Posts tagged immigration.

favianna:

“Migration Is Beautiful” was just released by Voice of Art this week! The short 3-part documentary follows me and many other pro-migrant artists as we go to Tucson and Charlotte to combat anti-migrant hate with art. It also shows shines light on some of the worst migration policies in the country and what the community is doing to fight them back.

This documentary wouldn’t have been possible with the amazing artists and activists who are featured in the documentary. From the artwork of Melanie Cervantes, Jesus Barraza and Julio Salgado to Pulitzer-prize winner Jose Antonio Vargas and the UndocuBus bus riders, this documentary shows the power of cultural and community organizing. To know more about each one of the participants, just click on the image!

latimes:

L.A. to consider multi-use library cards for illegal immigrants: The cards, under study now, would provide a form of identification for those without driver’s licenses and could be used to open bank accounts, transfer funds and access cash.

Alarcon said that in his Northeast Valley district, some immigrants who don’t use banks end up being gouged by payday lenders or robbed if they keep large sums of cash on hand.

“They can be scammed and taken advantage of,” Alarcon said. “This will help end that.”

The cards would not be a substitute for driver’s licenses and would not provide any protection from deportation by federal immigration authorities. And they would come with a cost. Applicants would pay a fee, around $15 to $20, for the card, and then would be able to deposit and withdraw money through a network of ATMs at local grocery stores and shopping malls. There could also be a monthly fee of up to $2.99.

Photo: A sample San Francisco city identifcation card. Credit: sfgov.org

WE GOT THOSE! New Haven was the first city to have a municipal ID card. I use mine all the time. Except ours only costs $10 with no monthly fees, and we don’t call people illegal.

(via ziatroyano)

Jorge Rivas at Colorlines: L.A. County: Sorry for Tens of Thousands of Deportations in Depression ›

nezua:

On Tuesday, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors formally apologized for deporting “tens of thousands of Mexicans and Mexican Americans living in L.A. County” during the Depression because they were supposedly taking jobs from white U.S. born citizens.

MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund) was recognized in Tuesday’s agenda for “their efforts to pursue a formal apology from the State of California to those individuals and families adversely affected by the Mexican Repatriation Program of the 1930’s.” The motion was arranged by Supervisor Gloria Molina.

One of those cases where you wanna say “Sorry is nice to hear…but I’d rather you stopped the behavior.”

Ooopsies! doesn’t cut it. Important lesson I learned when I was maybe 8: Being sorry means that you know you screwed up and are committed, to the best of your ability, to NEVER do the same again. You can’t apologize for a government policy’s actions in the past when those same sorts of policies are still in place.

op + pose

In my afterschool program, we’re working on learning word roots & prefixes, and how to pick apart a word you don’t know to figure out the gist of its meaning based on word parts you do know (I could go waaay into this if anyone is interested) (I have neon flashcards) (and cluster diagrams). Today one of the roots we were working with was “pos/pose,” as in expose, impose, propose, dispose, etc. We set up cards to say “oppose,” but once we got the definition sorted out, my students were still confused about how to use it. So I asked if we could come up with examples of how they’d heard the word used before.

A freshman gave the example of Obama getting elected saying he opposed things like the war in Iraq, but he actually didn’t really. Then we got totally off topic talking about politicians being hypocrites, saying they oppose something when they won’t actually go against it.

Then we were working with the word “reform,” again looking at other words with that root and talking about possible definitions. I gave examples of places they might hear the word, like school reform, immigration reform, welfare reform, and again we got off topic because that got them pissed about immigration reform and US immigration policies and, again, Obama’s hypocrisy.

So instead we (they lead the conversation, really; I just listened) talked about how racist immigration laws are, and they brought up rad things like how it’s fucked up for Americans to say anti-immigrant stuff when Europeans showed up in the Americas in the first place (“This was our land first, y’all just showed up”). And how Puerto Rico should be independent of the US. And how bogus Taco Bell is, and how bogus US food is in general (“Here, you go in a restaurant and they just give you meat, microwaved meat, and that’s it. Where my family’s from, they give you vegetables.”). It was amazing. And somehow, we got ourselves back to talking about word roots again, and how to make learning them useful.

Then I got into an argument with one of my favorite students about homophobia and whether it’s cool to say “no homo.” It went on til the afterschool session was over and I had to send them out to get snack, so I told him we’d keep fighting later and he just said, “Okay, bye Miss Camille!” cause it was still a cheery fight. He was scandalized that I’d 1) said fat people can be totally cute, and 2) used a fat woman as an example. We had a good afternoon.

