Is immigration an issue of race?
November 2, 2007
My fellow Brave New Films Blog Host marti1704 put up an interesting piece on Immigration Reform being an ‘issue of race.’
She essentially points out that many people who are against immigration reform legislation are doing it from a racist foundation. They are worried about high numbers of illegal immigrants, not because of their effects on domestic jobs, the hospital and health care system, or education, but because they will poison the purity that is whiteness.
If you’ve ever seen Birth of a Nation, then this sentiment sounds pretty familiar to you.
One Love. One II.
Immigration reform and slavery?
May 27, 2007
Immigration reform is a hot issue right now (we have discussed this issue before) and I want to talk about immigration without a supercharged discussion about the benefits and/or drawbacks of Black Brown unity. Having said that, one contentious point in the proposed Senate bill “would put a higher premium on immigrants’ education, earnings level, or job skills.” If this bill passes as is, it would represent a reversal of long standing
2007 State of the Union: A Translation
January 24, 2007
Here is my real-time analysis of G. W. Bush’s 2007 State of the Union address. This is a shortcut for anyone that did not watch the speech on TV or listen to it.
First, an omission. He did not say a word about Hurricane Katrina. That made me so upset that I nearly shed tears.
Madame Speaker…
This actually started well. Hearing this reminds me of how historic it is for Rep. Nancy Pelosi to be the Speaker of the House, the most powerful woman ever in the United States Congress. I wonder if Mr. Bush was sincere in his words to her during his opening remarks.
Decisions are hard, and courage is needed…The will to face difficult challenges…Congress has changed, but not our responsibilities…
These guarded statements are said to try and disarm his opposition within the Democratically-controlled Congress. What these statements basically mean is, “I will give lip service to working together, but expect nothing different out of me and my administration.”
3 Economic Reforms that deserve to be priorities…Balance the Federal Budget…We can do so without raising taxes…What we need is spending discipline in Washington…Earmarks…Entitlements…Commitments of Conscience…Fix Medicare and Medicaid, and save Social Security…
This was the first “meat” of the speech. He spit typical conservative banter about “fiscal responsibility,” and it is simply banter because this administration has been arguably the most fiscally irresponsible administrations in history. A key example of this irresponsibility: Iraq. The “we can do so without raising taxes” part is consistent with Bush’s insistence on cutting taxes while we are at “war,” something that has never happened before.
The stuff on “earmarks” is a joke because those will not go away any time soon since Republicans and Democrats use them all the time.
Conservatives use the term “entitlements” to deceive people. They need to do this so that they can make you feel bad about the government doing things for you. They play up this farce so that people feel bad taking things from the government that they select & elect. Funny how there was no mention of corporate entitlements in the form of war profiteering or the Bankruptcy Bill a.k.a. the worst piece of legislation since the Patriot Act (which a certain person voted for, and that really bothers me).
The future of opportunity requires that all of our citizens have affordable and available health care…For all other Americans, private health insurance provides the best option…Standard Health Insurance Tax Deduction…Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care available to all Americans
I don’t even know why this man fronts like he wants all Americans to have health insurance. If so, he would at least put a dent in the 40+ million people who don’t. He and his friends still think it is a bad idea to realize Universal Health Care through what’s called a Single-payer system. Basically, single-payer means that only one party negotiates for the price of health insurance and services: the government. Every citizen would then have their health costs covered through what they pay in taxes. This would result in higher taxes for the citizens, but those increased costs probably would not add up to the amount that people overpay for health services every day, month, and year. The idea of trying to get everyone to go private is as ridiculous as the privatize social security plan that he had a while back (and still has). This is also consistent with the way that the “war” in Iraq has been privatized. These pro-business, anti-citizen types always think private is the answer so that they can take money away from public institutions and services.
Extending hope and opportunity in this country requires an immigration policy that is worthy of America
I won’t say much on this. I think that Bush’s guest worker idea sounds a whole lot like new school indentured servitude. For those that don’t know, this was the precursor to slavery in this country. I do not think that the parallel is coincidental.
Reduce gasoline usage by 20% in the next 10 years…
How??? His mandatory fuel standard statement was weak at best, especially in the midst of his administration and its energy policy.
