A Correspondent Writes...
We do get email. Some of it is banal. Some of it is abusive. Some of it is truly extraordinary in its thoughtfulness. And a lot of it came my way as a result of the heated and extended discussions about immigration we've hand on this blog this past week.
One email I received out of the blue on Thursday was superlative. Below I post the entire message from "CG." I don't agree with everything that our correspondent argues -- not by a long shot -- but so what?
Our correspondent does, however, get to the very roots of the illegal immigration issue by correctly noting that which is rarely said in our official debate i.e. that the ultimate solution is investment in the "sender" communities and countries, affording families a sustainable existence where they actually live.
From somewhere in the Big Nowhere of L.A. our unsolicted correspondent writes:
Dear Marc,
I read your article with much curiosity. I was working downtown on Saturday when the big protest was held. I was struck by several things the volume, the peacefulness and the fact that everyone there seemed to be from Central America. I thought it was exciting to see working people mobilizing for political action. However, what struck me the most was how clueless all of my friends (none of whom are Central American) to what had happened downtown. Speaking to them later after the news coverage of the event I was
shocked by their responses. None of them supported the protest and the sight of the Mexican, El Salvadorian and Hondourian flags solidified their feelings that this was not about fairness for all but economic leverage for< a few and hardened their positions towards reform.Surprsingly vocal were my Puerto Rican, Cuban and Dominican friends. There is a myth about the Latino voting block - that they all think and feel as one because they speak Spanish. However different histories, cultures and racial identies disguish the many different Latin immigrants. My Puerto Rican friends in New York sited that many of the jobs that their relatives would take upon leaving Puerto Rico are now being taken by the growing Mexican population. I heard the same from my ex-boyfriend's Cuban relatives in Miami. Their distaste stemming from the fact their relatives face death and torture from the Cuban government if they get caught trying to leave. The lack of numbers in the protests in New York and Miami seem to confirm this. Another friend who is Dominican and has teenagers in the LA school system, spoke about her kids wanting to join the marches but being rebuffed by their fellow "Hispanic" students that this was a "Mexican thing".
As for African-American's (which I am one) the vast majority are admantly against anything that smells of amnesty, being that they are the ones who are most in direct competition for the same jobs with illegal immigrants. You only have to look at the riots in schools and the warfare in the jails to know that tensions between blacks and Latinos in Southern California is growing and the fear of being discriminated by not only the Anglo powers to be but by the new Latino majority. They are especially offended by the weak comparsions between undocumented's concerns and Civil Rights. Notably not one single national black leader, including the ones still alive who forged the Civil Rights movement has come out in public with one of the immigration leaders in support. African-American's, a mixture of the African, European and Native Americans were citizens who were denied equal status on the basis of their skin color - a culture generated by the unique conditions that created America - we were never immigrants, to gloss over that fact lacks basic PR savvy. Not to mention the movement was successful because so many whites were able to identify with the basic message, contributed and in some cases lost their lives to advance Civil Rights. The Central Americans who protested were not slaves brought here against their will, they are not being prevented from from going to school or from healthcare, nor are they being lynched. Vincete Fox has used the prejudice torwards blacks in this country and in Mexico as a wedge issue to justify his government's failure to bring about any kind of reform. The fact the left has excused him for his blantant bigotry has left many wondering where we fit into national politics.
Many feel that the Central Americans did not care about Civil Rights or their contributions until it served their politics and that the politicians and clergy smelling a population shift has chosen to get behind the people who can deliver the most amount of votes or parishoners, fairness and moralitiy aside. We're told that America does not have the money to fix one it's oldest and grandest cities, New Orleans. Ray Nagin has been working through a crisis when many native contruction workers black and white returned to New Orleans to rebuild even through they had no where to live, so they could bring their families back sooner, only to find that they were being replaced with significantly cheaper labor from Central America thereby enacting a double tragedy. New Orleans parish with the largest percentage of black Catholics in the country has not been half as vocal on the issue of rebuilding New Orleans because there's no growth in black folks. There's the Sudanese refugee with one hand from my church who would love to rescue all who have been raped, maimed and driven from their home in Sudan, but nothing in this current Central American debate about immigration addresses that crisis. Or we could talk about Hati the poorest country in this hemisphere, with the lowest life expancy and infected with violence, but whose undocumented the US disposes of with ease. Eighty percent of Hatians live at poverty, a situation clearly more dire than the majority of Mexicans, yet when they speak about "immigration reform" where are Hector Flores' and John Transvina's immigrants other than Central Americans?