Document for U.S. Citizens Who Have Never Applied for a Visa and Have Just About Had It with These Aliens Who Go On and On about Some Letter, by Tsitsi Ella Jaji

crankyskirt:

It is not like going to the bank.

There are no hard candies in a basket made in China,
And no Kleenexes on the counter.
There is no refund if someone forgets to wish you a good day.

There are no chairs for the aged, no toys for two-year olds with earache, no supervisor to speak to in case of the
Absurd.

There are no meal vouchers if it takes all day,
No list of local hotels with a negotiated rate.
No one wants to know if you are a doctor.

Plastic is not magic. Seals are not signs.
Your cousin’s wedding is not relevant.

And it is always your fault: not enough planning,
The wrong color passport, the misplaced stress

In a word.

Taken from here.

(via jhameia)

Tumblr-Bomb this poll on undocumented students and in-state tuition ›

weexist-weresist:

So far, only about 10 states allow undocumented students to attend college and pay in-state tuition versus skyrocketing international fees. In places like Alabama, undocumented students are banned from attending any and all colleges. The poll is about whether undocumented students should be allowed to pay in-state tuition.

Right now, more people vote NO then YES.

Please change this!

(via praxis-makesperfect-deactivated)

midwestmountainmama:

readnfight:

midwestmountainmama:

healthtothepeople:

midwestmountainmama:

note-a-bear:

Here’s another one that’s even more terrifying.

A white boy asks, “innocently” “If Californians are having less children where are all the people coming from” over and over, using a different focus (cars, over-crowded class rooms, 10-year population growth) each time.

I want to murder someone.

These people are terrifying and need to be shut the fuck down.

o__O

wooooooooooow.

The attacks on planned parenthood are intrinsically and intimately connected to white supremacist nativism. it’s not just that “we have to pay attention to race because some women are colored.” it’s that white supremacy uses gender violence to *enforce* white supremacy. *whiteness* is as important in this equation as the *color* of racialized women. gender dichotomies are a function of white supremacy. gender violence is a function of white supremacy. race IS gender IS race. 

do you mean gender violence i.e. forcing white women to have white babies to spread white supremacy? (plausible) or do you mean white supremacist and patriarchal (re)production of nativist values affecting oppressed folks across intersecting lines? 

i’ve been trying to figure out the attack on planned parenthood in relation to the people also operating out of white supremacy. because eugenics motivates reproductive health policy like a motherfucker. 

i’ve generally taken it literally based on some readings will the ‘real’ mother please stand up? by patricia hill collins

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pkp_iP8-l-UC&oi=fnd&pg=RA1-PT220&dq=%27will+the+%27real%27+mother+please+stand+up%3F&ots=HRrKrCJiQ-&sig=NxoGrM0g8Uq3yk0MpMZVwENVvp8#v=onepage&q=’will%20the%20’real’%20mother%20please%20stand%20up%3F&f=false

and our bodies, our crimes jeanne flavin; andrea smith conquest

but it makes sense to translate it into a cultural (re)production of values (white supremacist) that hurt oppressed people especially women* and people of color

thanks for the food for thought :)

Yes! :D Not sure how to answer ur question tho—(forcing white women to have white babies or cultural narrative) didn’t understand the second half of the question. But re: forcing white women to have white babies—that’s *some* of it—but I’m not really looking too hard at trying to do the whole “person in power is a victim of “particular power” too!” sorta thing…I’m more thinking through the way so many white feminists approach intersectionality as a project of “inclusion”—that we have to “include” colored girls in our approach cuz intersectionality says colored girls have problems accessing reproductive health services too!—where it’s sort of a benefactor/recipient relationship—it *keeps* white women in a position of power, and they are benevolently handing out a spot at the table to non-white women and telling the non-white women where they can sit.

when in all reality—as clips like this show—control of reproduction (and indeed, who is counted as a ‘real’ woman) is *built on their acceptance of that position of power they hold*. Their acceptance of things like: The Help, “gender is the only thing we should be worrying about, only white women showing up to their meetings, only having white women on their organization board, only having white women in their leadership, only having white friends, “helping” non-white women by telling their stories for them, never challenging or questioning the all white faces of the media that hire them or produce their work, only having all white class populations, living in all white neighborhoods, going to all white schools, not reading any books by non-white authors, only having an opinion on things to do w/non-white people, never having a *relationship* or being a part of community (so their opinion affects them too), living in diverse/multicultural neighborhoods because it’s cool/cheap/pretty/etc, never changing the goals of the feminist organizing they do to directly fit the needs of women of color in their community, etc etc etc— is actually their tacit acceptance of the gendered violence they experience.