Global climate change…
He can’t say global warming because that does not exist. So rather than being a flip-flopper (we know how much he hates those), he has decided to use a different term: global climate change. This is his backwards way of admitting that there is a problem. I guess a small first step is better than no step at all. Is the next step for him to watch this?
To win the war on terror, we must take the fight to the enemy…
This was the opening statement to his surprisingly long section on Iraq, Iran, and foreign policy. There was too much B.S. here to sift through. Take a look at some of our analysis to get an idea of the truth. Suffice it to say that this strategy is questionable at best.
Darfur…Fight AIDS on the continent of Africa…Dikembe Mutumbo…
He really mentioned Darfur? That’s a surprise. Too bad he didn’t refer to it as a genocide. Again, I guess a small step is better than no step at all.
It is sad, but the “fighting AIDS in Africa” phrase is being rendered absolutely meaningless. It gets paid so much lip service that people forget that there are actually humans living on the continent of Africa who exist for reasons other than making someone feel good being a philanthropist.
Categories
Politics
Foreign Policy
State of the Union
Taxes
Darfur
So-called “War on Terror”
Pre-Election Day Voter Suppression
October 19, 2006
Republicans have reportedly been attempting to preemptively suppress the votes of Hispanic people in southern California. The misleading part of the letter, which was written in Spanish (didn’t the President say that the national language should be English?), was [translated] as follows (with my emphasis added):
–
“You are advised that if your residence in this country is illegal or you are an immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time.”
–
Now, according to the MSNBC article and US law, “In fact, immigrants who are naturalized U.S. citizens can vote.” This is sinister, just like tactics that said that people who’ve been found “guilty of anything, even a traffic violation, can’t vote in the presidential election.”
The key thing to understand here is that voter suppression begins long before election day. We need to be on the look out for such tactics before 7 Nov 2006.
Have similar things happened in your areas? What’s the best way to combat this sort of thing?
Categories
Politics
Voting
Immigration
300 Million People in America & Smaller Families
October 17, 2006
There are now 300 million people in america. Is that a big deal? More interesting than this stat, or the ambiguity over whether the 300,000,000th american was a newborn child or an immigrant, is the this stat from the article (emphasis added by me):
“The average US family had 4.5 people in 1915, 3.3 in 1967 and 2.6 in 2006”
What are families so much smaller? Is it because more of us live in urban areas, which generally have smaller living spaces?
Seattle Metropolitan Magazine has an article about how to “be green,” or live a more environmentally-friendly, environmentally-conscious lifestyle. One of the things they said was that people should have fewer children. Their reasoning is that more kids could grow up to be environmentally-irresponsible consumers. Is that a legitimate concern?
Categories:
Family
Immigration
Children
Environment
Do you trust people who are not like you?
October 13, 2006
Harvard Political Science professor Robert Putnam released a study recently which states that “the more diverse a community is, the less likely its inhabitants are to trust anyone.” Here’s an excerpt from the article:
–
The core message of the research was that, “in the presence of diversity, we hunker down”, he said. “We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us.”
–
I can understand being slightly less willing to trust someone who may be perceived as different from you, but not trusting anyone????? That seems like a bit much.
Do you agree with these findings?
Categories:
Diversity
Immigration
Trust
On Immigration
April 15, 2006
I have been pondering the current ramifications of the immigration debate and I have come up with more questions than answers. And unfortunately, I am no where as near well-versed on this issue as I would like to be. But I would like to take some time to at least steer us in the right direction.
Language
For starters, (this applies to any issue) we have to pay strict attention to the way in which language is used to frame a debate. When commentators use the words, “alien” and “illegal,” the ensuing argument already assumes its own conclusion. And to call someone an “illegal” is just plain ignorant. I heard a guy on NPR ask, “Why don’t we call Martha Stewart an illegal CEO after she was indicted?” Similarly, if you ever had to go to court to contest a speeding ticket, the bailiff or judge doesn’t label you as an illegal driver. So why are so many of us so comfortable with using this term with respect to Latinos? If we are going to have an intelligent debate, we need to create language that is clear and respectful to both sides.
