Ralph had more to say on the issue I referenced below. The following was copied with minor edits from his MySpace blog.
Many are worried over the use of Latin American flags in marches and of the walk-outs around the Southwest to combat HR 4437. But we must ask ourselves is there not already a backlash against Latinos?
While I understand the use of the Stars and Stripes as a precautionary measure to calm the xenophobic tendencies of Anglos, especially in the wake of a 500,000 march of Latinos that filled the megatropolis core of Los Angeles, has it come to this point in the political tactics of Latinos that we must receive approval from Anglos for everything? We seek to make them understand that we are humans and deserve rights, as in the case of contesting HR 4437, but must we also seek approval from them for the manner in which we demonstrate our anger at their vindictive immigration policies… such as what type of shirts we wear and what we can or can’t wave at a march?
As we get rid of the flags of Latin-American countries, why not be even more cautions and also hold a march in which we only speak English, better yet… how about we ask that all the dark-skinned Latinos stay home during that march so that they see many of “us” look just like them? For the naysayer, I challenge you to realize that the GOP is like 7UP, it does not like Latinos, “never has and never will.”
In fact, Americans, widely known for their “linguistic tolerance” of Spanish do not understand Latino protest language either. Within the Latino community we understand the use of flags is to demonstrate the representation of protesters by national origin. Although paranoid Anglos take every act Latinos do as either anti-American or an act of un-Americanism. In the eyes of Anglo-Saxon America, Latinos will never be “Americans”… this is demonstrated in the widespread fear of Latinos stoked by AM radio and Lou Dobbs on CNN. Many say that flags of Latin American countries will create a “nativist backlash.” Even with out the marches, the high school walk-outs, and the Latino politicians in office, Anglo-American have already created a backlash against Latinos. Not because of the flags at a march or the message of the pro-humane treatment to migrants, but in reality the Anti-Immigrant hysteria created by the GOP, AM radio, and the Minutemen from the DNC to the RNC, from Sen. Fienstien to Tancredo, from the soccer moms to the NASCAR dads, the new anti-immigrant movement is a distraction by America of its own failures.
The truth is that Anglo-America failed to protect its own democracy from the Republican Neocons and Corporatists. This deadly duo dragged the Evangelicals (Abortion Clinic Bombers) and fringe neo-nazi militia men (Minutemen type) voting blocs around by three golden words come election day: “Gods, Gays, and Guns.” These 3 words have allowed the Republican Neocons and Corporatists to plunder the coffers of the United States with a war on the world that has cost the American people plenty in terms of jobs, government services, and international prestige…. instead of blaming themselves for voting Bush & Co. into office TWICE, they do what every generation of Americans have done before them… they blame immigrants!
The issues around the Latino response to HR 4437 and the Anti-immigrant movement need not go the way of the convoluted responses generated by the Latino political elite during Prop-187. We need not prove that Latino immigrants love America, or that they enrich America economically, or even that they are law abiding citizens, the issue here is that for the last three presidential administration: Bush Sr., Clinton, and Bush Jr, Americans have allowed its leaders to embark upon a path of neoliberal corporate exploitation of the U.S. and the world. Policies such as NAFTA, CAFTA, and FTAA have decimated the agricultural-base of Mexico and Central-American, thus creating a push-pull immigration factor for those affected by neoliberal economic policies of Bush/Clinton/Bush through out the Western Hemisphere, forcing them to find refuge within the epicenter of that economic disaster called global capital… the United States of America.
Some may tell Latino youth to stay in school and learn about America and study English before they walk out to protest for the rights of the Undocumented. I scoff at those racists remarks and I challenge everyone Latino, Anglo, Asian, African-American alike to learn about the world of Neoliberal corporate globalization that you allowed to be ushered in on your watch. Look to the actions and teachings of the Zapatistas that clearly define what must be done to combat neoliberalism in la Sexta Declaración de la Selva Lacandona . We need not divisions or attempts to placate the beast, rather we need “a world in which many fit.”
“Para todos todo, y para nosotros nada!”
- Ollinkoatl (words and photo)
I see. I don’t expect I’d be able to have a discussion very usefully with Ralph.
Suffice it to say this subject is a very highly charged one.
Maybe I should just listen to some The Cure like you are right now Cindylu.
Derek,
Yeah, I think Ralph’s longer explanation of what he thought might appease your comment that he really didn’t answer my question (which wasn’t a question to begin with). Ralph is rather passionate when it comes to this sort of stuff, which is just one of the reasons why I like him.