To be clear, I am not saying they *are complicit* in their own violence (as in, they deserve it, they agree with it, they want it, etc)—I am saying that they are prioritizing *white supremacy* over gender liberation, which cannot happen while white supremacy still exists. period.

—and ironically, they are doing this all while *saying* they are prioritizing gender justice above all else. but in refusing to “see” color or recognize the way that heteropatriarchy is a function of white supremacy—in *refusing to interrogate their own position within white supremacist heteropatriarchy*—they are simultaneously refusing to see how attacks like this video—which imply that it is good and just and makes sense that *reproduction must be controlled *literally* by white males*—lay the ground work for attacks on Planned Parenthood, their champion cause.

In short—the reason ‘ally’ fails as a political concept is because it demands you to ‘shut up and listen.” which is good and all that. but i read a post somewhere that of course I can’t find now—where somebody said repeatedly something along the lines of:—I know I’m not a member of the community, but i want to support, so I stay over here, shut up and listen!. And while, ok, that’s good too…the only thing I could think when I read that is that *you are not a member of the community because segregation kept all us non-white folk out of YOURS*. and so to *me*—I DO think that the explicit goals of “ally-ship” *continue the practice of segregation*. They do NOT teach a white person (or specifically, a white woman), how to *desegregate her community, her worldview, her work, her stories, her friendships, her family, the television she watches, etc*. They teach her how to not be an obnoxious asshole when they move in unannounced to the colored part of town. I mean—I think that is a *useful* thing to know…but as long as it makes sense to deny people resources based on their race, the control of *gender* will always be of paramount importance to the justification of deny people resources. which needs a much different response than learning how to not be an obnoxious asshole.

if that makes sense. :-/

… was that post by me, here? (embarrassing.) If so, I meant that in response to people whose families and communities are non-native and non-freedmen coming in and deciding what should get done and how, when they most likely don’t know all the intricacies of the situation and also don’t need to be telling anyone what to do.

I do think that if there’s a dialogue that needs to go on between groups of people, outsiders need to step out of the way, and then do what’s asked of them if they want to support that dialogue. I’m involved in work right now on building a coalition between black and latino organizers, and we removed ourselves from white organizers in order to hash things out between ourselves, but there were things that we asked of white organizers who want to support our work. I didn’t mean that if you’re not involved you should just peace out; I meant you should get out of the way and not intrude or impose yourself on the situation. And then if there’s something you’re being asked to do to support, you should probably do it, and be as present as possible along the way.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear the first time around. Also sorry if this wasn’t even in response to what I’d written a couple weeks ago, although it’s stuff I had been thinking about since. Because I do want coalition building to be really strong because it’s important, and I want it to be done in a way that is useful and not just like you said, white feminists trying to not look like assholes.

(Actually, from all that talk a couple weeks ago about freedmen and the “5 civilized tribes,” I found out that the Choctaw were considered one of the “civilized” tribes, which I’d never known. The black part of my family is also part Choctaw, which makes me wonder if they were freedmen amongst the Choctaw…?)

oh gosh no!!!! it totally wasn’t you—and in fact I agreed totally w/what u said! no, this was a discussion that happened probably within the last week, and it was white women saying this, i remember it clearly because she was offended by the discussion on not liking the word “ally”—and she was saying it was useful (which I agree with), but then saying she stays in her own community, and she considers herself a mouth to be used (OR SOMETHING! GAWD I know that sounds silly—I wish I could find it cuz I don’t want to make her sound silly through paraphrasing—but when I read it, that’s how I interrpretted it!!!) by people of color and that’s her job as an ally etc…and that *particular* strain of thought about staying in your own community, just reminded me so much of the rhetoric around segregation and how “being an ally” so very very rarely attempts to understand the irony of white people positioning themselves as “allies” (i.e. always segregated from the community) rather than working to deconstruct the borders that *they* built…

Hmmm, that does sound interesting…and kind of strange. I do see that happen too, where white people talk about anti-racism but only amongst themselves, and eventually I’m like, So where’s all the people of color y’all are working with? I mean, there’s some value in white people having that conversation even if the only action it’s being put into is changing their own personal behavior, or any other group that wants to be allies with a marginalized group. But at some point…put it into action! Make some POC friends, link up with other groups, whatever!

