|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 1, 2006
On International Workers' Day today, hardly any Euro-Amerikans showed up at two events in Los Angeles and San Diego respectively -- nothing new here. At the same time, demonstrators were more likely to identify as, or with, migrants and/or Latino or Third World nationalities, than as "workers" without any nationality. [In New York City, placards and discussion had more focus on workers.]
This was not surprising for San Diego and Los Angeles. Globally, First World imperialist countries are bourgeois, while Third World nations are exploited, and the world proletariat is concentrated there. This is how class structure manifests itself in the world. Wherever there were flags of Third World countries in demonstrations today, one should think that the proletariat was marching.
Workers simultaneously demonstrated in Mexico in solidarity with migrants inside u.$. borders. Countries all over the world had demonstrations including 1.5 million in Russia. This May Day, people inside u.$. borders are twice as many as Russians, so it is possible we had three million u.$. demonstrators and an equal May Day for once. On the other hand, if we excluded all the Euro-Amerikan petty-bourgeoisie in the united $tates and all the Moscow and Leningrad petty-bourgeoisie in Russia, just this once, the exploited inside u.$. borders proportionately-speaking had a greater International Workers Day than Russia!
Demonstrations in the United $tates that look "nationalist" can also have a proletarian aspect. Third World neo-colonies and colonies have been proletarianized, and furthermore, the proletariat has an interest in supporting Third World nationalism against imperialism.
There were multiple events in both Los Angeles and San Diego today, even multiple marches that happened concurrently in downtown Los Angeles. One early march in Los Angeles started around 11 AM and went from Olympic & Broadway to City Hall. Especially interesting were several signs, held by Latinos, opposing the Iraq War. One sign read: "No Iraqi ever called me a wetback." Another read: "Alto a la guerra en Irak." Text on a shirt read: "Iraq is our 51st state." Also, there was a sign criticizing military recruitment of undocumented migrants as hypocritical. The largely petty-bourgeois antiwar movement was absent today, but demonstrators in Los Angeles spoke against the war against Iraq. Some Euro-Amerikans were undoubtedly too busy blaming Bu$h for gas prices to come to any May 1 event.
One of the most common printed signs at the Los Angeles march read: "Hoy marchamos. Mañana votamos" ("Today we march. Tomorrow we vote") -- potentially a risky strategy that could unite more Euro-Amerikans at the voting booth against migrants, but the slogan partly reflected the willingness of Latino citizens to resist attacks on their communities. Another professionally printed sign read: "Amnistía general."
Legislators almost universally oppose amnesty proposals that would allow undocumented migrants to get permanent legal status if they want to, without restriction. Some so-called comprehensive immigration reform proposals offer only a difficult "earned" so-called path to citizenship for a subgroup of undocumented migrant workers. So, it was disconcerting to see few demonstrators focusing on temporary migrants except to denounce so-called guest-worker programs. There were more love-Amerika types than open supporters of temporary migrant workers' rights.
The United $tates is not about to offer instant citizenship to anyone who crosses the border. So, to call for amnesty, but oppose temporary-worker programs without opposing immigration restrictions, sets up temporary migrant workers and migrants in general for continued repression. In other words, denouncing temporary-worker programs just to call for amnesty is not necessarily progressive. Some of those who are calling for "general amnesty" openly qualify their definition of amnesty, saying it should be granted only to migrants who have been in the United $tates for longer than a certain minimum length of time and meet other requirements. Even if unconditional amnesty were proposed, amnesty-versus-guest-worker still reflects a legalistic outlook that fundamentally accepts closed borders and anti-migrant repression. The so-called immigration reform debate doesn't represent a reformist movement against anti-migrant repression. Calling for amnesty without opposing repression is a capitulation to reactionaries.
Demonstrators singled out HR 4437 more often than any other piece of legislation. HR 4437 still serves as a rallying point for many demonstrators, but Congress has moved onto other legislation, more crafty, but still repressive. Some recent proposed "compromise" legislation would criminalize undocumented migrants as misdemeanor offenders, rather than felons, which would actually make it easier to deport undocumented migrants for certain reasons.
Archbishop Mahony had opposed people's boycotting work and school, but this writer saw a Catholic priest at the front of a small group. A Hummer, on the back of which was a banner with the name of a Catholic immigration reform campaign, "Justice for Immigrants: A Journey of Hope," drove around with a Mexican flag, to the cheers of some onlookers. The Catholic Church has its own reasons for supporting migrants, and this support is limited. But it appeared that some Catholics were more internationalist than Euro-Amerikan-dominated "socialist" groups criticizing nationalism while making trite calls for working-class unity with white workers who hadn't supported migrants' rights in significant numbers. U.$. Catholic church leaders are largely united in their support for so-called moderate immigration reform legislation that would still result in more anti-migrant repression, but there has been some division over May 1 boycotts. Some dioceses have opposed the boycotts, while others have supported midday rally events.
