the Philippines and brought to the U.S. illegally as a 12-year-old, Vargas hid in plain-sight for years, writing for some of the most prestigious news organizations in the country (The Washington Post, The New Yorker) while lying about where he came from and how he got here. After publicly admitting his undocumented status--risking his career and personal safety--Vargas has challenged the definition of what it means to be an American, and has advocated for the human rights of immigrants and migrants during the largest global movement of people in modern history. Both a letter to America and a window into Vargas's America, this book is a transformative argument about migration and citizenship, and an intimate, searing exploration on what it means to be home when the country you call your home doesn't consider you one of its own"--… (more)
Awards
Los Angeles Public Library Best of the Year (Non-Fiction — 2018)
RUSA CODES Listen List (Selection — 2019)
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
2018
Physical description
256 p.; 7.62 inches
User reviews
LibraryThing member nmele
Disclosure: The author is a friend of my son.
This brief book is the personal story of a young Filipino boy brought to the U.S. by his family who discovers he is undocumented just after Congress passed the immigration legislation that made being in the U.S. without documents a crime. Vargas
This brief book is the personal story of a young Filipino boy brought to the U.S. by his family who discovers he is undocumented just after Congress passed the immigration legislation that made being in the U.S. without documents a crime. Vargas
Show More
describes his personal journey to a career first in journalism and then in activism, his efforts to change his status and why they have not worked for him. It is a gutsy book that describes a different kind of undocumented immigrant--from Asia, not Mexico or Central America; brought here as a child who later finds out he has believed untruths about himself. Vargas makes clear why the immigration debate is important--human lives are at stake--and why it is so complex and difficult to resolve. Show Less
LibraryThing member SamSattler
I gave up on "Dear America" only after completing about seventy percent of the book. This may be the only book that I read that far through without finishing, so it's one that I'll remember, even if it's only for that reason. So why did I quit on it?
Going in, I figured it would offer a heartfelt
Sorry, Mr. Vargas. You had me convinced of your argument for over half the book - then you blew it with your petty attack on anyone who dares question your view of the issue. (And honestly, folks, the book is not particularly well written in the first place - it reads more like a Young Adult book than something meant for adults.)
Going in, I figured it would offer a heartfelt
Show More
defense of immigration into this country, especially of the illegal variety, a defense that would, based upon the author's personal experiences, be an understandably one-sided view. That would not - and did not- bother me at all. But I was hoping that if Vargas even bothered to mention that there was another point of view, that he would treat it and those who held it with at least a tiny bit of respect. Instead, Vargas tore into Trump, those who voted for him, and conservatives in general with a dismissive, bigoted, and cruel ferocity that caused me to lose all respect and patience both for him and his little book.Sorry, Mr. Vargas. You had me convinced of your argument for over half the book - then you blew it with your petty attack on anyone who dares question your view of the issue. (And honestly, folks, the book is not particularly well written in the first place - it reads more like a Young Adult book than something meant for adults.)
Show Less
LibraryThing member strandbooks
Notes of an Undocumented Citizen by Jose Antonio Vargas is a very powerful memoir. He’s my age so references many events from high school/college that I remember well...except for him it was the time he learned that his grandfather who had come here legally from the Philippines had doctored
Show More
papers so Jose could make it here. He’s struggled in a limbo and self-doubt ever since. His story is also about the many people (teachers, friends parents, coworkers) to become a successful journalist despite his status. It’s a fast and powerful read that I highly recommend. Show Less
LibraryThing member MrDickie
Interesteing book about what it means to live undocumented in the United States. The author was born in the Phillipines and came to this country before reaching teenage. He has made his living as a journalist, writing for a number of nationally known newspapers and magazines. I was somewhat
Show More
disappointed with the book ending because the author didn't state what he plans to do in the future. Show Less
LibraryThing member PuddinTame
Vargas is a more sympathetic person than Suketu Mehta, who recently wrote This Land is Our Land, on the same subject, although I find him intermittently annoyingly entitled and whiny (see below); he is more likely to be viewed favorably by people other than ardent immigrant advocates. I found Mehta
Vargas was unwittingly smuggled into the country illegally, and can't become a citizen or get a green card at this point without going back to the Philippines, likely for about ten years; he ends on a hint of going back to the Philippines, whether or not he comes back. Vargas became tired of the multiple lies and dodges needed to keep his secret, and made his status public, first in an article and then in this book. I checked recently, and he has not been deported, although he has certainly been threatened with it. The ICE may have heeded Mark Twain's advice about not arguing with someone who buys ink by the barrel, or, alternatively, has friends with lots of access to the media, despite his his view of himself as lonely and isolated.