(via butterfacebooger-deactivated201)

midwestmountainmama:

healthtothepeople:

midwestmountainmama:

note-a-bear:

Here’s another one that’s even more terrifying.

A white boy asks, “innocently” “If Californians are having less children where are all the people coming from” over and over, using a different focus (cars, over-crowded class rooms, 10-year population growth) each time.

I want to murder someone.

These people are terrifying and need to be shut the fuck down.

o__O

wooooooooooow.

The attacks on planned parenthood are intrinsically and intimately connected to white supremacist nativism. it’s not just that “we have to pay attention to race because some women are colored.” it’s that white supremacy uses gender violence to *enforce* white supremacy. *whiteness* is as important in this equation as the *color* of racialized women. gender dichotomies are a function of white supremacy. gender violence is a function of white supremacy. race IS gender IS race. 

do you mean gender violence i.e. forcing white women to have white babies to spread white supremacy? (plausible) or do you mean white supremacist and patriarchal (re)production of nativist values affecting oppressed folks across intersecting lines? 

i’ve been trying to figure out the attack on planned parenthood in relation to the people also operating out of white supremacy. because eugenics motivates reproductive health policy like a motherfucker. 

i’ve generally taken it literally based on some readings will the ‘real’ mother please stand up? by patricia hill collins

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pkp_iP8-l-UC&oi=fnd&pg=RA1-PT220&dq=%27will+the+%27real%27+mother+please+stand+up%3F&ots=HRrKrCJiQ-&sig=NxoGrM0g8Uq3yk0MpMZVwENVvp8#v=onepage&q=’will%20the%20’real’%20mother%20please%20stand%20up%3F&f=false

and our bodies, our crimes jeanne flavin; andrea smith conquest

but it makes sense to translate it into a cultural (re)production of values (white supremacist) that hurt oppressed people especially women* and people of color

thanks for the food for thought :)

Yes! :D Not sure how to answer ur question tho—(forcing white women to have white babies or cultural narrative) didn’t understand the second half of the question. But re: forcing white women to have white babies—that’s *some* of it—but I’m not really looking too hard at trying to do the whole “person in power is a victim of “particular power” too!” sorta thing…I’m more thinking through the way so many white feminists approach intersectionality as a project of “inclusion”—that we have to “include” colored girls in our approach cuz intersectionality says colored girls have problems accessing reproductive health services too!—where it’s sort of a benefactor/recipient relationship—it *keeps* white women in a position of power, and they are benevolently handing out a spot at the table to non-white women and telling the non-white women where they can sit.

when in all reality—as clips like this show—control of reproduction (and indeed, who is counted as a ‘real’ woman) is *built on their acceptance of that position of power they hold*. Their acceptance of things like: The Help, “gender is the only thing we should be worrying about, only white women showing up to their meetings, only having white women on their organization board, only having white women in their leadership, only having white friends, “helping” non-white women by telling their stories for them, never challenging or questioning the all white faces of the media that hire them or produce their work, only having all white class populations, living in all white neighborhoods, going to all white schools, not reading any books by non-white authors, only having an opinion on things to do w/non-white people, never having a *relationship* or being a part of community (so their opinion affects them too), living in diverse/multicultural neighborhoods because it’s cool/cheap/pretty/etc, never changing the goals of the feminist organizing they do to directly fit the needs of women of color in their community, etc etc etc— is actually their tacit acceptance of the gendered violence they experience.

To be clear, I am not saying they *are complicit* in their own violence (as in, they deserve it, they agree with it, they want it, etc)—I am saying that they are prioritizing *white supremacy* over gender liberation, which cannot happen while white supremacy still exists. period.

—and ironically, they are doing this all while *saying* they are prioritizing gender justice above all else. but in refusing to “see” color or recognize the way that heteropatriarchy is a function of white supremacy—in *refusing to interrogate their own position within white supremacist heteropatriarchy*—they are simultaneously refusing to see how attacks like this video—which imply that it is good and just and makes sense that *reproduction must be controlled *literally* by white males*—lay the ground work for attacks on Planned Parenthood, their champion cause.