Reading about the reaction in the Asian community was more mixed, with the majority seeing the issues debated as benefitting a particular group instead of the whole. I must admit I marvel at the liberals who try to attach the ethics Enron, Walmart and Tyco to conservative politics while ignoring the patrician regressive politics of Fox. Forty percent of Mexicans live at the poverty level. Undocumented workers are an important tool for his government, they allow him to ignore the corruption in the military and law enforcement and excellerating drug trade because the best and brightest of the working class are willing and able to leave for a better life.
My westside white friends were the most harsh, those who think Bill Clinton got railroaded, stating if they wanted to show they were pro-America the protesters shouldn't be waving the Mexican flag (honestly when I heard that I wondered if these folks were truly my friends). Until last week most of the country weren't even thinking about the issue and the leaders of the movement should feel proud about the level of awareness the marches have brought. However, their vision is severely stunted if they think their movement is universal. I support a guest worker program, but I have mixed feelings about amnesty, I am open to learn more, but find myself more and more disturbed by the political tone of the message.
America is the most successful country in the world is because of the people's desire to improve their quality of life. You cannot talk about healthcare reform without taking into fact it's cost, or the myriad of other economic issues that face the poor, working and middle classes at a time where we are churning out more poor since the depression. Disparity bewtween the classes are growing as companies seek more ways in a globally challenging market to get more profits.
Latin America has been in an economic freefall for the last decade and none of our economic policies have seemed to help. Wouldn't supporting leaders and devising policies towards the economic growth of Latin America be the true solution? Soverignty and fairness for all, instead of "these people have the right to clean my toilette for three dollars an hour, because how else would I afford my trip to Hawaii?" I think immigrants deserve to get an American wage when they are here, not be low balled because they come from another country. This is post PC consumer America, the people who are put off by the flag waving are too busy wondering if they'll get that five percent raise and will it be enough, watching DVD's at home because they're trying to save money are way too polite to write letters, or argue with co-workers - they'll just vote. I think the movement is doing themselves diservice in their marketing, they don't need to take their message to the streets, they need to take it to the people.
Sincerely,
XX XX -- + --
Thanks again CG! Meanwhile, here's the latest on the state of the Senate debate on immigration reform.
March 31st, 2006 at 7:23 am
Great letter by CG — and it’s great you posted it.
I know you don’t read all (most, any?) of my ramblin’ rants here, but you noted an important something : “which is rarely said in our official debate i.e. that the ultimate solution is investment in the “sender” communities and countries, affording families a sustainable existence where they actually live.”
I totally agree with this — but must note that the “investment” needed is very simple.
Poor countries need businesses; they need jobs for their poor people.
They need entrepreneurs who can organize capital & labor to produce an OK product at a low price and then sell that product. And sell so much that they hire other workers to sell more.
Since the Marshall Aid plan, most gov’t aid has been going to gov’t. NOT to creating jobs. If the entrepreneur is the seed of economic success, aid can be like fertilizer — helpful, but secondary.
No additional manure from gov’t aid or NGO aid or Church aid is going to increase the number of local seeds sprouting into economic fruition.
Which is why I suggested such aid folk look at a new model of “employment maximizing” firms.
Again, thanks for: “these people have the right to clean my toilette for three dollars an hour, because how else would I afford my trip to Hawaii?”
How many Dems & feminists have illegals doing the domestic work in their own households, I wonder?
[On "breaking the law" I have to laugh; virtually all of those so upset are 99% likely to have "broken the law" by speeding, while driving, in the prior week. An activity which certainly increases their chances of killing others. Immigrants just want to peacefully and voluntarily offer their labor for money.]
