2 Responses to “The Obama Election and the Chicano/Mexicano Community – The Lansing/Michigan Perspective: Greater Mexico Podcast 4, Part 1”

1. Ashley Wilson Says:
   May 3rd, 2009 at 11:33 pm

   The podcast for February 16, 2009 answered some lingering questions regarding Obama’s presidency and his effects on Chicano’s and United States Mexico relations. Guest speaker, Ernesto Todd Mireles gave insight to what the new presidency may potentially do, or not do, in regards to Chicano’s. Mireles, community activist and active organizer of the Xicano Development Center, does not define current Chicano problems as an old phenomena. He comments that nativism has played a big role since 1944. Propositions 187 and 203 resulted in the beginning of nativist resurgents and anti-immigrant incentives. This has continued up until present day. The Bush administration had an 8 year impact on Chicano’s in Michigan, especially in Lansing, ,considering Lansing has the third largest Chicano population. However he pinpoints that Chicano issues are not ethnicity based, as are most racial problems in the United States, but they are more of an issue of class. As our economy sinks lower there is more job competition, and more worries about the welfare system. In opposition to common belief Mireles comments that Americans should not be worried about the welfare system or jobs, because the number of Chicano’s returning to Mexico has increased recently. Yet the United States is still taking a very aggressive stance against immigration and Chicanos. Mireles highlights that after 9/11 terrorist rhetoric expanded to Mexico, and the military presence towards the Latino community increased with the border patrol becoming a more militaristic unit. So therefore what is the American message? Is the United States really serious about the situation or are they simply re-establishing who is in control? He then points out a 2004 article by Sam Huntington that emphasizes the grasp of Anglo-Protestant-Saxon race on the United States. This is a view most politicians rely on, and sometimes even further. Milires responds to all of this saying that the Obama may be the first black president however he stresses his protestant background. Therefore the administration will most likely not change immigration policies. He acknowledges that Obama realizes as president that he is there to protect the majority, and he is still a capitalist and militarist. As for Obama, he remarks that Latinos need to stop engaging in a legal debate because it is not helping forward their cause.

   I thought the podcast was very interesting. I am from Traverse City, which is a farm town, and most of the farm workers are immigrants. It will be interesting to see what happens this summer as more individuals are losing their jobs, because people are becoming more desperate to work low paying jobs that require physical labor. I can therefore understand American pressure to stop illegal immigration. However, at the same time, I think Americans forget that the United States was built on immigration. We practically exterminated, and definitely suppressed, the indigenous group that originated on United States land (Native Americans), and we continue to do so to a group (Latin Americans) who originated on much of the Southern part of the United States. Therefore who are we, as United States citizens, to force out and discriminate against a group who has essentially been here longer than we have. When it comes to job competition, society should take their resentments out on the big businesses who are transferring potential jobs overseas, instead of the people who are trying to strengthen the economy. I feel like it is a historical phenomena that crisis brings discrimination, and I feel like that is what is going on with the Chicanos since 9/11. As Merelis notes, terrorist rhetoric expanded south, however it did not go north. Chicanos were easy targets though, because United States and Latin American cultures are so different. Labeling Canadians as a potential terrorist risk would be like accusing the Americans of being terrorists.

2. Jimmy Walsh Says:
   May 5th, 2009 at 10:10 am

   The “dark days of Bush governance” biggest impact has to do with class, as opposed to race or community. I never thought about it like that. That makes sense.

   I would agree with what Todd is saying about how the “pendulum” swung a little farther in the case of Mexicanos, and Chicanos, as being perceived on the same grounds as terrorists. I really hadn’t thought about that fact that much, but I do seem to remember, especially during the 2004 elections, there being this almost pandemic concerning the fear of illegal immigrants running across the border from Mexico. And, of course, these immigrants had to be terrorists; or, at least the way the Bush Administration and select news groups would have us perceive them. One of the main goals of the Bush Administration, concerning Immigration, was to link it, with Terrorism, and I believe they did a decent job of accomplishing that.

   Young Americans for Freedom (YAF), Todd describes the YAF, rightly quoting the Southern Poverty Law Center, as a “hate group.” I’ve walked past them a few times outside Wells, and couldn’t believe what I was hearing, especially when they were holding a sign that bore the name of their group, and had Freedom italicized.

   I liked Todd’s description, or more or less disclaimer about the struggles of people in Michigan, and his idea of social justice. He’s not saying that people on the right aren’t struggling to achieve their idea of social justice, which is a comment usually left out regarding ones opposition. I also don’t agree the right’s idea, nor their tactics.

   The U.S. has a history of expelling Mexicans in mass, I never knew this.

   “Mexicans return to Mexico because of lack of jobs:
   Proves they’re not here for welfare”
   I love this headline. “What welfare?” as Ben so rightly pointed out. It’s hard enough with all the proper documentation to get welfare, I don’t know why there has always been this misnomer that every single Mexican, or Chicano, that has been in the United States, has come there for one reason, to get on the welfare system. If they wanted to get on the Dole, they should have gone to Canada, a land where they could actually get something they needed sorted out.

   That would be crazy if the populations of the South West actually voted to reattach the South West of the U.S. to Mexico.

   That is an awesome point to raise, and I’ve heard many people state, “Oh, now that we’ve elected a black President, it proves that racism is dead in the U.S.” and this is completely absurd. Yes, it represents a step, but not the complete eradication of racism –which is something I don’t ever think will become extinct in the United States.