We live in a complex, divided society. We are divided by wealth, income, education, housing, race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation. These divisions are discussed; but rarely do we devoted time examining the growing income divide. We know it is there, we feel everyday when we enter a grocery store, when pay for gas, or even paying a simple bill.

Constant Orwellian propaganda by the media, think tanks, politicians, and business leaders denies the class polarization of capitalist society. An important element of this misinformation campaign is the mythology surrounding the “free market” economy.

In William Domhoff’s controversial book “Who Rules America?”, he noted that class and power are terms that make Americans uneasy because it goes against Horatio Alger Myth. And that concepts such as “ruling class” and “power elite” immediately put people on guard. The very idea that a relatively small group might dominate government as well as the economy went against the American grain, he wrote.

History shows we have been warned about our current crisis, but it is the strong belief in Horatio Alger Myth that dooms this country in repeating past mistakes. In Franklin D Roosevelt’s 1944 State of the Union, FDR proposed a “second Bill of Rights” that would protect us modern day robber barons.

As our Nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

One of the great American industrialists of our day—a man who has rendered yeoman service to his country in this crisis-recently emphasized the grave dangers of “rightist reaction” in this Nation. All clear-thinking businessmen share his concern. Indeed, if such reaction should develop—if history were to repeat itself and we were to return to the so-called “normalcy” of the 1920’s—then it is certain that even though we shall have conquered our enemies on the battlefields abroad, we shall have yielded to the spirit of Fascism here at home.

If anything, we should have listen to President Jimmy Carter’s July 15th, 1970 “Energy Speech” how our values of owning and consuming will be our downfall.

Just some food for thought to start your week.

Posted in Misc, Public Policy, economy | | functional No Comments »

Last week Feb 17, 1929, during the height of the nativist movement, three pioneering Latino civil rights organizations met at Obreros Hall in Corpus Christi, Texas and agreed to merge to form the League of United Latin American Citizens. The emergency of LULAC came at a particular history of South Texas when Hispanics were forced to attend segregated schools, restaurants and public facilities; could not serve on juries; were often denied the right to vote; had their lands routinely taken from them; and were the objects of racially motivated lynching throughout the southwest.

When the United States of North America annexed a third of Mexico’s territory following the Mexican War, nearly 77,000 Mexicans became U.S. citizens. For generations, these citizens were to be plagued by a prejudicial attitude which would result in overt acts of discrimination and segregation which in turn brought about the curtailment of many of their civil rights, privileges, and opportunities. The sign, “No Mexicans Allowed” was found everywhere.

In Texas, prejudicial attitude and discrimination acts had reached such extreme proportions that Mexican Americans started organizations as defensive measures against such anti-American practices. Outstanding among these were three organizations: The Order of the Sons of America with councils in Sommerset, Pearsall, Corpus Christi, and San Antonio; The Knights of America in San Antonio; and The League of Latin American Citizens with councils in Harlingen, Brownsville, Laredo, Penitas, La Grulla, McAllen, and Gulf.

There were serious doubts as to merger because of personal reasons and ill feelings that existed between the leaders of The League of Latin American Citizens and the President General of The Order of the Sons of America from San Antonio. With this in mind, The Order of the Sons of America and The Knights of America made an agreement to unite themselves even if The League of Latin American Citizens did not. For a year, Council #4 of The Order of the Sons of America and The Knights of America waited for the proposed merger. In the meantime, Alonso S. Perales was in constant contact with Ben Garza to bring about the merger. The fact that the long awaited unification convention was never called by the President General of The Order of the Sons of America resulted in the withdrawal of Council #4 from The Order of the Sons of America at a meeting held February 7, 1929. Also, at this meeting in which Alonso S. Perales was present, it was voted to have a uniting convention on February 17, 1929, at the Obreros Hall, on the corner of Lipan and Carrizo streets in Corpus Christi.

LULAC is not only the oldest, but their rich history of activism in advancing the economic condition, educational attainment, political influence, health and civil rights, but also makes them the most successful Latino civil rights organization in the country.

LULAC’s name and its membership policy deliberately emphasized the importance of citizenship – only American citizens could be full members of LULAC. The founders of LULAC believed this gave the group added leverage in seeking to reform American society to accept Mexican-Americans as full and equal citizens. Furthermore, it also put forward a particular identity for the new organization, one its leaders hoped that would change common assumptions about Mexican-Americans in American society at large.

