Empire

Originally Posted on Citizen Orange

I was excited to find out over the weekend that David Neiwart, through his own blog and a cross-post on Firedoglake linked to me and others in the pro-migrant blogosphere in the last post of his three-part series on immigration:

The blogosphere can have a role in this change as well. There is a wealth of blogs out there dealing with immigration and Latino issues on a regular basis, and many of them feature not just important perspectives that need to be part of the conversation, but compelling and powerful writing as well.

A sampling: Migra Matters, Latina Lista, Matt Ortega,Immigration Prof Blog, The Silence of our Friends, Citizen Orange, The Unapologetic Mexican ... well, the list is long, and this one is certainly incomplete. But you get the idea. [ Source :David Neiwart]

I encourage you to use my blogroll on the right to complete that list, but now that he's finished his series I thought I'd use it as an opportunity to insert my own commentary, and hopefully build or hone on what was a massive and ambitious undertaking for Neiwart. Neiwart wrote three posts. One introducing his series, a second debunking a lot of the anti-migrant myths that exist, and a third with proposals about how to move forward.

While the first two posts were informative, I'm going to spend my time on Dave's third post, "Immigration: Looking Forward". This post is the second major migrant manifesto to emerge out of the blogosphere, coming after Duke's post that garnered a front-page spot on Daily Kos. In his post, Neiwart outlines what a "liberal program for comprehensive immigration reform" would contain:

Quiero decirte que mi respaldo no ha sido el producto de la espontáneidad, ni del ciego optimismo.

Primero, me ha alarmado la falta de entusiasmo y apoyo que has demostrado por activistas en la red que no han sido en alguna forma aprovados por tu equipo. Aunque hablas de un movimiento, en la red veo que ese movimiento tiene que venir de tu espacio, de que tiene que darse dentro de los parámetros controlados por tu campaña.

Si los instrumentos de la red resultan en la subversión de jerarquías; haz demostrado como con el caso de John Anthony o con el repudio de la acti-red que tus esferas de influencia son inclaudicables. Que hay jerarquías pre-establecidas a tu alrededor que si se alteran, son recibidas tanto con el activo repudio de tus subalternos como con el desdén de tu silencio.

¿Cómo ha de ser éste un movimiento democrático si quieres controlar como el pueblo no dicta ni decide?

¿Cómo ha de ser transformativo, si uno no controla, desecha o reinventa tu campaña política?

¿Cómo hemos de saber que nuestras palabras valen si no haz de escuchar nuestra voz?

Sin embargo, éstas son dudas quedan rebasadas por la serie de epifanías que tu campaña me han revelado.

De cómo el miedo me llevaba a negar tu candidatura en un intento falaz de protegerte.

De cómo los grilletes del prejuicio me immobilizaban ante la mar de clases sociales, de lenguajes, de creencias y de edades que te cercan por donde pasas.

De cómo la inspiración de tus palabras alimentaba el cinismo que ha subrayado mi activismo político.

No espero que tu optimismo te convierta en un mesías.

No espero que tu mulataje borre el racismo.

No espero que tu deseo de una democracia transformativa contrareste la corrupción.

No espero que tu procedencia como hijo de un immigrante le abra las puertas a los millones que sufren los efectos del nativismo eurocentrista que infectan esta nación.

No espero que este país ni el mundo entero cambien el día que te confirmen frente a la Casa Blanca.

No.

Sin embargo ...

Michael Barone has an interesting theory about the Iowa results over at The Wall Stree Journal.

I so do not agree. What we have here is an electorate disgusted, at least in Iowa, with dynasties :

Ronald Wilson Reagan 1981–89
(George H. W. Bush)

George Herbert Walker Bush 1989–93
(J. Danforth Quayle)

Bill Clinton 1993–2001
(Albert Gore, Jr.)

George Walker Bush 2001–2008
(Dick Cheney)

That's in a nutshell Hillary Clinton's problem.

Have you seen the Tom Tancredo ad about how Central American gangs are taking over the United States and he's the only one brave enough to stop them?

Here's the jewel in the son-of-Italian immigrants anti-immigrant crown :

The word "immigration" may have an official definition in dictionaries, yet as a meme it continues to be written and expanded to proportions that are truly mythical.

Tell me if the rabble of Tancredo's rouse is not reminiscent of JR Tolkien's army of Orcs?

Come to think of it, I can understand why the Elvish-looking Tancredo is worried.

Yet, let's look at this closely shall we. As a building block in the narrative of the "immigration" meme, what Tancredo and his team have concocted in that ad is rather impressive.

I got this video clip via Andrew Sullivan via Memeorandum. Two things immediately jump out of this video.

1. What the Southern Avenger says here is in line with what a lot of liberals and progressives have been saying for the last eight years : That people like George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Sean Hannity and Michelle Malkin are extremists and not conservatives at all.

2. Exactly because the argument of this video is that true conservatives are against the war, I find interesting that Andrew Sullivan doesn't waste time to call out the author a paleo-conservative. And yet, if you go to the guys' website ... paleoconservative is the last word to come to my mind.

What do you think?

Ugh.

If there ever was a big media juxtapotion of capitalist imperialism and mysogyny this has got to be the one.

This particular portrait haunts me. Not because there is anything wrong with the girl, but because there is everything wrong with making her a piece of exotica.

She may elicit comparisons with the madonnas of the Renaissance; but I feel our Afghani girl was shot to look more like a pre-Raphaelite painting. Check out especially the ladies created by Dante Gabriel Rossetti.

With their dreams of brotherhoods, medievalist fantasies and nymph fetish, the pre-Raphaelites artists can be considered one of the most anti-women aesthetic movements of European. I would like to make the point that it is particularly mysogynist exactly because their style was meant to represent women as precious objects.

So when I look at this ironic juxtaposition at The New York Times, I read it not just as a joke. Looking at it closely it speaks volumes about the way in which Americans not only regard women but 'foreign' or colored women.

Call it the Pier 1 Imports effect.

Anything that is not the 'mainstream' American culture or looks like is treated by the purveyors of 'haute taste' as a commodity, as another tradeable piece of furniture or accessory of interior decor.

Barack ObamaAmsterdam - say cheese

Three things have prompted me to write this quick essay.

Over the weekened Micah Sifry pinged with a link to CBSNews published decision to close all comments on articles pertaining to Barack Obama because, "stories about Obama have been attracting too many racist comments".

The week before I had read Spencer Overton's A Significant Development for the Blackroots with a bit of amusement. I know some of the people involved in the push to have have the Congressional Black Caucus Institute cancel their sponsorship of the presidential debates that FOXNews was going to telecast. Somehow, I never received an email or a memo from them --and that even includes my friend Chris Rabb.

Then I got an email from a BBC editor through my personal website. They wanted to know if I was an Israeli blogger writing from Jerusalem. That prompted me to write a post about the presumably Jewish origin of my last name.

Which takes me to heart of this post --how immigration an miscegenation are pushing a lot of blacks in the United States to narrow the definition of blackness to the confines of descendants of US African slaves.

This would be outrageous south of the border.