I have realized lately the importance of context: I'm a moderate (or conservative anarchist, as my friends prefer), basically living in LiberalLand. Except for a couple of relatives, who are capable of holding reasonable, civil conversations, I have very little direct contact with Conservatives, and what contact I have is not encouraging. I don't have a working television set, my home access to the Internet to limited to my iPhone (and reception is limited here), I don't use social media. I used to read some Patheos blogs, but now I don't. I am still affected by the hardening divide and people's rigid opinions; I am so alienated now as to feel adrift.
If I had heard Vargas's story fifteen years ago or so, my reaction would have been that we shouldn't waste our time and energy on fussing – just give the man a green card, and ask if his Mother, in the Philippines, wanted one too. On the other hand, I understand why people waited years to get a visa resent amnesty for people who didn't, and people who don't have family here resent that chain migration takes up so many visas (72% last I read; one of those “whose ox is getting gored?” issues.)
Things have gotten belligerent, and I don't respond well to belligerence. I'm very open to negotiating for more space for asylum seekers and refugees. I was stunned at the idea of having no immigrants, that's what we do and who we are. I don't, however, believe in open borders or admitting known criminals. It doesn't seem to me to be a good plan to admit people who are fleeing gangsters and also admit the gangsters. That's when the insults, literal yelling, and its written equivalent begin. On blogs and in person, or in books, immigration advocates have made it quite clear that in that case, I am a racist hater of all immigrants. There was the comments for one blog seemed to consist of nothing other than escalating insults to Trump supporters. I commented (and was ignored) that, call people any names you like, they're still on the voting rolls. I once asked (and was ignored) if they seriously thought that profanity-laced insults changed anyone's mind, fun though they may be for the person issuing them. How'd that work out for the Westboro Baptist Church? There is always the chance that it will backfire. If people don't like the activist, they might turn against their cause as well. There is no discussion, no middle ground, no compromise, no concern for anyone else's point of view. I think that's wrong, stupid, and extremely dangerous.
Cesar Chavez opposed unlimited immigration for fear it would undermine his efforts at unionization. I have been told that we are running out of workers because we don't admit anyone, except for a few whites, and chain migration is rare (see above). Never mind that we admit around a million people a year, plus tens of thousands of people with work visas, our foreign-born population is at its highest since the early 20th century, and our ethnic demographics are rapidly changing. I don't know whether to be more insulted at being lied to, or at being thought to be such an ignoramus. Not all Trump supporters are white supremacists, and liberals need all the moderates and swing voters they can get it they want to make any changes. Vargas also seems to be disturbed by this to a degree, which I find heartening – he has a much more complex and interlocking view of issues than the vast majority of people.
I am fed up with people arguing with slogans and entitlement. There is a lot of tragedy in the world, but it can't be solved simply: one case is heart-rending, and may be easy to solve; hundreds of millions are overwhelming; Vargas lists 258 million migrants and growing. I think the people whose countries are being flooded should get priority. What I almost never see or hear are realistic plans. My two favorite questions are “who do you mean we?” and “then what happens?” I was dropping a friend off at her house, when she began her usual spiel about illegal immigrants. I put on the parking-brake, and said, “o.k., green cards for everyone here; then what happens?” What happened is that she quickly opened the door and fled. Most Americans aren't interested in deporting illegal immigrants, they are concerned about the future. We supposedly had a deal in the 1980s, but except for the people who got amnesty, not an insignificant gain, it failed completely. The critics proved to be right: it solved none of the issues and we are continue to have the same disagreements. Maybe that's why people are so vehement. Arguing, as Vargas and others do, that one hand we try to limit immigration, and on the other hand have a “help-wanted” sign out, ignores that there are different “we-s” in the USA, that have conflicting interests.