Distraction
You know what is killing me about all of these Black commentators talking about how Latinos are taking away jobs is baffling. I say that because like most Black folk (perhaps with the exception of those living in the Southwest) never seriously thought or wrote about immigration policy. But now, poll numbers show that Blacks and the rest of the country consider immigration policy to be an important national issue. Did you ever once consider that maybe this immigration debate is a convenient distraction for Bush and the Republicans to not talk about the ongoing civil war in Iraq? Not to mention that while Iran is upping the ante, our national government is obsessing over immigration. So for all the Black writers who recently discovered the importance of immigration reform, go back to what you were writing before instead of taking your talking/writing points from the mainstream press establishment.
Patriotism
Another thing that perplexes me is Black commentator’s assertion that we can’t let “illegal immigrants” sneak into our country. I don’t need to get into the nuances of why Black people may not have the warmest affection for America, but I condemn anyone that will use racism/discrimination to solidify their patriotic ideals. Because when Katrina survivors STILL can’t depend on FEMA to help them and when our country ignores the plight of those in Darfur, Black patriotism for America is hard to find.
History
I know Americans are notorious for lacking an appreciation of history, but why hasn’t Manifest Destiny or the Mexican-American war of 1846 informed the immigration debate? To be sure, the US “conquered and held California and New Mexico during the U.S.-Mexican War. The nation also obtained vast cessions from Native American tribes, which were relocated to remote and unwanted regions, a process begun in the seventeenth century.” Therefore, it seems to me that for as complex as the current debate has become, it would be a little easier to understand if we put it in the context of real American history.
West Indian Immigrants
And I haven’t heard anyone talk about the vast numbers of West Indians (I am speaking generally, of course) that are patiently awaiting their green card. So my gripe with Bush’s proposed guest worker program is that I wonder how much easier it would be for Mexicans and other Latinos to participate in this program than it would be for West Indians. Again, a historic note would be fitting because if you really think that people would be trying to keep Elian Gonzalez here if he was a Jamaican, then you are seriously mistaken. My hope is that immigration reform should be just as easy to take advantage of as Mexicans or West Indians, or any one else who wants to come to this country. More importantly, letting people work illegally without any intentions of granting them citizenship is just wrong. And for all the people talking about how illegal immigration closes job opportunities for Blacks is narrow-minded at best. We see the same flawed logic used in affirmative action when people imagine two applicants where one White applicant directly competes against a Black applicant who has lower credentials. The fact is that college admissions, like the economy, is dynamic and the market place (with healthy assistance from the government interference) and therefore, cannot be simplified to one Black and one Latino competing for one job. The fact is that if American corporations were more concerned about producing better products and services than cutting costs, there would be enough jobs for everybody.
Black and Brown Unity
Hopefully, this immigration debate will serve as the bridge between Blacks and Latinos because if you keep it real, it hasn’t really been robust. More importantly, Black people are not the judges of whether a “civil rights movement” is justified. I appreciate our unique history in this country but in the same way not “every” Black person was involved during the Civil Rights Movement, not every Black person have to take sides on the immigration debate. That is to say that not every quest for civil rights requires the involvement of Black people. I think Latinos have showed themselves to be quite capable or organizing themselves around this issue. As such, Blacks people’s presence or lack thereof, is not the deciding factor in determining Black/Latino relations. We have to define our own destiny.
Brandon
Stand up!!!
March 30, 2006
That’s exactly what happened today at MacKenzie High School, (a Detroit Public School) when reportedly 200 students “marched up and down Wyoming, many chanting “No books, no school.” The students complained they have to share books in the classroom and can’t take them home. They also were upset about a new uniform policy implemented last fall and said bathrooms have toilets overflowing with feces and some students urinate in hallways.”
I’m not sure if you can sense it but there is a rumbling going on that is slowly making its presence felt. Young people are protesting in France, the Palestinians voted Hamas into power, Latinos are mobilizing like wild fire over the current immigration reform bills before Congress, and now students in my beloved hometown are stepping up demanding better resources. What makes me so proud is that these students were not “led” by old school civil rights leaders and as a result, they couldn’t be used as a backdrop.