Legacy
The philosophy and tactics LULAC in its first decade believed in a practice of negotiation with local leaders to bring change. If negotiation failed, they encouraged communities to pressure, investigated and documented charges brought by parents, brought evidence to the attention of higher authorities, and publicized the differences between facilities for Mexicans and those for Whites.

LULAC has played a role in the formation of several important related organizations. They created La Liga Pro-Defensa Escolar (the School Improvement League) in San Antonio, and formed a veterans’ committee to address the rights of G.I.’s before LULAC member Hector P. García organized the American G.I. Forum. LULAC members established Little School of the 400, the model for the federal educational program Head Start.

Ironically, LULAC’s early view of oppression parallels with conservative’s reason for dismantling affirmative action. LULAC believed Mexican Americans were not victims of oppression but by a lack of initiative to take advantage of the opportunities they had and to make themselves into citizens that the rest of society would have to respect. In all, LULAC equated Americanism with middle-class success and believed that true leadership could emanate only from the middle class – speak English, dress well, encourage education, and be polite in race relations.

Post-WWII: Change in Vision
LULAC’s vision for Mexican-Americans was forced to change during the postwar years. Renewed immigration from Mexico changed the socio-cultural context and turned America’s attention to the Southwest and immigration issues.

One of the most misunderstood and oversimplified views was LULAC’s position on immigration. It is true groups like LULAC opposed immigration, more specifically temporary workers to America. Their argument arose out of concern they would force Mexican-Americans to find work elsewhere while temporary workers would be used as a captive labor force to lower wages; employers rarely treated Braceros according to the protections included in their contracts. LULAC leaders had the foresight to see the dangers of importing labors.

Before the passage of the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 was passed, the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization held a hearing, Temporary Admission of Illiterate Mexican Laborers, to address the labor shortage in the beat-sugar industry. The farmers argued importing Mexican laborers would be the best solution to address the labor shortage because they were considered disposable labor. Speaking in their behalf, TX Rep. John Garner explained the farmers would be able to save three times the amount of work a “negro and white man would do” because Mexican laborers are considered “peon labor,” people “who knows nothing about the question of money other than to get enough to live on.”

In 1942, facing labor shortages caused by World War II, the United States initiated a series of agreements with Mexico to recruit Mexican men to work on U.S. farms and railroads. These agreements became known as the bracero program. LULAC leaders felt the discrimination towards the foreign workers would threaten their desire for an educated Mexican-American population because the presence of cheap foreign labor would force Mexican-American families to move in search of work. In a letter to President Truman written by LULAC national president Raul Cortez, Gus C. Garcia, and George I. Sanchez expressed that thousands of resident families would be consigned “to live in slums, in extreme ill-health, in ignorance, and in a squalor that is spiritual as well as physical … . What does this promise to the coming generations, to the citizens of tomorrow, to the assimilation of a rapidly increasing number of “Mexicans,’ to the Four Freedoms, to the American Way?”

Once Bracero Program was established, it brought brought millions of temporary, contract laborers to the United States from 1942 until its termination in 1964. The use of Mexican immigrants as cheap manual labor on the great Southwestern farms is not a recent occurrence. It is a thoroughly entrenched system, a systematic exploitation of an underprivileged class of humanity as cheap labor. Crossing the border was a major hurdle in the journey north. Braceros were often subjected to humiliating exams and bureaucratic procedures. If they did not pass the medical exams, they were sent back to Mexico. Those who did make it across, found out their bracero contracts did not always deliver on their promises.

Poor housing conditions, disputes over pay, discrimination, inadequate health care, and a lack of worker representation were some of the braceros’ common grievances. There living condition usually consisted of a shacks or they were sometimes housed in converted barns and makeshift tents with limited water, heat, and sanitary facilities. They were often transported in unsafe and poorly operated vehicles. Although the work was grueling and housing substandard, many braceros endured these conditions, hoping to make more money than they would at home. Health and social services are non-existent. The diseases bred by such conditions are spread by rapid migration. As a result the braceros suffer a disease-death rate much higher than that of the native populations.

They realized that continued immigration would make complete assimilation. The increase in immigration forced LULAC to rethink their view and the approach the as a policy problem. The late 1940s through the 1950s LULAC had reach new heights with their activism. LULAC councils were established throughout the Southwest, and no other group could match LULAC in size of membership or influence.

Same Phenomenon, Different Era
Today, once again, we are confronted by a rising tide of anti-migrant sentiment. The arguments are the same, the view in the USis that “illegal immigrants” are violating of US immigration law; therefore Congress seeks to address this problem through anti-crime legislation. While the view in Mexico is that Mexican migrants are filling jobs Americans don’t want. What is intriguing, the need for temporary labor can be found over several decades in congressional testimony yet the solution has always been the same.