March 31st, 2006 at 7:54 am
The problem with the protests are not so much the flag waving, but the signs that were proudly displayed and slogans that were proudly chanted by the protesters. Claiming that this land was theirs is not a good way to get American citizens on your side. Carrying the “reconquista†signs doesn’t help either. To top it off, we have ignorant high schoolers (who think this is all about immigrants, not ILLEGAL immigrants) raising the American flags at their schools, burning American flag, and causing so much tension that an entire school district in Oceanside, CA has decided to send everyone home. If you want to be here, and you want my support, act like you want to be here.
I think the movement needs to sit down and rethink what they are trying to say to us, because they are hurting themselves with their current tactics. The unfortunate part of this affair is that the kook fringe has taken over the message and is turning regular citizens against them.
I find Tom Grey’s rant at the end of his message asinine. Equating speeding with coming here illegally is just plain stupid. Does speeding overtax our schools? Does it affect the social services of those here legally? Please.
March 31st, 2006 at 8:19 am
I wouldn’t call CG’s letter “superlative.” I think she raises an immensely important point re the necessity of improving economies in Mexico and Central America, and agree with her on that. But I found a lot of her message confusing … it seemed like she bounced back and forth between supporting the marchers and criticising them. And I’m still not sure just what position she wanted her friends to take. Am I missing something here?
March 31st, 2006 at 8:59 am
Since these Times columns aren’t free links, I’m going to post most of Krugman’s latest:
March 31, 2006
Op-Ed Columnist
The Road to Dubai
By PAUL KRUGMAN
For now, at least, the immigration issue is mainly hurting the Republican Party, which is divided between those who want to expel immigrants and those who want to exploit them. The only thing the two factions seem to have in common is mean-spiritedness.
But immigration remains a difficult issue for liberals. Let me say a bit more about the subject of my last column, the uncomfortable economics of immigration, then turn to what really worries me: the political implications of a large nonvoting work force.
About the economics: the crucial divide isn’t between legal and illegal immigration; it’s between high-skilled and low-skilled immigrants. High-skilled immigrants — say, software engineers from South Asia — are, by any criterion I can think of, good for America. But the effects of low-skilled immigration are mixed at best.
True, there are large benefits for the low-skilled migrants, who may find even a minimum-wage U.S. job a big step up. Immigration also raises the total income of native-born Americans, although reasonable estimates suggest that these gains amount to no more than a fraction of 1 percent.
But low-skilled immigration depresses the wages of less-skilled native-born Americans. And immigrants increase the demand for public services, including health care and education. Estimates indicate that low-skilled immigrants don’t pay enough in taxes to cover the cost of providing these services.
All of these effects, except for the gains for the immigrants themselves, are fairly small. Some of my friends say that’s the point I should stress: immigration is a wonderful thing for the immigrants, and claims that immigrants are undermining American workers and taxpayers are hugely overblown — end of story.
But it’s important to be intellectually honest, even when it hurts. Moreover, what really worries me isn’t the narrow economics — it’s the political economy, the effects of having a disenfranchised labor force.
Imagine, for a moment, a future in which America becomes like Kuwait or Dubai, a country where a large fraction of the work force consists of illegal immigrants or foreigners on temporary visas — and neither group has the right to vote. Surely this would be a betrayal of our democratic ideals, of government of the people, by the people. Moreover, a political system in which many workers don’t count is likely to ignore workers’ interests: it’s likely to have a weak social safety net and to spend too little on services like health care and education.
This isn’t idle speculation. Countries with high immigration tend, other things equal, to have less generous welfare states than those with low immigration. U.S. cities with ethnically diverse populations — often the result of immigration — tend to have worse public services than those with more homogeneous populations.
Of course, America isn’t Dubai. But we’re moving in that direction. As of 2002, according to the Urban Institute, 14 percent of U.S. workers, and 20 percent of low-wage workers, were immigrants. Only a third of these immigrant workers were naturalized citizens. So we already have a large disenfranchised work force, and it’s growing rapidly. The goal of immigration reform should be to reverse that trend.
So what do I think of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s proposal, which is derived from a plan sponsored by John McCain and Ted Kennedy? I’m all in favor of one provision: offering those already here a possible route to permanent residency and citizenship. Since we aren’t going to deport more than 10 million people, we need to integrate those people into our society.