Going beyond the picture
You are probably surprised that we posted a picture to accompany this post because you have never seen us do so in the past, but there is a point to be made that words alone can’t express. We are not permanently changing the format but if you read this story without the picture you might miss the significance. The young lady speaking, Christina LedBetter, is holding a bottle of Sprite and what I presume to be her talking notes. Now compare that image to what you normally see of so-called Black leaders; memorized talking points and catch phrases along with a bottle of water.(that they never use by the way.) My point is that she was being herself and she wasn’t being coached or managed. I’m not saying the students looked like bums but how many of you would get on camera fighting for justice if you were not looking right? And please don’t say yes too soon.
And do you see the tall brother standing behind her? His arms are crossed and his face, like the others is serious and I think it is symbolic of the fact that Black men have less of a problem being supportive of Black woman than what most would think. Beyond that, their faces convey a sense of urgency that I don’t see very often. And if the students have been reading all the negative statistics about Black youth and their bleak chances of achieving their educational/career goals, then they knew that they need a quality education right here, right now. And just like our forefathers before us, these students are taking control of their destiny and demanding a quality education. So before you continue, take a minute to let this image sink into your conscious so you are aware of what’s at stake.
The preparation
What I think people forget about most the civil rights movement is the preparation and sacrifice that people never saw or heard about. As such, I am proud of the preparation it took these students to get over 200 students to walk out of class. 200 people are not a clique. This event took thoughtfulness, determination, and effective communication because you know some people were on the fence, but was won over by the peer pressure to stand up for justice. Just imagine what will happen when they improve their organizing skills and present a whole new paradigm for correcting the system.
The sorry principal
Principal Bernard Bonam, I don’t know you very well but even if the newspaper took you of context, but you never should have said, “They don’t give a doggone thing about their education… and many of the problems are caused by students themselves, such as those who toss their textbooks out windows onto the schools greenhouse or others who stuff toilet paper into the toilet.” And people wonder why so many Black people are not pleased with the state of public education. For starters, you have to take people at their word and if the group was chanting, “No books, no school,” then that shows me pretty clearly they care about their education. But how many times do people have to say that schools don’t have enough textbooks, classes are overcrowded, the maintenance is shotty, and there is too much administration and not enough education. The students had enough and they demonstrated. But here is the real problem, why should kids ever have to protest to get enough books?!?! I mean fa real fa real. Could you imagine your wealthy suburban high school having kids march talk about “No books, no school?” That sounds silly right? Well if it sounds silly for suburban students then why in the hell doesn’t it seem silly for inner-city students?
Which brings me back to Principal Bonam, why are you blaming the students for the school’s issues? I’m not denying that there are some troublemakers but here’s a new rule that might help you. Get out of your office and get in the hallways and the classrooms. If you know kids are throwing their books out the window, how in the world can you say that you have an adequate number of books? Lock the windows!!!!! And then you tell me it is not in the budget. What about your budget? Open up your wallet, sell some candy, I don’t care, but don’t just wallow in what’s wrong, offer some solutions and ask yourself, “What can I do to make the situation better?”
This question also applies to the person reading this post because even though you may not work in the education field, we all have learned some things along the way that make us extremely valuable in being a resource and inspiration to our youth. Markell Donaldson, a Mackenzie sophomore, said “If we don’t walk out, we won’t get recognized.” Let’s wrap our hearts around all the Markells in this country so they know that the community is there to serve them in school so they don’t have to walk out.
Big Superspade shoutout to all the students that organized today, I applaud your integrity and willingness to stand up for what’s right. We stand with you in the constant fight for justice.
Stay up fam,
Brandon
In defense of Dubai (and Bush)
March 12, 2006
I waited to write about the Dubai issue until it was clear who was going to back down first. In the end, opportunistic politicians and an irrational public won along with terrorism recruiters. And while Bush lost this battle, he won a tiny bit of my respect.
Everyone is against it
For starters, let me say that just because the proverbial “everyone” seems to be against the port deal, doesn’t make that position any less vulnerable to criticism or ignorance. In fact, when it seems like “everyone” is doing it, the chances of that position being flawed is usually high. In a previous post, I made reference to a poll where the majority of soldiers in Iraq believed they were in Iraq to retaliate against Saddam Hussein for his involvement in 9/11. Now of course, this is not true but this is just one small example of how being in a majority does not make your position right.