In short—the reason ‘ally’ fails as a political concept is because it demands you to ‘shut up and listen.” which is good and all that. but i read a post somewhere that of course I can’t find now—where somebody said repeatedly something along the lines of:—I know I’m not a member of the community, but i want to support, so I stay over here, shut up and listen!. And while, ok, that’s good too…the only thing I could think when I read that is that *you are not a member of the community because segregation kept all us non-white folk out of YOURS*. and so to *me*—I DO think that the explicit goals of “ally-ship” *continue the practice of segregation*. They do NOT teach a white person (or specifically, a white woman), how to *desegregate her community, her worldview, her work, her stories, her friendships, her family, the television she watches, etc*. They teach her how to not be an obnoxious asshole when they move in unannounced to the colored part of town. I mean—I think that is a *useful* thing to know…but as long as it makes sense to deny people resources based on their race, the control of *gender* will always be of paramount importance to the justification of deny people resources. which needs a much different response than learning how to not be an obnoxious asshole.

if that makes sense. :-/

… was that post by me, here? (embarrassing.) If so, I meant that in response to people whose families and communities are non-native and non-freedmen coming in and deciding what should get done and how, when they most likely don’t know all the intricacies of the situation and also don’t need to be telling anyone what to do.

I do think that if there’s a dialogue that needs to go on between groups of people, outsiders need to step out of the way, and then do what’s asked of them if they want to support that dialogue. I’m involved in work right now on building a coalition between black and latino organizers, and we removed ourselves from white organizers in order to hash things out between ourselves, but there were things that we asked of white organizers who want to support our work. I didn’t mean that if you’re not involved you should just peace out; I meant you should get out of the way and not intrude or impose yourself on the situation. And then if there’s something you’re being asked to do to support, you should probably do it, and be as present as possible along the way.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear the first time around. Also sorry if this wasn’t even in response to what I’d written a couple weeks ago, although it’s stuff I had been thinking about since. Because I do want coalition building to be really strong because it’s important, and I want it to be done in a way that is useful and not just like you said, white feminists trying to not look like assholes.

(Actually, from all that talk a couple weeks ago about freedmen and the “5 civilized tribes,” I found out that the Choctaw were considered one of the “civilized” tribes, which I’d never known. The black part of my family is also part Choctaw, which makes me wonder if they were freedmen amongst the Choctaw…?)

(via butterfacebooger-deactivated201)

Sturdy bootstraps ›

Since asks aren’t rebloggable this is awkward:


You are so young and ignorant. There’s a difference between “wanting to keep amurrica for amurricans” and wanting to keep the people here legal citizens. My family came here, to America, and took the time to become a citizen. Why should these people be allowed a free ride and come into this country not having to do ANYTHING and still get every single right I do? If I did that in any other country, ESPECIALLY Mexico, their government would treat me WAY worse than how America treats them. READ.
Anonymous

liquornspice: Oh! Were you under the impression that I think the United States is a valid entity whose borders should be maintained and protected?

Your nationalism is invalid, good bye.

Forever hate variations on “These bootstraps just showed up conveniently, and then I pulled myself up by them, and you should too.”

Maybe if this person wants to tell someone else to read and not be ignorant, they should give us a book report on the Mexican-American War, and the fact that plenty of people were living in Mexico when the US border swallowed them up, and suddenly they were immigrants. Pretty sure Mexico has never done that, so I guess you’re right that Mexico has been treating people and the border a little differently.

Also don’t know what’s up with the claim that undocumented people get every single right as citizens. For instance, think how many things you do in a day that depend on having a state-issued ID, such as a driver’s license: have a job that isn’t under the table, drive a car, use a bank account, cash a check, use a credit card that hasn’t been verified, get on an airplane, not get automatically taken to the police station if you’re stopped by the cops (maybe), use a library card, buy alcohol or get into a bar, and on and on. These are just some examples off the top of my head. But without a state-issued ID you couldn’t legally do any of those things, and at best would have to find an illegal workaround. (To be fair, in New Haven we have a city-issued ID that lets you do many of these things, but it isn’t recognized outside of the city and we are the only place in the US that has that. ETA: firesandwords just told me that San Francisco also has one) This is like bare-minimum, basic things you can do as a documented US resident that you cannot as an undocumented one.

I don’t even want to go into it more than that, because this is foolishness. There’s other things that should be obvious going on too, like some immigrants are white. Or already wealthy. Or professional class. Or coming from countries that the US government considers allies.