Latinos are now the largest minority in the US, but Latino community is no longer homogenous as in the past. It is now made up from many different countries with very different cultural backgrounds. However, like previous generations of immigrants and minority groups, anti-immigrant views have not changed. Once again, the Latino community will to look to LULAC and the National Council of La Raza to be their voice. Hopefully, they will not ignore the lessons of the past and not prove George Santayana, the Spanish-American poet and philosopher, correct; those of who do not know our history, are condemned to repeat it.

Posted in Civil Rights, History/Historia, Immigration, LULAC, Latino vote, Nativism, Prejudices, Racism, Raza, Xenophobia | | functional No Comments »

Mr. President, We Have Shed Enough Tears
By Samuel Freeman

On Wednesday, 10 February, Pfc. Adriana Alvarez of San Benito died of a gunshot wound in Baghdad, Iraq.

The exact circumstances of her death remain unclear, so we do not know whether her death is combat related. Pfc. Alvarez enlisted in the military at age 18, shortly after graduating from high school. She wanted a career in law enforcement and believed military service would be helpful in that pursuit. She received military police training at Ft. Leonard Wood, Missouri, and was deployed to Iraq with a military police unit in August, 2009. She had completed about half her tour when her life was cut short.

Her family, understandably, is immensely proud of her, but also completely distraught. Reportedly, they did not want her to enlist, but she was determined to gain the experience she wanted and proud to serve her country. While she undoubtedly served her country well, our government, and the American people, obviously served her very poorly.

Mr. President. It is past time to end these wars. Neither one of them serves any purpose beyond spreading and intensifying the world’s hatred of the United States. Whatever goals we needed to achieve in Afghanistan were achieved long ago. Now, we just slaughter people and cultivate a new generation of resistance fighters willing to die to drive us from their country; and, in some instances, cooperate with international terrorist organizations dedicated to attacking the United States.

With respect to Iraq, where you, Mr. President, ordered Adriana to sacrifice her life, there never was any legitimate, justifiable reason to invade and ignite a slaughter of Iraqis that also have cost thousands of American lives, plus many more thousands severely wounded, many debilitated for life with the physical and psychological scars of war. We are looking at a flood of service men and women, repeatedly deployed to combat zones, who are coming home with numerous psychological disorders, including Post Traumatic Stress. There are so many the military and Veterans Administration are overwhelmed. Now, we are seeing treatment of our military personnel being contracted out to various state agencies whose employees are beginning to take crash courses in how to counsel and treat psychologically wounded veterans.

Mr. President, we have lost too many, and the ones we will continue to lose–even if you end these God forsaken wars and withdraw all troops immediately without another new casualty in either Iraq or Afghanistan–are far more than can be justified in any decent, honorable, honest way. The Rio Grande Valley is one of those regions to bear the highest costs of loved ones lost. In the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a total of 5,365 U.S. military personnel have lost their lives (as of 13 Feb 2010). Of those, 37 are from the Valley, representing 0.69 percent of the total lost. While that is a small number, less than one percent, we have lost servicemen and now a service woman, at a rate of 1.97 times higher than the Valley’s proportion of the nation’s population.

Few areas in the U.S. have been forced to pay a higher price in loved ones lost than have we here in the Valley. With Valley units being deployed to Afghanistan, where you are intensifying the war, the senseless slaughter, the needless deaths, the Valley must brace for even more of our own coming home in a box–not thanks to George Bush, but thanks to you, President Barack Obama.

Adriana was a daughter, sister, grandchild, niece, friend. She is lost to those who loved her and cared for her. There is disbelief they never will see her smile and hear the warmth of her laughter again. Who would she have been had she not been murdered in this unconscionable war? A wife, a mother? A happy, successful, fulfilled person who made worthwhile contributions to her community and nation? Certainly that is what everyone in the Valley would have hoped for her. Whom she might have become, what contributions she might have made now have been robbed from us forever by a president who does not have the guts, does not have the spine to do what, somewhere in that great intellect of his, he knows he should do.

Mr. President, we had a belly full of cowards in the White House with Deserter Bush. We had enough war criminals in the White House with War Criminal Bush and his henchman War Criminal Cheney. The continuing war crimes being racked up in Iraq and Afghanistan now are your crimes. The blood of Pfc. Alvarez is on the hands of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the other brigand war criminals of the Bush administration. But we say to you Mr. President, the blood of Pfc. Alvarez is on your hands also. Have you no decency, Sir? Have you no conscience?