Port management not port security
Companies like DP World are not responsible for providing security at the ports. Port security is maintained by the US Coast Guard and Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “For instance, in New Orleans, P&O is one of eight terminal operators responsible for marketing the port, signing agreements with shipping lines, hiring labor, loading ships, and moving cargo …We have our own police force, harbor patrol, customs officers, and Coast Guard,” says Chris Bonura, spokesman for the Port of New Orleans. “That won’t change no matter who is operating the terminal.” So for all the people against this deal, who prefaced their opinion by stating that this is not about “Arab” countries, please know that the US would still be responsible for security no matter which company operated the ports.
But here is a better analogy that explains how ignorant the media and politicians have twisted the truth; “It’s like I go to an apartment building that has 50 apartments, and I rent an apartment. This does not mean I took over the management of the whole building.” And if you are really concerned about national security, take Bush to task for funding “only one-fifth of what the port authorities had identified as needed to properly secure the ports.”
But UAE has helped terrorist networks
So what!!!! I don’t say that to mean that we should be doing business with the likes of Bin Laden, BUT since when did the actions of certain individuals come to reflect the beliefs of that government? And if you are willing to do that, then tell me why we haven’t invaded Saudi Arabia because we know that most of the hijackers of 9/11 were from there? And I understand that “Dubai was the distribution hub of rogue Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan’s nuclear black market. But truer still is the cooperation Dubai’s intelligence officials gave the US in helping unravel Dr. Khan’s network.” After 9/11, people had to change the way they did business with the United States. And maybe, just maybe if people knew how responsive the UAE were to these changes, then people might understand that Arabs, like most people, just want a better life for their families.
But how can we trust the UAE?
Well, if you did your homework, you would know that the UAE was the “first Middle Eastern government to accept the US Container Security Initiative as policy to screen all containers for security hazards before heading to America. In May 2005, Dubai signed an agreement with the US Department of Energy to prevent nuclear materials from passing through its ports. It also installed radiation-detecting equipment - evidence of a commitment to invest in technology. In October 2005, the UAE Central Bank directed banks and financial institutions in the country to tighten their internal systems and controls in their fight against money laundering and terrorist financing.” Now for some people, that might not be enough but if Dubai did all of this work just to get denied due American prejudices, then what more do you want from them? There is a point where being friends hurts more than being enemies. And I blame Bush for painting this global conflict as “you are either with us or against us,” and then get surprised when the public responds to this port deal with the same ignorance.
Sorry Democrats
However, I have been most disappointed with the Democrats who are trying to out-hawk the Republicans on this issue. Now anyone who reads the Superspade, knows that I am very critical of the so-called war on terror and I think we must re-examine Western business and foreign policy that fuels terrorism. And it is not just on religious grounds but I digress. The Democrats are weak on defense issues because they think that if they appear tougher than Republicans, they will gain majorities in the House and Senate. However, a proven martial arts principle informs us that the best way to defeat opponents is to find ways not to fight. Democrats would gain my respect if they showed any hint of understanding that principle.
Why I agree with Bush
Now that the deal is done, I must say I was impressed when Bush said, “I’m concerned about a broader message this issue could send to our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Middle East.” But my major contention is that Dubai and the UAE played by rules of democracy and capitalism while also showing itself to be an ally in the war on terror. Now my guess is that most wars are fought in part to create better business conditions for those involved. So if Dubai can’t get the hook up in getting some extra business deals for helping the US, then benefits are there for helping the US? Not to mention that by most accounts, UAE is considered a moderate Arab country. Given that, what incentive do we give other moderate countries to help the US when in the end, you probably won’t be able to get the financial hook up or any boost in nuclear arsenals.
“It is hypocritical for America to want democracy in the Middle East, to champion capitalism as the best economic framework while pushing for reform, transparency, and anticorruption practices in its businesses, and then turn protectionist when a Dubai-owned company turns up on our shores having played the capitalist takeover game responsibly and transparently.”