Critics also note that same-sex marriage privileges the priorities of white, middle- to upper-class lesbians and gays. Notably, one study revealed how LGBT Asians in America found concerns over immigration, healthcare, racism, and hate crimes as more critical than obtaining the right to marry. Indeed in this moment of marriage equality, services around life-death issues for more marginalized queers such as sex workers, the homeless, and those who are HIV positive are left simmering if not boiling over on the back burner.

Amy Sueyoshi, “Inequality in the Marriage Equality Movement”

Found via Against Equality. Doing zine research!

(via readnfight)

But marriage equality would potentially solve the immigration and health care issues.  Racism and hate crimes are a whole other animal…

(via gretchensaidso)

Gay marriage only solves health care if one partner already has insurance, which many people do not. Gay marriage doesn’t give us universal health care, or even change the health care system which is deeply flawed. So, it’s only a solution for some individuals, not for everyone. Similarly with immigration, it’s only a solution if one person is on track to become a legal immigrant; it does nothing to change the immigration system, which is flawed and based on racism and xenophobia. A movement for liberation, and not just increased rights for some individuals, needs to be based on the idea that everyone marginalized deserves a free, healthy, and safe life—everyone, not just some individuals. This is where queer liberation became watered down into gay rights. Rights are based more on laws and which government administration is currently in power, and therefore can be revoked—liberation cannot.

The queer liberation movement was once a movement that depended on the inclusion of people further marginalized within the umbrella of queerness, like is mentioned in the quote above. It is really interesting, although also pretty sad, to study the trajectory of this shift from demanding liberation to asking for individuals’ rights.

(via gretchenisincognito)

But They Didn’t Know About Racism Back Then!

weexist-weresist:

iamabutchsolo:

I hear this from people all the time when it comes to all forms of oppression, but particularly racism. When discussing the past atrocities committed by white folks onto people of color, someone, almost always a white person tries to excuse the white people in the past by suggesting that they just didn’t know what they were doing was racist.

Slavery? Native American genocide? Banning racial minorities from immigrating to the US? The Zoot Suit riots? Internment of Japanese Americans? Etc.?

“Yeah, that was bad, but they didn’t know that what they were doing was racist/knew what racism was/didn’t think about race!”

I think what people neglect to think about is that the people of color who were the victims of these racist acts definitely knew what racism was. They could see that the way they were treated was predicated upon their race. They lived every day seeing it and having to take it and normalize it as if that was how life was supposed to be. So when I hear, “But they didn’t know about racism back then!” to me, it suggests that the mindset of “they” meaning “white people” is somehow more important than the suffering of the people of color they oppressed. And to me, it’s just another example of how white people control how we see US history.

Plus, the fact that they happened happened in the past does not negate the fact that these acts were heinous and racist, the consequences of which still affect racial inequality today, and I don’t believe that we should just give the white people of the past a free pass and treat them as children by saying, “They didn’t know better.” No, it’s far worse: They knew exactly what they were doing; they just didn’t care that people of color were suffering.

I would buy that ‘people didn’t know that slavery was bad’ if

1. black people felt benevolent towards their enslavement

and

2. there weren’t abolitionists who lived right at the same time that slave owners lived.

I was lucky enough to see Nikki Giovanni give a talk at Yale about a year ago. She was amazing of course, but the thing that stood out to me the most that she said was that the excuse “so-and-so was just a product of their time” is bogus and an insult to the intelligence of the person in question. It gives that person a blanket excuse for refusing to think progressively and differently. It also fails because within any movement of oppressing people, there are plenty of people who decide to resist that oppression, even if they benefit from it. I’ll see if I can find a transcript of that talk, because I want to remember who the exact person she was talking about was.

(via praxis-makesperfect-deactivated)

Critics also note that same-sex marriage privileges the priorities of white, middle- to upper-class lesbians and gays. Notably, one study revealed how LGBT Asians in America found concerns over immigration, healthcare, racism, and hate crimes as more critical than obtaining the right to marry. Indeed in this moment of marriage equality, services around life-death issues for more marginalized queers such as sex workers, the homeless, and those who are HIV positive are left simmering if not boiling over on the back burner.

Amy Sueyoshi, “Inequality in the Marriage Equality Movement”

Found via Against Equality. Doing zine research!

CT passes version of DREAM Act ›

News here in CT:

by Thomas MacMillan | Jul 7, 2011 5:39 pm

A governor and a high school senior—both the progeny of “illegal immigrants”—met at Wilbur Cross High School Thursday afternoon. The governor signed a bill that will allow the student to go to college.

