"There is a reality that all low-wage workers-
Black, white, and Latino-are in competition with
each other for jobs. Forty percent of African-
American workers are stuck in low wage, service
sector jobs. These are also the jobs that
employers are most likely to seek out
undocumented workers to fill. This isn't the fault
of the undocumented; this is the reality of the
capitalist economy."
So writes Keeanga Yamahtta Taylor in the July-
August 2006 issue of International Socialist
Review. The premise being that the
"undocumented," the new euphemism for illegal
immigrant, has a legal right to seek work and
compete with the most under-employed
Americans. This is magical thinking. It is the
kind of magical thinking that prompted a
gentleman on NPR to state that Blacks have
benefitted in Los Angeles from the immigrant
population; his reasoning was that Blacks now
have a bigger portion of the public sector jobs,
because they speak English. What he didn't say is
that Los Angeles has lost half of the Black
population since 1970 in large part due to
immigration. The same can be said for New
York, which has lost Black population while
gaining a White one because of European
immigration and Hispanics who identify as
White.
Social scientist have long tried to conceal that with the influx of an illegal population what follows is Black flight. The reason in my opinion is should Blacks ever begin to question the benefits of illegal immigration to Blacks, we will find there is little to recommend it. The history of immigration legal or otherwise has long been the bain of Black existence in America.
The 1919 Race Riots in Chicago, the worst in the state's history, were caused due to racial tensions between ethnic White immigrants and Blacks. The riot was due to a young Black man being killed for inadvertently rowing his boat at an "informally" segregated beach. But the tensions were sparked due to competition for jobs and housing in and around the stockyards. Richard J. Daley, the Chicago Mayor who issued a shoot to kill order during the 1968 riots following the death of Martin Luther King; was a 17 year old active member of an ethnic Irish club named as instigators of violent attacks on Blacks, in the investigation that ensued the riots.
Susan Olzak wrote in Labor Unrest, Immigration, and Ethnic Conflict 1880-1914 that immigration, economic downturn, and contagion processes all raise the rate of ethnic conflict. So the question I want to ask is why are Black "leaders" in an effort to bring attention to the erosion of The Voting Act obscuring the issue by including Alabama's Immigration law? I believe many see their districts changing, and in an effort to maintain their own power are willing to throw their current constituents from the train. Our very right to vote is guaranteed by an Act. But the same "undocumented" immigrants they are marching for if granted an amnesty will have the full voting rights of other citizens without an ACT of Congress.
Black people especially those who have never competed for jobs with illegal immigrants have the weight of our own history on our backs. And because of it people tend to support the fight for "civil rights" which is really the fight to circumvent the law. And by the way, that fight includes circumventing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as well. The whole purpose of Title VII was to ensure that the old boy network used by Whites to keep Blacks from jobs would end. What has happened is the old boy network has been replaced with network hiring. I know how it works because I've seen it in action. Your boss stops letting all the employees know when there will be an opening he only tells his illegal help or they tell each other when they are leaving.
In horseracing we not only had to train the people who were taking our jobs, when they became a majority they would tell the boss they didn't need the 1 day we had off. You could count on a decrease in pay or an extra horse which amounts to a decrease in pay and an increase in work; because you want or need to keep your job. Nowadays the majority of the labor is Hispanic, track management pays for immigration lawyers to council the help on how to circumvent the law (I've spoken to them they encourage their clients to lie). In the meantime the only people who are allowed to speak to the issue are either the beneficiaries of the coming amnesty or people who have never had to compete for these jobs.
History repeats itself, the simple reason that Black Latinos aren't cast as Hispanic is because there is a major effort to assimilate Hispanics into the mainstream. The reason is the majority identify as White. The last century was fraught with ethnic tension which eventually faded as each group moved into the mainstream culture.
I'm linking two articles on the march one will focus on those who marched back in 1965 still in the struggle to ensure their right to vote. The other will show a movement that has angled to conflate the rights of non-citizens with those of the least represented citizens, and our struggle for our rights as citizens. I fully support the civil rights granted to all citizens under the law. I don't support a group so desperate to find a winning argument for the variety of laws they've broken, that they hijack an event soaked in the blood of my people. And I don't support Black "leaders" who do precious little to motivate their natural constituents and therefore have to form untenable coalitions. Once our purpose has been served we will find little support for full Black employment with La Raza or any of the other organizations working towards an amnesty. And no one will remember that amnesty was carried on the backs of Blacks.