I’m certain you’ve heard about Day Laborers Race for Justice, Peace and Dignity (immigrant rights)…so, why would Anglo America freak out about waving foreign flags proudly to protests when our gente is also doing something as creative and passionate as running across this infernal country to show that our hermanos y hermanas need our help and support NOT HR 4437.
This Day Laborers Race for Justice, Peace, and Dignity will run accross the East Austin streets, Canterbury and Pleasant Valley (one block south of César Chávez St. and just a few blocks from my casa), and I plan to be there this Friday to show my support.
What you are doing here, makes me proud. Keep educating, siempre I learn something with your blog.
I am in Edinburg, Texas visiting family for the night so I am going to be brief.
It is such a pet peeve of mine for someone to paint the immigration issue as a Republican vs. Democrat thing since it is a historical fact that especially since the time of Ronald Reagan, nobody has done more for naturalizing immigrants than Republicans. In fact, almost my whole family – all of whom came here illegally – were given green cards because of Ronald Reagans immigration reforms of the 80′s. Than take current President Bush’s a temporary worker program. Now, you may disagree with it, you may say that it doesn’t go far enough, but it is undeniable that it took a Republican president to bring this to national attention. In other words, under eight years of Clinton, and two years of Democrat control of the presidency and congress, you didn’t get any pro-immigration plan at all. It wasn’t until Bush brought the topic up to national attention that you now have Democrats trying to outdo him.
On the other hand, what did Bill Clinton, the supposed party leader of the ‘pro immigrant party’ do for immigrants? He is the person responsible, it is important to remember, for why there are so many immigrants dying trying to cross the Arizona border. It was Bill Clinton that ordered “Operation Gatekeeper” (two high fences running parallel to each other, helicopter surveillance by day and night, night-vision cameras and hidden electronic sensors) along the Californian border that forced immigrants seeking to come to the United States to move to the Arizona border, and along the way, suffer under the increasingly higher heat levels. And don’t think this stopped with Bill Clinton, even Hillary Clinton has jumped on the anti-immigration bandwagon.
Now as for free trade, I agree that it is not perfect, but it is undeniable that nothing has done more to alleviate poverty around the world than free trade. Take Monterrey, Mexico for example – a city that I visit yearly and just a few hours ago was at, and just a few hours from now will be at again – the city would be nothing like it is now without free trade. Granted, Ralph and his ilk may get personal satisfaction from seeing Mexicans work 16+ hour days working in the fields in the scorching heat with horrible pay and bad life spans, but me personally, I see the new ‘evil corporations’ and ‘americanization’ of Monterrey, and along with it, higher living standards, better working conditions, better pay and a higher life span as an undeniable good thing.
I have much more to say on what Ralph wrote, but I will just close with saying that like Derek, I too would probably find little to agree with when it comes to talking politics with Ralph, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like the opportunity to chat with him either via blogs or in person. If I did get the opportunity to talk to him, one of the first things I would bring up is the irony of his post, he goes on and on about how voters were duped by ‘Republican Neocons and Corporatists’ or the ‘Evangelicals (Abortion Clinic Bombers)’ yet political history and underdeveloped country economics shows that it is those who continue to put their faith in Democrats to alleviate poverty or help immigrants out that are in fact the ones duped.
Oh yeah, and this was just my brief response…;-)
César,
I’ve definitely heard of the Peace and Dignity runs. I think it’s beautiful that there are a lot of differeny ways people are voicing their opinions regarding immigration reform. I hope this momentum keeps up and as a community we fight for something rather than be on the defensive and fight against something.
HP,
Dude, don’t get your tanga in a bunch. I know this is all about Ralph having something you don’t have. You know, writing skills.
Go and enjoy your vacation and leave the blogging to the people at home hiding from the rain.
Okay, I’ll be serious. If you read Ralph’s diatribe closely, you’ll see that he mentioned Tancredo and Feinstein, the RNC and DNC, and Bush I/II and Clinton in the same sentences. If you knew him like I did, you’d know he doesn’t place all that much faith in either party to represent the interests of Raza. Oh yeah, we also don’t need any lessons on Operation Gatekeeper.
Even though there was immigration reform under Reagan, you can’t ignore the impact of Proposition 187 and Pete Wilson’s strong support for denying educational and public benefits to undocumented immigrants. Maybe you were too busy being involved in other things in the 1990s, but you can’t forget that the GOP came out strongest about undocumented immigrants.