If you need a refresher course in recent history, we urge you to remember you won the Democratic nomination over Hillary Clinton because you took a stronger position on peace and ending these God forsaken wars than she did. Those of us opposed to these wars are the ones who propelled you into the Presidency. Admittedly, you never pledged to end either the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. But you promised an honesty to the American people you have not kept. Indeed, as you give your pathetic speeches on why we must escalate the Afghanistan war while we also must perpetuate the Iraq war, and, in the process, continue to sacrifice on the alter of the God of War the lives and the blood of the very best we have, you lie to the American people. You lie repeatedly and at every turn.

You lie by omission, Sir, because you refuse to tell the American people continuation of these wars is not making us more secure but less secure. You lie when you say we must fight these wars to protect our national security. Yet the only real threat to our national security are our imperialist foreign policies and the wars of imperial conquest they dictate.

You lie by omission, Sir, because you refuse to tell the American people a key reason for these wars is to maintain and expand the American Empire. You lie, Sir, because you refuse to tell the American people the Taliban is not part of some international terrorist organization determined to destroy America, but is just largely disorganized rag tag bands of resistance fighters seeking to drive American invaders from their land and stop the senseless slaughter of their people every time there is a wedding.

You lie, Sir, because you refuse to tell the “geo-political” truth about both Iraq and Afghanistan. You lie, Sir, when you refuse to tell the American people the only reasons we are in Iraq are to control the oil supplies of the Middle East and toady to the dictates of Zionist pariahs who rule over Israel. You lie, Sir, when you refuse to tell the American people the reason we are in Afghanistan is to control the flow of oil out of Central Asia so it does not flow through Iran or Russia, and to restrict Chinese access.

You lie, Sir, when you refuse to tell the American people a key reason for these wars is to serve the “military-industrial complex”, to keep their pockets bulging with money as they are given lucrative military contracts. You lie, Sir, when you say you seek to reduce spending by the Federal government and reduce the budget deficit because you are proposing huge increases in military spending to enable you to continue to prosecute these wars to achieve the purposes of empire, to prostitute the United States to Israel, and to prostitute yourself to the war profiteers in the capitalist class.

You lie, Sir. You lie. You lie. You lie.

Now, a daughter of the Valley has paid for your lies with her life. We shed tears of grief. You continue to lie.

Sir, if you want to reverse your slide in the polls, if you want to restore both the faith and the hopes of many of those who voted for you, if you want to begin to regain the respect of many former supporters who now are beginning to revile you with contempt, end these wars now. Bring our troops home. Stop serving your war monger, blood thirsty, imperial masters and do the job you SAY you were elected to do.

SERVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. FOR A CHANGE, DO WHAT IS RIGHT INSTEAD OF WHAT YOU ARE TOLD TO DO BY YOUR OWNERS. STOP SACRIFICING THE LIVES OF THE SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF THIS GREAT NATION ON TO THE gods OF WAR AND EMPIRE. MAN UP DAMN IT!

Samuel Freeman is a political science professor based in the Rio Grande Valley and a Vietnam War veteran. His weekly Left Is Right column appears exclusively in the Guardian.

Content is republished in full from the Rio Grande Guardian.

Posted in Iraq, Raza, Texas, War | | functional 1 Comment »

The Weekly Undocument: Kafka’s Cops On the Watch
by Nezua

THE ECONOMY FALTERS and desperate denizens of a sizable nation tack to the right, back away from the light, throw coins at half-crock cops to purchase stronger locks, to erect more dank and shadowy holes in which to imprison the vulnerable soul, tunnels through which we channel our own unmentionable goals, call the hungry a danger, shackle the stranger, build an industry upon the back of the humble—again. The small figure of she who might one day herself hold a torch, welcoming once again that fierce spirit that through the ages moves; to find food, to find space, to find hope, to find life. We only recognize this spirit in statues, it seems….

Zeituni’s Story
And amazingly, the very aunt of our own President—himself a child of immigrants—Zeituni Onyango from Kenya, continues to fight deportation. It’s hard to comment further. That idea itself kind of blows the mind. As well as the fact that there is such pressure upon the POTUS to be One of Us (meaning, not black) that he must be careful to avoid being seen acting in the name of an immigrant…even someone who helped raise his own siblings. Bush, Clinton, and Kennedy are permitted dynastic dynamics, but Obama, the post-racial president, must turn his back to a family member fighting to simply stay in the same country as he, and all while living in public housing and recovering from paralysis caused by Guillain-Barre syndrome.