So yes, I feel sympathy for Vargas, who didn't create his original problem, but he is also arguing for everyone who wants to be here, and presumably anywhere else, but with little more than sob-stories, not a realistic view at means and consequences. I don't know what we have in place for people, like refugees, who may come with little more on the clothes on their backs, some lacking work and language skills, and need help. That's not a reason to keep everyone out, but just getting people across the border isn't enough. The more a society provides for its own citizens and residents, the more expensive immigrants become, a Liberal conundrum. Should we give priority to people who are losing their countries due to climate change? We are likely to lose a big chunk of our state, and boy, are those people, who pride themselves on their uniqueness going to be unhappy to join the rest of us. More foreign aid might be a great idea, but how do we keep it from being embezzled as so much has been?
I end on a trivial note in response to Vargas (this is the whiny part.) Some of the changes that were inflicted on colonies can't be easily reversed; some can. He tells us that “Later I would find out why my name doesn't carry an accent mark. After the Americans forced the Spanish out of the Philippines, their typewriters couldn't type accented words. My name is Jose because of Spanish colonialism. But Jose isn't José because of American imperialism.” That's been a problem in a number of languages with extended Latin alphabets, let alone those with other writing systems. There was no “Å”, “Ł” or “Ҫ” on my typewriter either, but with my wordprocessor, I can enter “é” without even using Insert → Special Character. And if he really wants to fight the lingering traces of imperialism, he could pick a traditional Tagalog name, just as some African-Americans change their names for the same reason.
Show More
quite alienating; apparently he doesn't consider that his hostility is not likely to encourage people to welcome immigrants.Vargas was unwittingly smuggled into the country illegally, and can't become a citizen or get a green card at this point without going back to the Philippines, likely for about ten years; he ends on a hint of going back to the Philippines, whether or not he comes back. Vargas became tired of the multiple lies and dodges needed to keep his secret, and made his status public, first in an article and then in this book. I checked recently, and he has not been deported, although he has certainly been threatened with it. The ICE may have heeded Mark Twain's advice about not arguing with someone who buys ink by the barrel, or, alternatively, has friends with lots of access to the media, despite his his view of himself as lonely and isolated.
I have realized lately the importance of context: I'm a moderate (or conservative anarchist, as my friends prefer), basically living in LiberalLand. Except for a couple of relatives, who are capable of holding reasonable, civil conversations, I have very little direct contact with Conservatives, and what contact I have is not encouraging. I don't have a working television set, my home access to the Internet to limited to my iPhone (and reception is limited here), I don't use social media. I used to read some Patheos blogs, but now I don't. I am still affected by the hardening divide and people's rigid opinions; I am so alienated now as to feel adrift.
If I had heard Vargas's story fifteen years ago or so, my reaction would have been that we shouldn't waste our time and energy on fussing – just give the man a green card, and ask if his Mother, in the Philippines, wanted one too. On the other hand, I understand why people waited years to get a visa resent amnesty for people who didn't, and people who don't have family here resent that chain migration takes up so many visas (72% last I read; one of those “whose ox is getting gored?” issues.)
