The Grand Forks Herald on Thursday called for a ban on the word “racism” from any discussion about refugee resettlement.
It’s not everyday that you find a newspaper calling for restrictions on free speech. You have to give it to the Herald — they’re really innovating.
“Residents on all sides should listen and learn,” reads the editorial, written by opinion editor Tom Dennis. “For both the skeptics and the supporters have important messages; and if they’d only start talking to rather than past each other — while banning the word ‘racism’ from the conversation — something good might actually result.”
The editorial references House Bill 1427, which would let individual cities and the governor ban refugees from being placed in North Dakota. What could possibly be racist about a state of almost all white people trying to ban refugees, many of whom happen to be black and brown?
According to the editorial, refugee “skeptics” just want to know how much resettlement is costing the taxpayers. This is a bunch of bullshit for a few reasons.
First, North Dakota needs new people. The population size is pitiful. Anyone who wants to move there should be applauded. It doesn’t even matter if they do any work — the mere fact that they showed up is enough.
Second, if saving taxpayers money was truly the issue, why isn’t the same amount of energy being directed at other, significant wastes of tax dollars? For example, the legislature just killed a bill to update state law to reflect the legalization of same-sex marriage. That’s the definition of inviting a lawsuit, the cost of which will be paid by the citizens. Where was the fiscal uproar then?
Instead, the attention is turned to refugees — people who escaped horrible situations in their homelands to find a better life. Little did they know they’d have to adapt to a new role: scapegoat.