But I’m puzzled by the plan to create a permanent guest-worker program, one that would admit 400,000 more workers a year (and you know that business interests would immediately start lobbying for an increase in that number). Isn’t institutionalizing a disenfranchised work force a big step away from democracy?
For a hard-line economic conservative like Mr. McCain, the advantages to employers of a cheap work force may be more important than the violation of democratic principles. But why would someone like Mr. Kennedy go along? Is the point to help potential immigrants, or is it to buy support from business interests?
Either way, it’s a dangerous route to go down. America’s political system is already a lot less democratic in practice than it is on paper, and creating a permanent nonvoting working class would make things worse. The road to Dubai may be paved with good intentions.
March 31st, 2006 at 9:24 am
Krugman makes the essential point: “But I’m puzzled by the plan to create a permanent guest-worker program, one that would admit 400,000 more workers a year (and you know that business interests would immediately start lobbying for an increase in that number). Isn’t institutionalizing a disenfranchised work force a big step away from democracy?”
It’s depressing to read about black and Hispanics and whites fighting over jobs.
“which is rarely said in our official debate i.e. that the ultimate solution is investment in the “sender†communities and countries, affording families a sustainable existence where they actually live.â€
Which is why globalization and sending jobs to, say, India is ultimately a good thing, however counterintutive that is.
March 31st, 2006 at 10:44 am
“Which is why globalization and sending jobs to, say, India is ultimately a good thing, however counterintutive that is.”
Investment in “sender” communities does not necessarily entail outsourcing jobs: those are two different potential strategies/outcomes. Assisting a country in improving its infrastructure affords said country the opportunity to build a domestic market as well as compete globally. While this may have the indirect effect of forcing the U.S. company to cut jobs in order to compete with these newer companies, it is absolutely distinct from the case where a U.S. company outsources labor (or entirely re-locates): from the perspective of the “sender” country the latter case is clearly less preferable, since it is still dependent on foreign companies, rather than building its own market and infrastructure.
So, no, it’s not counter-intuitive at all, because your comparison was incorrect.
March 31st, 2006 at 12:25 pm
the moment i hear people discussing the “roots” of the problem i know nothing will ever get done. the reason we have the so called “illegal immigration problem” is because we sit around and discuss why we have it instead stopping having it now–not some great time off in the future after countless, useless conferences. meanwhile the number grows from 1 million to 15 million on its way to 30 million. if you are a drunk, first stop drinking and then figure out why you started!
yes this is a repeat but………
sorry for the ‘bitch’ slap but most of us need it……..get a f’n grip…………
go after the companies that employ the illegals? send the illegals back?
we are all dreaming. i have lived in california for 30 years.
thousands, and i mean thousands, of small businesses hire and use millions of illegals everyday. trust me, short of a new black booted gestapo they are staying employed. any law passed to enforce some sort of penalty will never make it out of the court system. think prop 187 etc. so stop pulling your own chain thinking some legislation out of washington is going to change anything on the ground.
send them back? assuming we could get the authority to do it (this to will sit in the courts until we are the new, new mexico) we have to have a fence from san diego to brownsville so that they don’t just walk back in led by their favorite coyote for $3,000.
10-15 million well organized people-and they are very organized are staying so get over it. part of the solution is to stop adding to the size of the group. we have to build a fence before we contemplate any other measures. don’t listen to anyone that says fences don’t work. they have other agendas they are not willing to discuss. ie vincente fox, among others, is against the fence.
