North American anti-immigration rhetorics: Continental circulation and global resonance of discursive integration

Abstract

Over its decade of existence, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has allowed for deepening patterns of regional economic integration between the three member countries, Canada, Mexico, and the United States. However, the workings of NAFTA have definitely been more bilateral (U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico) than trilateral as a consequence of historical asymmetrical relationships and recent geopolitical articulations. Contrary to a European Union model of continental integration that theoretically facilitates the movement of people, goods, capital, and services, the focus of NAFTA has been primarily on the free flows of goods, capital, and services ardently defended by business lobbies and national economies. Very limited provisions of the agreement have facilitated the unbalanced movement of skilled workers, professionals, and managers in very biased directions dictated by existing national policies.2 Far from facilitating the continental movement of people, NAFTA, border fortification, and post-2001 national security agendas have exacerbated the serious democratic deficits created historically in immigration policies and practices—particularly of Mexicans in the United States.