Even now, a lot of the commenters frequently talk about the split in the Republican party regarding immigration reform. As you’ve mentioned there’s a pro-business side that wants cheap labor and another faction that for numerous reasons doesn’t want a bunch of non-white undocumented immigrants in the country. Last December, there were 209 Republicans who voted yes on HR 4437 as opposed to 36 Democrats. I know immigration is not an issue that just concerns the Republicans, but I think things like Prop 187 and the vote on HR 4437 are telling.
The impact of the neoliberal policies Ralph alludes to has been more undocumented immigration. More people have risked their lives across an increasingly militarized US-Mexico border.
Oh yes, and you might want to refresh your knowledge of what Hillary Clinton is talking about lately in regard to immigration. Get some new links.
Tell him (HP) like it is!!!!
There is a split within the Republican party on immigration but it is more, to use Kerry’s term, nuanced than a simple difference between the more economic savy pro-immigration Republicans and the more, for lack of a better term, ‘cultural centered’ anti-immigration Republicans. However, the debates are fierce, and unless a good middle ground is found, it is a debate that has the potential of splitting the party forever. But that still does not make anti-immigration a Republican issue.
You bring up Prop-187 and its supposed impact on immigration, yet what you forget to mention is that Prop-187 has amounted to practically nothing, it has – and most people knew it would – been defeated in the courts. But let us not forget that prop-187 passed in California with something upwards of 60% of voter approval, in a state that is by all measures one of the most liberal states in the union. So putting prop-187 on the backs of solely Republicans is not fair, it is a bill that appeased the most liberal state itself, and would not have passed without the overwhelming support it had from the very liberal California Democrat voters.
Your example of prop-187 does bring up a larger point though, in my previous comment I pointed to specific examples of Republican sponsored legislation that clearly benefited immigrants (Both Reagan and soon to come Bush II’s immigration propposal) and Democrat sponsored anti-immigration efforts that have had a clear negative impact on immigration (operation gate-keeper for example), yet in rebuttal to that, you have only prop-187 to give as an example? Surely, if the Republican party was such an anti-immigration party, or even half as anti-imnmigration as you and Ralph try to paint the party to be, you could provide even better examples of pro-immigration legislation sponsored by the Democratic party than Reagan’s or Bush II’s pro-immigration legislation, right? Or you could provide even worse examples of Republican sponsored efforts that have actually passed and done some more damage than Bill Clintons and the Democratic partys sponsor of operation gatekeeper, right?
You can’t, and that is the reason why painting immigration as primarily a one party issue is such a pet peeve of mine. Remember, when we talk about Republican vs. Democrat sponsorship for pro and anti immigration bills, we are not comparing apples to apples. Democrats are, overwhelmingly, the party that benefits more from immigration and its eventual voters than are Republicans. Yet with even that, Democrats tend to be the more anti-immigration and Republicans tend to be the more pro-immigration when it comes to actual passed law that has had a real effect on immigration. Sure, you’ll get the wackos like Tancredo sponsor their anti-immigration bs, but that doesn’t mean the bills will get passed or even that a good part of the party supports them (for the record though, if the GOP did pass such an anti-immigration bills in the future, I would leave the party and probably join the libertarians). They sponsor these bills and push this legislation through congress all the while knowing that the bills will not get passed anyway primarily to gain support from voters at home. Also, these ‘Republicans’ tend to be the fringe radicals of the party and in no way representative of what the core party represents. For example, the ‘evil’ mastermind behind the GOP, Karl Rove himself called Tancredo “a traitor to the party,” “a traitor to the president” and warned him to never “darken the doorstep of the White House”.
So of course you’ll have Democrats, for political purposes, grandstand on the immigration issue and try to make this out to be a Republican thing, but when it comes to actual legislation that has hadreal implications, it is almost always the Democrats who yield to their base – the ‘communist unions’ and the ‘poverty to all environmentalists’ and the ‘abortion-at-all-nine-months-of-pregnancy-and-even-shortly-after’ base – and makes the Democratic party the true enemy of immigration.
PS: My trip is going fine and I should be back in the States on Sunday, so in the mean time, hugs and kisses to all, I miss you gals/guys.
hp: that was not brief at all.
Cindy & HP,
Great Posts.
I’ve always been one to wane from the “Party” atmosphere because I’ve been in the current of intense divide within my families political ties for years. I’ve never been able to say that the Democratic Party exudes a pronounced dedication to immigration reform. Lately, they’ve been more of an aging beast staggering to control its’ movements. Yet, the Republican party, in which HP argues well, has also brought upon the scene some of the most malicious legislation over the past 3 decades. Now don’t take this out of context, but i’ve admired the GOP’s committment to what they believe in because they are like a predator who simply chomps down on everything that it defines as quenching their sustenance. The arrogant, close-minded, win at all cost mentality is so easy to despise. But like I said, the Democratic party hasn’t really become the sponsor of protest against such a rigid party. They have too many faults to count as well. But, that’s another post.