Things have gotten belligerent, and I don't respond well to belligerence. I'm very open to negotiating for more space for asylum seekers and refugees. I was stunned at the idea of having no immigrants, that's what we do and who we are. I don't, however, believe in open borders or admitting known criminals. It doesn't seem to me to be a good plan to admit people who are fleeing gangsters and also admit the gangsters. That's when the insults, literal yelling, and its written equivalent begin. On blogs and in person, or in books, immigration advocates have made it quite clear that in that case, I am a racist hater of all immigrants. There was the comments for one blog seemed to consist of nothing other than escalating insults to Trump supporters. I commented (and was ignored) that, call people any names you like, they're still on the voting rolls. I once asked (and was ignored) if they seriously thought that profanity-laced insults changed anyone's mind, fun though they may be for the person issuing them. How'd that work out for the Westboro Baptist Church? There is always the chance that it will backfire. If people don't like the activist, they might turn against their cause as well. There is no discussion, no middle ground, no compromise, no concern for anyone else's point of view. I think that's wrong, stupid, and extremely dangerous.
Cesar Chavez opposed unlimited immigration for fear it would undermine his efforts at unionization. I have been told that we are running out of workers because we don't admit anyone, except for a few whites, and chain migration is rare (see above). Never mind that we admit around a million people a year, plus tens of thousands of people with work visas, our foreign-born population is at its highest since the early 20th century, and our ethnic demographics are rapidly changing. I don't know whether to be more insulted at being lied to, or at being thought to be such an ignoramus. Not all Trump supporters are white supremacists, and liberals need all the moderates and swing voters they can get it they want to make any changes. Vargas also seems to be disturbed by this to a degree, which I find heartening – he has a much more complex and interlocking view of issues than the vast majority of people.
I am fed up with people arguing with slogans and entitlement. There is a lot of tragedy in the world, but it can't be solved simply: one case is heart-rending, and may be easy to solve; hundreds of millions are overwhelming; Vargas lists 258 million migrants and growing. I think the people whose countries are being flooded should get priority. What I almost never see or hear are realistic plans. My two favorite questions are “who do you mean we?” and “then what happens?” I was dropping a friend off at her house, when she began her usual spiel about illegal immigrants. I put on the parking-brake, and said, “o.k., green cards for everyone here; then what happens?” What happened is that she quickly opened the door and fled. Most Americans aren't interested in deporting illegal immigrants, they are concerned about the future. We supposedly had a deal in the 1980s, but except for the people who got amnesty, not an insignificant gain, it failed completely. The critics proved to be right: it solved none of the issues and we are continue to have the same disagreements. Maybe that's why people are so vehement. Arguing, as Vargas and others do, that one hand we try to limit immigration, and on the other hand have a “help-wanted” sign out, ignores that there are different “we-s” in the USA, that have conflicting interests.
So yes, I feel sympathy for Vargas, who didn't create his original problem, but he is also arguing for everyone who wants to be here, and presumably anywhere else, but with little more than sob-stories, not a realistic view at means and consequences. I don't know what we have in place for people, like refugees, who may come with little more on the clothes on their backs, some lacking work and language skills, and need help. That's not a reason to keep everyone out, but just getting people across the border isn't enough. The more a society provides for its own citizens and residents, the more expensive immigrants become, a Liberal conundrum. Should we give priority to people who are losing their countries due to climate change? We are likely to lose a big chunk of our state, and boy, are those people, who pride themselves on their uniqueness going to be unhappy to join the rest of us. More foreign aid might be a great idea, but how do we keep it from being embezzled as so much has been?
I end on a trivial note in response to Vargas (this is the whiny part.) Some of the changes that were inflicted on colonies can't be easily reversed; some can. He tells us that “Later I would find out why my name doesn't carry an accent mark. After the Americans forced the Spanish out of the Philippines, their typewriters couldn't type accented words. My name is Jose because of Spanish colonialism. But Jose isn't José because of American imperialism.” That's been a problem in a number of languages with extended Latin alphabets, let alone those with other writing systems. There was no “Å”, “Ł” or “Ҫ” on my typewriter either, but with my wordprocessor, I can enter “é” without even using Insert → Special Character. And if he really wants to fight the lingering traces of imperialism, he could pick a traditional Tagalog name, just as some African-Americans change their names for the same reason.
Show Less
Similar in this library
Pages
256