Salon.com
Comments
Black leadership? When a man like Herman Cain can rise to prominence, you know that black leadership is in serious trouble. Cain should have been vigorously denounced by black leadership and the black community. Was he? Obama is a great leader but he is in the White House and cannot assume the mantle in the community and at the grassroots, till the end of his term or terms in office.
That's my view.
Black leadership is a myth. President Obama will never be a Black leader his sensibilities are more in line with those of a couple of White WWII survivors. He strikes the wrong tone for many Blacks when he chooses to address us, which isn't very often. He would have to become a different man after his term of office to be an effective Black leader. And I somehow doubt that is the direction he is headed.
In my work life, I serve a richly diverse student population. Some are children of non-citizens. Through them, I have become educated about the underground lives their families lead, twelve hour work days, repetitive work injuries, no ability to see a doctor and no sick days, life in apartment communes with double digit number of residents. Nobody is having a good time.
It feels equally important to be able to contribute to their child's college education as it is to any child. How people come here doesn't matter much to me, and the fact that they can is one of the reasons I love this country, at a time when there isn't much to love. As someone who has known discrimination and suffering, would you have others treated with the same?
In the U.S., 'of course' black people end up on the bottom, White House occupant notwithstanding. Sometimes I think the Black Muslims had the right idea: withdraw, form own communities. At any rate, all our institutions and aspects of society (which it looked like black people were finally getting a toe-hold in) are gonna be trashed, and unforeseen things will rise out of the ashes. One of them will have to be a way for unemployed disenfranchised people (of all races, cuz this is gonna be total) to take care of themselves and each other when The Country no longer can or will.
Here is the thing: our politics are considered radical. Long ago, I accepted that the kind of person I felt should run this county was a dream. So then what? Year after frigging year of puffy white men as presidential candidates, until incredibly, there are Hillary and Obama, a woman and a black man, duking it out for the nomination. I still can hardly believe I was fortunate enough to live to see that.
While Obama does not do everything I wish he would, and does things I wish he wouldn't, regardless, he broke the ceiling, and the next crop of people are growing up thinking a black man in the White House is a completely natural thing. You and I may not reap the benefits of that much, but people coming up the line will.
Also let me put this in a different way do you think a Gay Republican is an oxymoron? If the answer is yes would the reason be because they support a party that doesn't have their best interest at heart? Well in my lifetime the Democrats and Black leaders have worked against the interest of Black people after the 1960s, the only time we get any attention is during election years, even with a Black President. His interest come first, that's to be reelected. When he stood before a Black audience and said take off your house slippers and get to work (for him), I was spitting daggers. I worked hard for his election he hasn't addressed the disparity in the Black/White income gap or wealth or the root causes of it. He's too afraid to address racism because he knows it will turn off that part of his base who isn't effected by it. What we have found out as a nation is if we ever again elect a Black President, and possibly a woman that the attacks will be fierce, and they will be spurious as well ( imagine the new and different ways to say slut without saying slut). I think what we are seeing is that when White men feel threatened they will go to great lengths to level the playing field in their favor, and in the process destroy a nation to do it.
We're all North Americans. We're all humans. Why is it that we're not all equals I ponder...and what to do, when to do it, and where and why are matters we can consider so that our "anchor children" will one day be accepted as "naturalized citizens".
About gay Republicans–I’m an artist living in a town with a lively gay community, in the first state to legalize gay marriage. I do know gay Republicans, even a black gay Republican, who no big surprise, works for Fidelity Investments. He and his husband have adopted seven children of various ages, colors, and health conditions, children and teenagers who are unwanted by young couples interested in brand new babies. He is raising his family to enjoy the fruits of a privileged Republican life: one stay at home parent, igadgetry, pastel Izod shirts, Bermuda vacations, Ivy league educations, etc. I admire B’s family values, his kindness and open mind, yet we cancel one another out at the polls. BTW, no one laughs more than he does at his oxymoronicism (word?).