SAN DIEGO -- The winners write the history. And now that border restrictionists have won the battle to scuttle immigration reform, the history that many are desperate to write is that the debate was colorblind.
Really. The restrictionists and those pundits who have taken up their cause claim that race and ethnicity aren't even part of the discussion and that those who oppose giving illegal immigrants a shot at legal status would feel the same way if the immigrants were coming from Canada instead of Mexico. They say their concerns are limited to border security and the rule of law, and have nothing to do with nativism or xenophobia. And they reject any suggestion that the debate was hostile to Hispanics.
And, as I travel the country speaking to Hispanic groups, one thing I hear is that "anti-immigrant" rapidly morphed into "anti-Hispanic" and specifically "anti-Mexican."This is the fable being spun by CNN's Lou Dobbs, a commentator labeled by New York Times columnist David Leonhardt as "the heir to the nativist tradition that has long used fiction and conspiracy theories as a weapon against the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the Jews and, now, the Mexicans." In recent days, Dobbs has argued that the Senate compromise died because Americans of all colors dispassionately concluded that it was bad for the country. Racism played no role, he insists.
Most Hispanics feel differently. I've seen three surveys, including one by the Pew Hispanic Center, where majorities of Hispanics say that the immigration debate has led to an increase in anti-immigrant sentiment. And, as I travel the country speaking to Hispanic groups, one thing I hear is that "anti-immigrant" rapidly morphed into "anti-Hispanic" and specifically "anti-Mexican."
I get evidence of that every day in my e-mail. Just last week, after I defended the prosecution of two Border Patrol agents, a reader called me a "dirty Latino" who needs to get "back to Mexico." Another writer called me an "anchor baby" -- the term used by nativists to describe the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States. Never mind that I was born in the United States and my parents were born in the United States. What I see here is racism.
More
1 comment:
What you don't understand is that this Country,the USA, was built by Europeans with European Civilization and values.
It was meant to be a White Country with a White Culture.
Any group which is presently here with the exception of the native red-skins and those of African-slave descent are here because of the generosity of White America.
None of these people has any rights to claim anything other than obey,comply and live within our established civilization.
Spanics are not fit to live within our civilization as they have developed over centuries a way of life which is incompatible with ours and this is the basis of our rejection of you.
Whether you are Spanish-speaking White, mestizo, or "indian" you are a dark mark to our civilized life and traditions.
Additionally Spanics are not LATINOS as you imply.
The LATINOS are the ITALIANS. Italy is the birthplace of the Latin Language, organized Christianity,the rule of Roman Laws and basically with Greece, the founder of western civilization.
You need to study Roman History.
By extension other European people could claim some Latin heritage through the long Roman/Italian colonization of their territories. They are: France, Romania, Spain and Portugal.
Amerique Latine doesn't mean Latino/a . It means just that Amerique Latine or America Latina or Latin America. It cannot be translated into LATINO.
Amerique Latine , as the French called those territories south of the USA, doesn't really exist anymore. It ceased to exist 200 years ago.
Anyone other than the real Latin/Latinos/Latinas/ above mentioned claiming to be Latino is insulting the great language and culture of millions of Italians and at the same time is twisting history.
Further information can be found visiting the following websites:
http://www.mexica-movement-.org
http://www.real-latins.org
Post a Comment