Fundamentally I could never become part of the Republican world because they’d cast me aside for the Anglo-Saxon gain anyday. Ideologically, the Republican party and I would never come to a compromise. Even this proposed “guest-worker” policy scares me a bit.
I see millions of workers, in the US, being scrutinized and stranded in the line of fire. I can see workers, who’ll really have no substantial rights in this country, become a scapegoat for highly motivated hard-right Republican spokesmen. Have you ever noticed that “hate crimes” are never defined as terrorist acts? I find that interesting.
Nonetheless, at what cost will this reform faciliate tolerance and cultural growth in this society? I think it is a valid question because tolerance in this country is as deprived as water in Los Angeles. Furthermore, this administrations’ isolationist attitude illustrates that narrow, big-business minded thinking, is what incites what they call reform and what I’d truly like to see called potential for corporate growth. Slightly off subject but were the “Spin Doctors” Republican?
Remember, ideologically I differ with this group.
Yet, my ties are far from Democratic, but I do yield to one question. Has the Democratic party ever submitted such malicious legislation against an immigrant population, as we’ve seen the GOP propose in the last three decades? It may sprinkle with the Democrats, but Republicans unleash storms.
I wish you all a great Wednesday. Salud y fuerza. Ciao.
© Citoyen du Monde Inc. 2006™
Thousands even protested here in Michigan too.
That was what a friend of mine in Mexico City told me when we were chatting over IM a couple days ago. I didn’t really know what to tell him.
I think nationalistic flag waving is stupid in all its forms, but this time around I’m as stumped as I was when I saw bumper stickers with an American flag which said “Free Iraq.” Anyway, like you say Cindylu, I don’t think that Ralph answered your question.
I know, this topic died a while back, but I wanted to respond to Alejandro and say one last point on this whole thing, since it’s such an important topic.
Alejandro,
Well, that is the difference between you and I, you seem to be more scared of the dog with a loud bark but no real bite, I, on the other hand, am more scared of the dog that doesn’t bark but has a vicious bite.
Lastly, contrary to popular opinion, I am starting to read some of the reactions people are having to these protests (Ive been in Mexico and Texas the last week, so haven’t had a chance until now), and as a person who shares the same pro-immigration desires as everyone else here, I am saddened to say that I am starting to get the impression that these protests may have been working against our cause, not for it. The reason I say this is because even pro-immigration libertarians are starting to side more with the anti-immigration forces precisely because of these protests, for example, this is what John Fund of the usually very pro-immigration Wall Street Journal stated with regard to the protests:
In addition, protest pictures like this are certainly not helping much either.
Of course it is still too early to tell, but I do think that these early reactions, both positive and negative, are worth noting.
If you would like to see the real concerns fair headed conservatives have with open immigration, read this, this, this, this, and this.
Oh yeah, and one final point, if you read the ardently liberal economist Paul Krugman from the New York Times March 27 article titled, North of the Border, essentially arguing that immigration – especially from Mexico – does not amount to much in gain for the United States, you will see that the enemies of immigration are both broad and bipartisan.
HP,
I’d have to say I’m simply scared of Republicans. And I mean that sincerely. In respect to religion, politics, economy, and morals (since I have none), I see the party’s focus to be detrimental to growth. Especially the ones in power today. I wasn’t necessarily seeking to isolate the Democrats as less malicious, but I was curious to see what the legislation looked like under them. Thus, being bitten at all scares me.
As the great Dadaist Tristan Tzara stated, “I am the anti-art”. I am anti-party…so to speak
.
I’ll definitely check out those links though! Buen dia tio, ciao.
© Citoyen du Monde Inc. 2006™
I’ve started hearing conservative pundits (dumb-asses) heralding the “Balkanization” of America. This will be the backlash of the flag waving since the dominant gringo culture does not understand cultural pride (or can’t concsieve of it being anything other than “supremacy”- it must be the echo of “white man’s burden”) and the young vatos and vatettes waving the flag haven’t had an education in moderation and self-control (with regards to nationalism). Education is the key.
It will of course spur a backlash.
But they look damn cool.
Keep going guys, hasta la victoria!
Que Paso con el Grande Backlash?