John Carlson has latched onto a new argument that he evidently thinks is a home run in the immigration debate. In fact, he's so proud of it that he has used it in almost every one of his daily immigration rants delivered over the last several weeks. Here is a sample from the April 10th edition of the John Carlson Show: (Audio)

CARLSON: Every time I talk to someone who has a liberal attitude about illegal immigration, I say name a pocket of America, anywhere, any neighborhood, any community, that is better off because large numbers of illegals live there. The schools are better? After all they pay taxes right? The schools are better? There's less crime, it's safer, right? Since they're in a hurry to assimilate, everyone can communicate well? No. It's not the case, and they know it. And they don't care.

And truthfully, it probably is a clever argument if your goal is to energize and further radicalize the right-wing base, because it is an almost perfect clone of the kind of race-baiting talk that has been in use for hundreds of years. People like David Neiwert have had some excellent pieces recently about how various organs of the right-wing noise machine are being used as tools to spread extremist ideas, and talk radio has provided some perfect examples with the steady drumbeat against latino immigrants.

Think about it: there's a single word in Carlson's quote that you can replace and it becomes an unquestionably racist statement. Just transport yourself to the post-civil-war South and replace "illegal" with "former slave", or in the 1950's with "black". Seems like a perfect speech to convince white voters to segregate and restrict the freedom of that scary group recently freed from bondage. Or replace "illegal" with "Jew", and picture yourself at any number of anti-Jewish pogroms over the last 2000 years.

In fact, rather than try in vain to complete Carlson's negative proof, callers should turn the question around and ask him to present specific proof of a community that is in desperate straits due to immigration. After all, if it's such a huge problem then he should be able to name at least one. Then we could have a real analysis and debate about some specifics rather than his wild generalizations.

Of course Carlson would angrily pound his fists and claim that he's not racist, he just wants to make sure that laws aren't broken. But it doesn't take more than a careful reading of that one quote or a few random minutes of his show to realize that in this case the law is a distinctly secondary concern. The vast majority of the right-wing anxiety about immigration is cultural. They fear a large group of newcomers that differ from themselves in terms of language, customs, and yes, skin-color. And so the call rings out: "Prove it! Prove that they aren't destroying the very fabric of our community!". After all, a group so dangerous and insidious leaves us with no choice but to get rid of them.

In that context, the word "illegal" is nothing but a carefully crafted code for "Mexican", and Carlson's clever argument is revealed in all of its race-baiting glory.