15 million illegals are easy to assimilate over twenty years–and guess what, despite the headlines, they want to be assimilated. but it can only work if no more are added to the mix……
the folks that think the 15 million illegals are going anywhere are simply delusional. we let them in and now they are here for good. there are no laws, past , current or in the future that are going to change that. no doubt there will be folks who get on soapboxes and pretend to write new legislation to solve the problem. the sooner we all act like adults and realists the sooner this divisive issue can be put behind us. do any of you actually think that the illegals are going to be rounded up and sent back to mexico etc? do you think funding is going to be cut to cities who harbor them? you have to be kidding. the bong smoke is clouding your vision.
the absolute best that we can accomplish within current law is to build a fence so the problem doesn’t get any bigger. a fence is cheaper and more efficient than salaried border patrols in the long run. this fence works
http://www.weneedafence.com/images/Fence_Idea.jpg
after that then we can deport the bad guys during a 5-10 years green card period on the way to their citizenship. that’s right, their citizenship. 15 million people are not going to continue to live here as second class illegals forever without bringing the whole country down. why? because as certain as the sun comes up in the morning 15 million will be 30 million in 25 years without a fence. we need to get our arms around these kinds of numbers. we need to seal the border and make them citizens just like the irish, italians, germans, jews etc who came before them. the fact that they got here illegally is irrelevant. they are here, get over it. we are not going to collect back taxes or any other such nonsense. it will cost more to collect it. we might be able to get a citizenship fee. that will pay for the fence.
there are no good choices just hard ones. but again, to repeat, the illegals are not going anywhere. the protest march is just the beginning. 15 million organized people are not going to leave because we tell them to. you are right about the current legislation being proposed–they won’t sign up as expected. why? because its just more BS. however they will sign up for a clear one step green card to citizenship path because despite the flags we saw, that is what they want. they are no different than previous legal immigrants. if the irish etc could have walked across the border they would have. so stop pissing and moaning. the federal government and states left the border wide open and millions walked across it. duh!
i’ll make a prediction. if a secure fence is not erected at this time we will have this cicrle jerk again in twenty years and the number then will be 30 million along with 25 million children who will be citizens. then the problem will be this
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4786/105/1600/Aztlan.jpg
not because of some dark conspiracy but because of differing birthrates. we need to start seeing the world as it is not as we hope it would be.
riddle me this………
who broke the bigger law? the folks who risked life and limb to get here or the politicians/bureaucrats who failed to enforce the state and federal laws to protect and seal the borders? we need to get past this “illegal†designation. they are here and they are staying. no amount of convoluted gestapo, stalinist, nativist jib jab is going to change that. remember 15 million is really over 50 million when you throw in their supporters and the larger hispanic community in general. start getting serious.
the idea that the newly unemployed “illegalsâ€,you would create, are going to go home in numbers is ridiculous. the part we are not getting is – this is their country now. millions of them already have their own small businesses, families, homes etc.
crack down on the people that hire them? again we are just not getting it. we are cutting our nose off to spite our face. when i read the suggestions/solutions i feel like i’m with a group that is being held up at gun point and we are asking the perp if the gun is registered. lets try to get the weather-vanes in washington to do at least one thing first–SEAL THE BORDER. after that we will work on the rest.
just remember this at all times–if you were them–young, poor and starving for a life– you also would have crossed the border if it was left open. we caused this problem. we left the border wide open with a huge 2000 mile long honey pot on the other side. i’m honest enough to admit i would have pushed you out of the way as i scrambled across! please at least look at this petition.
http://www.weneedafence.com/petition.asp
here’s the real pathetic reality—virtually every congressman/woman and the president are against sealing the border. they are more worried about our image with the world and mexico. read the fine print in bills being considered. so, you think we are going to start solving the illegal immigrant problem inside the US while we can’t rally the consensus to close the border where the illegals enter? put down the bong you have had one hit too many.
and finally……
the fence has nothing to do with the war on terror or any other nonsense that its opponents want to attach to it. the “fence” sole purpose for existence is to secure the border from illegal immigration from primarily latin america. the fact that latin america is hispanic is strictly a coincidence. if canada was a third world country i would propose the same fence. for two hundred years we controlled immigration with quotas per immigrant group. i believe jimmy carter was the moron who changed this. the chief reason for quotas was for assimilation purposes–language, culture etc…. as stated earlier mexico encourages illegal immigration as an outlet so as to avoid the hard choices that it should be making to rectify a pathetic economic model it inherited from the spanish. there is a reason that english speaking colonies/nations have done better than spanish or french. every time you seduce a young hispanic to flee his country you further enslave the tens of millions they leave behind.
we have to frame this discussion within the bounds of what we can do, not what you would like to do. modern america is a very complicated legal system etc…. using existing ‘green card’ laws that have already been vetted combined with our existing right to build the fence mentioned will put an immediate end to most of the problem. after that we can go through the psychic trauma and emotional healing of all the why’s, wherefore’s and finger pointing that always comes when we recognize we personally caused this problem– the “illegals” are only the symptom.