Onyango fled violence in Kenya. She claims as much and I, for one, give her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe that’s because she gives the same reason that drove one of the women in my own family to cross international borders and thus came to the U.S.A. Though I guess this benefit of the doubt is something just about any article on Onyango refuses to do, oddly. Often, these writers pretend a guessing game of wondering what she is stating as reasons to fight deportation are “this time.” (Love of public housing in the USA? The lovely cold shoulder of her nephew?) As if her plea to the government is just some sort of fad going around in Senior circles! One week it’s Shuffleboard and the next it’s, oh, Applying for Asylum.

And then sadly, you have sites like this, where apparently anyone can scratch out an article—even one loaded with venom and phrasing so anti-crafted as to cause unintentional laughter. Citizens who lament that Onyango “won’t be alone” in her cause, joined by all the many, many others who exist in a nation “that refuses to properly secure its borders” etc etc etc ad nauseam.
(more…)

Posted in Immigration, The Weekly Undocument | | functional No Comments »

The Weekly Undocument is a post done by blogger Nezua at The Unapologetic Mexican. This will now by a syndicated piece on this blog.

The Weekly Undocument: The State of our Union is Sassy!
By Nezua

THE PRO-MIGRANT BLOGOSPHERE IS ALIGHT with talk of The 38 Words uttered in President Obama’s first State of the Union speech last night. Immigration advocates and activists alike were watching with baited Twitter client. Websites were liveblogging the SOTU. Obama was fill of spirit. At moments you felt hope rise that he’d hit it right. Or at least smack someone on the Right side of the aisle.

“Damn,” you said to yourself, beaming at the determined expression on Little Computer Screen Obama. “The way he is talking about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, he may just bring some of this fire to immigration reform!” And you waited for those words. You and your millions of Latino friends waited. (You have a big living room.)

But in the end, he sort of just slid it in under the wire. As Sandip Roy of New America Media writes, it seemed nothing more than a “casual platitude.”

“And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system – to secure our borders, enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nations.”

12 million undocumented immigrants deserved more than those 38 words.

“Continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system.”

Does that imply that Congress or the White House have been already busy fixing our broken immigration system? Were they doing it during the rest breaks in the middle of health care reform gridlock? If so, I missed the memo.

Yes, it sounds like a punt, eh? A missed opportunity. It felt that way to me.

Maegan la Mala at VivirLatino.com points out another missed opportunity: that of connecting the health care reform issue to immigration reform, and breaks it down to the community level in her post The President’s State of the Union: Missed Opportunities on the Push for Immigration and Health Care Reform.

While I was preparing mentally for the State of the Union address, I saw on the Spanish language news about an immigrant mujer, Alexandra Nunez, who died from massive bleeding during an abortion in a clinic walking distance from Casa Mala. A single mother, like me, made a decision about her body and life within the limits placed on her because of law and who she is.

During the State of the Union speech, Obama spoke about the problems with getting health care reform passed and spoke on immigration from a law and order perspective, following the laws and securing the borders. He failed, as so many do, in pointing out where health care reform and immigration reform intersect, in the very lost life of mami Alexandra Nunez.

The “law and order perspective” is very popular with many politicians and right-wingers alike, when talk of immigration arises. Why is that? Probably because the notion of criminality and Latinos is linked nearly every day, in the mouths of many a mainstream pundit. (And immigrants today are thought of as only—and erroneously—Mexican!) Images are reinforced in movies and video games and magazines. To talk of numbers of brown people coming over the border is to provoke an anxiety that the mainstream US mind will often try to soothe with the placebo of a prison prescription.

In many cases there is just a straight-up divide in worldview and life circumstance. As a friend, Prerna (the organizing force behind DreamActivist) wrote during a post-SOTU discussion on a list-serv today:

There’s a lot of strategies and egos, but then there are also broken families, wasted lives, unfulfilled dreams that no amount of driving legislation forward can change because we don’t get back lost time. Talk is cheap, free actually, but some of us just have to make do with what we have, take matters into our own hands or move on to greener pastures.

Civil disobedience, occupying buildings FTW.

So the level of frustration is high. And yet the need for action will not wane.

Is it time to occupy buildings? How far to step up our presence and voice at this point?

Is immigration reform “dead in the water” as some DC sources lament? Not at all, counter others. What is to be done? We’ll come back to that.
(more…)

Posted in Immigration, The Weekly Undocument | | functional 1 Comment »