‍WASHINGTON, D.C. — Over the past few weeks, major cities across the United States—including New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago—have seen an upsurge in protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the enforcement of deportation laws. Protesters, led by left-wing activist groups, have taken to the streets, blocking major highways, disrupting public spaces, and demanding the abolition of ICE.

While these demonstrations claim to stand for “immigrant rights,” they are in fact a misdirected reaction against the enforcement of existing immigration laws, not an effort to improve legal immigration pathways. But why are so many young Americans blind to this distinction? The answer lies in the legacy media’s use of linguistic manipulation and semantic infiltration—tactics eerily similar to Newspeak, the mind-control language in George Orwell’s 1984.

Linguistic Manipulation: How Words Shape Perception

Linguistic manipulation refers to the strategic use of language to alter how people perceive an issue without them even realizing it. The legacy media has perfected this technique when discussing immigration.

• Illegal immigrants are consistently referred to as "undocumented migrants"—a term designed to remove the illegality of their actions and replace it with a sense of bureaucratic oversight.
• Border security measures are described as “cruel” or “inhumane”, instead of being framed as necessary for national sovereignty.
• ICE enforcement actions, which are legally mandated, are rebranded as “military-style raids”, creating a false perception of law enforcement brutality.

This type of framing primes young Americans to see border enforcement as an oppressive act rather than the fundamental right of any sovereign nation. The media doesn’t lie outright—instead, it controls what words are used, ensuring that only one perspective is seen as morally acceptable.Semantic Infiltration: The Weaponization of LanguageAnother media tactic at play is semantic infiltration, a concept introduced by diplomat Fred Iklé. This occurs when ideological groups introduce emotionally charged terms into everyday political discussions, forcing their opponents to adopt their language—and thereby, their worldview.In the immigration debate, activists have:

• Successfully rebranded illegal immigrants as "dreamers", making deportation seem like an attack on hopeful young people rather than a legal measure.
• Promoted the idea of “sanctuary cities”, which sounds virtuous, despite the fact that they actively shield criminals from federal immigration laws.
• Framed “mass deportations” as a human rights crisis, even though every country—including Canada, Mexico, and European nations—routinely deports illegal entrants.

Through semantic infiltration, anyone who supports border security is painted as a bigot, and anyone opposing mass amnesty is labeled “anti-immigrant”, despite the fact that millions of legal immigrants come to the U.S. every year.A Modern Form of Orwell’s NewspeakThis deliberate warping of language closely mirrors the concept of Newspeak from George Orwell’s 1984. In the novel, the ruling Party creates a controlled language designed to restrict independent thought and force ideological conformity.

• Words that might allow dissent are erased from the vocabulary.
• Definitions are rewritten so that opposing ideas become impossible to articulate.
• “Wrongthink” is criminalized by social pressure and government control.

Sound familiar? Today’s political climate punishes those who challenge the mainstream immigration narrative, with many young Americans unable to express opposition to illegal immigration without fear of being labeled as racist or extremist.In effect, the legacy media and activist organizations have created their own version of Newspeak, shaping how an entire generation thinks about immigration without them ever realizing it.The Real Argument: Protecting Borders is a Sovereign RightThe core issue here is not about immigration itself—it is about whether a nation has the right to enforce its own laws and secure its own borders. The United States accepts more legal immigrants per year than any other nation, yet the media frames all border security measures as hostile and xenophobic.Every country in the world, from Japan to France to Mexico, enforces its borders and removes individuals who enter illegally. Yet in the United States, the media and left-wing activists have manipulated language to convince young people that only America is guilty of oppression when enforcing immigration laws.This is not a debate over human rights—this is about national sovereignty. And as long as the media continues its linguistic deception, millions of Americans will remain blind to the real issue at hand.

References

• New York Post – Protesters Against Trump’s Immigration Crackdown Block Los Angeles Freeway (2025)
• Amnesty International – Why the Language We Use to Talk About Refugees Matters (2024)
• University of Valencia Study – Manipulation of Language as a Weapon of Mind Control and Abuse of Power in 1984 (2023)
• The Federalist – How Media Narratives Distort the Immigration Debate (2025)