March 31st, 2006 at 1:01 pm
“Investment in “sender†communities does not necessarily entail outsourcing jobs: those are two different potential strategies/outcomes. Assisting a country in improving its infrastructure affords said country the opportunity to build a domestic market as well as compete globally. While this may have the indirect effect of forcing the U.S. company to cut jobs in order to compete with these newer companies, it is absolutely distinct from the case where a U.S. company outsources labor (or entirely re-locates): from the perspective of the “sender†country the latter case is clearly less preferable, since it is still dependent on foreign companies, rather than building its own market and infrastructure.”
Blah, blah blah. The Indian has a job in India not America, so he or she doesn’t have to immigrate to America to get a job. He or she spends his or her income in India thereby helping India’s economy. The differences you point to are miniscule.
The goal should be for American workers to organize and then to link up with organized labor in other countires. Tough, but possible.
March 31st, 2006 at 1:59 pm
Patrick neid; huge rant, no mention of the $20 billion sent “home” every year.
If it was sent to DC, or even if just half was sent to DC, that would pay for most of the services AND it reduce the desire for others to come.
$20 000 tax loan to get a green card from outside; $40 000 tax loan to get a greed card from inside.
$5 000 - 20 000 penalty per illegal hired by an employer; $1 000 bounty availble to any citizen who provides evidence that such an employer is hiring illegals (knowing or unknowing).
The main argument of Krugman or other border closers is that immigrants “cost too much” — so they and their employers should be charged more.
Not criminal, only civil / financial. They come for money; set it up so the gov’t gets more of it, they get less, and fewer want to come.
Sean, perhaps you want to keep violating the speeding laws, yet complain about the “rule of law” being broken by illegals? What other laws are less important? Tax laws? Drug laws? Prostitution? [I'd be more willing to scrap these than speeding laws on surface streets].
“Does speeding overtax our schools? Does it affect the social services of those here legally?”
Isn’t this just another way of saying: look, we take X amount from the rich of America (and we can’t seem to get much more with Bush tax cuts), and we want it all plus more — so no sharing with the really poor who were too stupid not to choose American parents, hmm?
The idea of “middle class” in America, like homeowners (68%), is that they can take care of themselves. Not need handouts from the gov’t.
But yes, the gov’t handout game is zero sum; the more that get a share, the smaller each share will be.
Just don’t complain about “illegal” if you’re unwilling to follow all the laws.
March 31st, 2006 at 2:06 pm
Tom Grey’s suggestion that we tax illegal immigrants at the bottom of the wage scale more is one of the nuttiest yet. I’m against any measures that use intensified persecution of poor people as the means to resolve what I believe is a real problem, but for a “libertarian” to come up with the notion that people who in many cases are barely making a minimum wage and in some cases making less should pay more taxes is just incredible.
March 31st, 2006 at 2:11 pm
“she spends his or her income in India thereby helping India’s economy. The differences you point to are miniscule”
Wrong. Simply spending income within a country is obviously no assurance that an economy will be “helped”. A country with a solid infrastructure and diverse range of domestic employers will result in re-investment of domestic spending–not so in the case of a country with a shoddy infrastructure dominated only by foreign employers.
You can be simplistic if you want, and just make ‘blah blah’ babblings in the background, but you might find it more meaningful to actually try and understand what’s at stake in these difficult immigration questions. Your choice.
March 31st, 2006 at 2:33 pm
Reg, thanks for posting the superb Krugman article. I can often be a garbled type of writer, so it’s refreshing and illuminating to read crystal clear points like these:
“But I’m puzzled by the plan to create a permanent guest-worker program, one that would admit 400,000 more workers a year (and you know that business interests would immediately start lobbying for an increase in that number). Isn’t institutionalizing a disenfranchised work force a big step away from democracy?