Nothing is free in this world and the UAE scratched the US back by helping in the war on terror so now it is time for the US to scratch the UAE’s back. Unfortunately, DP World and UAE now probably feel like they have been stabbed in the back. And if you were the leader of a moderate Arab country, would you feel comfortable doing business with the US? Of course not!!!! And of course if the UAE becomes a hub for terrorists, critics will say this had nothing to do with the ports deal. But the main point is that the biggest recruiting hub for terrorists can be found in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I’m sure that the US is going to be fighting this so-called war on terror long after Bush is gone from office, but we have to understand that we are living in a world that requires strategies more akin to chess than checkers.
Stay up fam,
Brandon
Civil Rights & Why Voting Matters
November 14, 2005
The Washington Post ran a story Sunday about the changing DoJ Civil Rights Division. In summary, the article is informing us that over the last year, the Civil Rights Division has been losing veteran lawyers and handling less “Civil Rights” cases. That means that instead of working on Equal Opportunity Employment breeches, they have been spending time on immigration matters. Now, I’m not against immigration, but I do believe that if the division is spending 40% less of its time handling the types of cases it was created to be involved in, then there are some serious issues present.
Nevertheless, this has been the case over the past 5 years. Since I believe wholeheartedly in coincidences, I’m going to refer to it as a coincidence that the change in focus of the division as well as its personnel bleeding have nothing to do with the current administrations attitudes towards Civil Rights. Right. The two are unrelated.
Let’s pretend, however unjustifiably, for a few seconds that it is not a coincidence. Then, maybe, I would not be suprised to see that the Civil Rights Division would need to shift focus away from issues such as intimidation of minority voters and disenfranchisement of low-income Americans. Had the Civil Rights Division served its historical purpose, there may have been real investigation at the federal level into the attrocity that became Election Day 2000. I wonder how this administration feels about Sen. Obama’s new voter intimidation legislation? We can’t possibly waste precious resources in the Civil Rights Division prosecuting individuals based on that; there are too many immigrants to harass.
I digress. Instead, lets go down a more pratical road. The SuperSpade is about practicality. How does this information point to personal action(s) that can be taken? This, to me, adds to the infinite list of reasons why voting is important. Brothers and Sisters, all of us who have had illegitimate run-ins with law enforcement, or know someone who has, feels as though their Civil Rights have been violated. Students wanting to attend non-HBCUs that were refused admissions due to factors outside of their control feel as though their Civil Rights have been violated. Individuals who never recieved call-backs, job interviews, or job offers due to the nature, spelling, or pronunciation of their names feel as though their Civil Rights have been violated. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 created the Civil Rights Division on 9 December 1957. This office was established to address issues discussed earlier in this paragraph. Granted, as times change, the definitions of Civil Rights expand, but I am not a fan of the core focus being forgotten. We need our people to be proactive and work towards electing to our representative democratic government individuals that represent our views. Anyone who has encountered the above and didn’t like it has concrete evidence as to why they need real representation.
The age old problem, however, is the “my candidate lost, so what’s the point now” phenomena. Let me offer a suggestion through a simple analogy. Anyone who cooks (especially as badly as I do) knows that it’s hit-or-miss. When what I attempt to prepare does not come out as intended, I am presented with two options: throw it away, or work with it. Lets examine both options:
1. Throw it away
I can discard my food and therefore invalidate the time it took to prepare it, the resources it took to gather the ingredients, etc. This does, however, afford me the opportunity to start over again from scratch. However, I will again need to set aside the needed time and ingredients to prepare the meal a second time; a situation that may or may not be possible now. Not to mention, this effectively makes the meal twice as expensive.
2. Work with it
It doesn’t taste good. Why not? Is it bland? Add some salt. Is it cold? Put it in the microwave. If you were not able to get what you wanted on the front end, you can work with it on the back end until you have something edible.
The same logic applies to voting, or any other form of positive action. If your candidate loses, you have the same options: you can throw your hands up in the air and give up. This way, you’ll end up pissed off because you got racially profiled, again, and have no real legal representation, agian. Or you can work on improving your current situation despite them, while at the same time building up a stronger opponent to the now incumbent to challenge them in the future (which could turn out to be you). Black folks are better than any people on the planet at being triumphant in the face 0f adversity. Why give up because the person you voted for lost. We have more heart than that.
Shout out to truthout.org for referring me to this article. The truthout.org post is here.
|