The occasion was the celebration of a new Connecticut law, a version of the so-called “DREAM Act,” to allow children of undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates at Connecticut colleges and universities, as long as they have spent four years in—and graduated from—a Connecticut high school.

Except, this kind of rhetoric that’s been going on around DREAM Act & similar campaigns makes me really uneasy:

Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman was the first to speak, calling the new law a “very common sense” measure that will keep talented and productive young people in the state.

I know people have written about that before, how this rewards only “good” kids. I think her use of the words “talented and productive” is pretty telling, as though the working assumption is that undocumented children normally are neither of those things. Kids who want to go to college are the exception.

The other thing that makes me uneasy is that it’s pretty similar to the New Haven Promise program that got launched here in the fall, and is based on Promise programs in a few other cities. It gives kids money to go to colleges in-state (way less money, I found out later, if they go to a private school in-state), scaled based on how many years they lived and attended school in New Haven. But at the same time, our public schools are disasters, and money is spent in all the wrong places, and state-wide there are HUGE disparities in spending per kid because the school funds are based first on property taxes. So kids finish high school not ready to go to college, and neither of these programs do anything to get them ready.

For kids that are ready for college, this is great. But there isn’t much infrastructure in place to get them there. I’m just really wary of anything that seems to be based on Brown Kid Defies the Odds, Makes Good narratives.

ETA: I am really really happy, though, to see this as a cross-racial people of color centered campaign, and appreciate that the article picked up on that and highlighted the connections being made with black organizers. That’s super important. I’m part of a group that’s doing Black/Latino unity work, so I’m stoked on seeing that happen. (I’m not grumpy about everything!)

insaniyat:

67 Sueños: An Introduction

The Oakland based The “67 Sueños Collective” (“67 Dreams”—- a group, named after the 67% of young people who would not be affected by the dream act) holds monthly encounters or “Encuentros” with undocumented youth from across the Bay Area.

The focus is to build solidarity, and to record their testimonies/stories in hopes to build awareness about the issues they face and to bear witness to their American experience.

“Black and white portraits of undocumented youth dominate our media, our politics and even our movements. On the one hand migrant youth are painted as criminals by a xenophobic right wing hate campaign. In response many counter the narrative by lifting up only the exceptional individual stories of 4.0 students and valedictorians. In Oakland, California migrant youth are refusing to be elbowed out of the conversations about their future by these black and white narratives. They are bursting on to the seen in full color. This project aims to lift these powerful voices to shine a light on the reality of migrant youth. No more angels and demons a new movement is being born.”


by Josue Rojas & Ann Bassette
NewAmericaMedia.org
YouthOutlook.org
dreamdeployed.blogspot.com/​2011/​03/​67-suenos-birth-of-movement.html

This is amazing & necessary. I went to a panel organized by students at my school a couple weeks ago about immigration, and a lot of the stuff said was about how immigrants are such hard workers (especially being said by a white non-immigrant on the panel who had done work with immigrants), so dedicated and selfless—I’m trying to mimic the patronizing liberal inflection with my italics. You could have come away from the panel believing that immigrants are magical creatures that come out of the woods, work 20 hours a day, put everyone else first and themselves last, get straight A’s, and never make a mistake or need anything. I’m pretty sure they were on the panel talking about goddamn elves, a monolith of elves at that—not immigrants, not real, complex individual people.

This has been on my mind since, and has always bothered me about DREAM act organizing, but as a nonimmigrant I don’t want to step in and complain.

(via praxis-makesperfect-deactivated)

Arizona Immigration Bills Spark High-School Protests at State Capitol ›

stfuxenophobes:

It was Tuesday around midnight when Ana, 16, received the text message: “Walk out tomorrow… It’s time to rise up, this is it. They will no longer intimidate us.”

The message came from fellow high school students, and Ana forwarded it to others via through Facebook. She was nervous about walking out of class to protest a new set of laws proposed by Arizona legislators — laws that could keep undocumented students from attending public elementary and high school or college — but she did.

Ana, who asked not to be identified by her full name out of concern for her family, stood Wednesday on the lawn of the Arizona State Capitol as groups of students arrived with signs reading “Educate Don’t Discriminate” and “Education is My Human Dignity.”

“It’s better to miss one day of school than to miss school for the rest of your life,” she said.

(via positivelypersistentteach)