For a hard-line economic conservative like Mr. McCain, the advantages to employers of a cheap work force may be more important than the violation of democratic principles. But why would someone like Mr. Kennedy go along? Is the point to help potential immigrants, or is it to buy support from business interests?”
March 31st, 2006 at 2:38 pm
I’d be interested in your reactions to the Ofari article Marc posted. I was perhaps more provocative than I should have been in response, but what are these kinds of real-time forums for if not to let it all hang out ?
March 31st, 2006 at 4:33 pm
liberty,
i don’t care if they sent 100 billion. its their money. what i care about is all my fellow american losers who are not prepared to take responsibility for all the illegals being here. they are here because of us seducing them to come here. and if that wasn’t bad enough now i have to listen/read all the further BS about solutions–again always blaming the “illegals”. just read all of the above and any of the other web sites out there. you are all a bunch of phonies ranging from stalinists on the left to the gestapo on the right. i’m sick of it.
close the F’n border, legalize the illegals and be done with a problem of our own making. you want yugoslavia and a race war keep crying “but they broke the law”, i’m taking my ball and going home if they don’t. get a grip…….
its all this complicated crap that has us circling the drain. the miracle is they wanted to come here in the first place. read my original rant over and over again and as the days go by you will see it is the only answer. you are like a drunk that hasn’t hit bottom yet. you are in denial. the problem is you not the “illegal”.
remember, we created this problem. we seduced these “illegals” to be illegal. it is our fault. we put bags of money on remote roads and told them its a crime to take any. our local vice squads have learned the same lesson when their cases were always thrown out of court. “you can’t have the decoy walking around naked and then bust the perp for asking “how much”.
we need to put our clothes on and seal the border first, before we lay on the shrink’s couch to find out what caused us to be such idiots for so long………
March 31st, 2006 at 5:25 pm
Here in East Oakland when students walked out a fair amount of black students joined them or seemed pretty supportive. Though this observation may be ancedotal, and there is definetely Black-Latino tension here, I also see a lot of genuine attempts of cross-racial solidarity as well. Just a thought.
March 31st, 2006 at 7:03 pm
drydock,
people against this fence/closing the border are just making excuses. they want/will get a police state instead with greatly enhanced IRS, FBI, INS etc. they want/will tear this country apart with a new race war because of something we did. we let them in–don’t ever forget it. if people think 30 million hispanics are going to sit still while a bunch of crackers on the left and right jump up and down screaming “its not right its illegal” we’re sending you home while we discuss root causes and other such nonsense they have been wandering around the desert eating to much peyote!
they should sign the petition and do something useful.
http://www.weneedafence.com/petition.asp
April 1st, 2006 at 12:59 am
Interesting letter, but I find that the author was ignorant about the reality facing what she/he writes about “Central Americans.” Last time I checked, Mexico was part of North America and Central America included other countries such as El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala. Simple geography that is only a peripheral part of the debate, but the ignorance about Latinos in the US has really come out in the media this past week.
CG also seeks to make many distinctions between “Central Americans” and African Americans. Although I know there are distinctions and do not want to gloss over historical and present day differences, I can’t help but see more holes in CG’s argument.
First, simply saying that since Latin American immigrants were not brought to the US as slaves ignores the fact that Latin America was part of the diaspora.
Second, Mexicans have been prevented from going to school. Segregation impacted Mexican students as seen through Mendez v. Westminster, which ended segregation in California schools.
Third, one could pick up a number of books by Chicano historians to learn about how Mexicans were also the victims of lynchings.
Finally, I’d like to point to photos of a march in Boston in support of immigrants’ rights. There were people from many different countries present and they were waving flags too, but it doesn’t seem like people were complaining.
April 1st, 2006 at 3:15 am
cindylou - you express the notion on your blog that “Anglo-Saxon American will never see Latinos as Americans”. Apparently you are missing all of the right-wing opinion in support of more open borders, loosening of already liberal immigration policy and such that is based on the idea that Latinos and Asians represent the kind of people with “traditional values” that the country needs more of, with the assumption that poor blacks won’t work as hard and are more socially dysfunctional because “they don’t want these jobs” the not-always-unspoken background noise. This is the line of free-market conservatives, neo-cons and a significant wing of the “traditional values” conservatives signified most notably in this instance by the Catholic church. The sophisticated right-wing elites are on your side in this debate. It doesn’t make you wrong (I’m a critic of “liberalized’ labor markets, but I agree with you on stuff like oppositioin to Sensenbrenner, pragmatic approaches to channeling people with families here into citizenship, stupid stuff like a “wall”, etc.) , but don’t gloss over where the lines of this debate are actually drawn with a lot of simplistic rhetoric that puts Lou Dobbs - one of the few national reporters who, among a lot of other bullshit, actually criticizes the political hegemony of global capital - on one side and people who abhor right-wing politics and see through the Bush administration on the other. It won’t wash. Whether you can stomach it or not, you are effectively on the side of the “pro-laissez faire trade and labor markets” global capitalists, neo-cons, etc. you thrash against on your blog when it comes to this particular issue.
I’m pretty old and I have only a dim memory of “Anglo Saxon America” but the last time I looked the “Anglo Saxon” elite - if the Bush family and friends, quintessential remnants of “Anglo Saxon America”, are representative - didn’t seem bothered by the fact that large numbers of Latinos - or Asians - were immigrating to the U.S. If you want a hint as to why they’re not cowering at the influx of “other than Anglo Saxons” - aside from reactionary labor market and “values” issues - look at Latino citizens and Asian citizens voting patterns as compared to blacks.
April 1st, 2006 at 1:55 pm
They are especially offended by the weak comparsions between undocumented’s concerns and Civil Rights.
************************
The only movement these kids learn about in school is the Civil Rights Movement, so does it surprise anybody that some of them they are comparing their own struggle to that one?
People in America have been protesting since the Boston Tea party, but that isn’t taught anymore.
They don’t learn about their own indigenous history on this continent, and they don’t learn about the struggles that previous immigrants have endured. They also don’t learn about economics, or globalism, or US labor history.
So of course some of them are going to place their movement in the very narrow context of the Civil Rights Movement. It’s what the public schools have conditioned them to do.
April 1st, 2006 at 4:54 pm
They absolutely do, but not to the exclusion of reality as you suggest.
April 1st, 2006 at 11:04 pm
I agree that there are comparisons with the Civil Rights Movement. (African-Americans don’t have a patent on the term “Civil Rights.”)
But calling it a Civil Rights Movement puts it in too narrow a context. A better term would be human rights.
And the real question: What happens in a global economy when labor and capital move faster than bureaucracy?
October 7th, 2006 at 4:07 am
crystal marshall…
Interesting post. I came across this blog by accident, but it was a good accident. I have now bookmarked your blog for future use. Best wishes. Kristal Marshall….
February 3rd, 2007 at 5:02 am
african american skin care…
I see you have some nice information about skin care. But I thought…
April 5th, 2007 at 12:58 am
Excuse, and what you think concerning forthcoming elections?
April 9th, 2007 at 2:46 am
cool blog!
April 15th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
cool blog!
April 18th, 2007 at 12:09 am
nice photos of this blog
June 28th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Philip Koepple…
I am along with everyone else this summer for getting poison ivy; although, I think I got a nice case of poison sumac. It formed in a straight line down my arm right before graduation. I tried treating it with caladryl lotion. When that didn\’t work …
October 22nd, 2007 at 6:13 am
frys food stores tropical root vegetable orlando hotel condos harmonica songs marital rape embryology perferred places to work trainig key deff leppard songs alltheweb
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 pm
hem of his garment sheet music music and its negative psychological effects
February 1st, 2008 at 11:26 pm
globe life home insurance arc financial insurance
[url=http://www.conectarnos.com/search.php?query=site:greatlistquotes.com&pr=&image=&www=true&start=20]florida gap insurance[/url]
mortgage insurance calculator
March 8th, 2008 at 6:30 am
time.virusvideo bubba sparxxx run away lyrics nude furniture vintage french art olneyhighschoolclass1976 real sex forumadultstories check out the back covers of the adult movies how do you download music videos on your psp passport pictures las vegas nevada