In Los Angeles, stores along Broadway were closed. Many shops on Olvera Street were also closed.
CNN suggested that demonstrators in the United $tates were just calling for amnesty. Actually, many demonstrators in Los Angeles were more general, some calling for "justice" and others opposing "all attacks against immigrants." The mainstream media is thus trying misrepresent demonstrators' demands, as if demonstrators were making an unreasonable demand on legislators. "Amnesty" is a legalistic term. Unconditional amnesty is extremely unlikely to be the outcome of the current legislative debate in Congress. For the media to suggest that demonstrations were just about amnesty, rather than opposing the anti-migrant movement, is inaccurate as well as an attempt to frame discussions in a way that is favorable to reactionaries.
On the flip side, some media outlets have suggested that demonstrators were just opposing the criminalization of undocumented migrants as felons, which paves the way for criminalizing them as misdemeanor offenders instead. This is what the Hagel-Martinez substitute amendment would do, in addition to helping local law enforcement agencies turn undocumented migrants over for deportation. This is outrageous. The oppressed don't want people to oppose HR 4437 just to support something like the Hagel-Martinez Substitute.
Some bourgeois tendencies were evident at the Los Angeles event. One reason why Mexican flags, especially at an International Workers' Day event with so little Euro-Amerikan participation, should be seen as proletarian is that they stood in contrast to the many Amerikan flags that were there, too. Proletarian temporary migrants were probably more likely to hold non-Amerikan flags. Sometimes, the Amerikan flags were in competition with Mexican flags, for example, where there was no attempt by individuals walking together to wave both Amerikan and Mexican flags. Some of the Amerikan flag-waving was just a futile attempt to pander to critics in the white media, but there were many who just wanted migrants to have equal rights and equal privileges with Amerikans. Due to attempts by the Euro-Amerikan nation to deny Latinos cultural and educational self-determination, many Latinos and other oppressed nationalities see themselves as part of the mythical "multiracial" Amerikan nation.
One unusual flag in Los Angeles was the Soviet flag, with the hammer, sickle, and star. Another was a large Israeli flag flown high. This writer overheard someone on the street making an anti-Semitic remark about it. For demonstrators, wanting to defend migrants and their communities from repression, to align themselves with fascists is confused and wrong. Anti-Semitism is evil and must be struggled against wherever it rears its head. Anti-Semitism dangerously distorts the struggle against imperialism and encourages alliances with U.$. imperialism. At the same time, supporters of migrants must recognize that, even though there are thousands of Israeli migrants in the United $tates, the flag of Israel represents a settler imperialist state that represses migrants who are in their own land. Israel claims Jewish heritage just to legitimize itself. There are other symbols of Jewish people than the Israeli flag. Many Jews have taken part in and organized migrant rights demonstrations in the United $tates without pointlessly defending Israeli imperialism.
In the morning, Geraldo Rivera showed up briefly and then left on a motorcycle. Some demonstrators gave him hugs, but one Salvadoran womyn wanted him to go away. This was really interesting because Rivera didn't seem to be there in connection with Fox News, and he has been critical of obnoxious anti-migrant advocate Lou Dobbs. This writer can understand why many would like Rivera. Unlike most Amerikans, Rivera, also known as a former lawyer for the Young Lords, at least has a track record of denouncing the Minutemen and Lou Dobbs; although, some critics of the Minutemen and Lou Dobbs still support repressive border and migration policies. Rivera in a post on his blog today opposed the nationalism of Mexicanos and even added his voice to those who are hysterically denouncing a Spanish-language version of Amerikans' imperialist national anthem (http://www.geraldo.com/index.php?/archives/79_Chain_Reaction.html).
Based on counts in the mainstream media, the number of demonstrators throughout the day in Los Angeles, in various marches, etc., appeared to be lower than during the record-setting March 25 demonstration. Not everyone being able to miss work is certainly one factor, but the white media in the days leading up to May 1 gave the impression that demonstrations could turn violent, which possibly discouraged many from attending. Were it not for the systematic and widespread effort to discourage boycotting, the turnout today probably would have exceeded the March 25 one. Tonight, a local TV station in San Diego, suggesting that demonstrators were drunk, paid a disproportionate amount of attention to alleged violence at a demonstration in San Diego County.
It's hard to draw a comparison between evening and midday demonstrations based on just two small events, but there were some differences between a San Diego event and the early Los Angeles march and rally. An evening march in San Diego turned out to be more powerful in some ways. In Balboa Park in the evening, near 6th & Laurel, there was a rally with the theme "We are America." (There was another event early in the day at the Tijuana-San Ysidro border crossing.) Some held lit candles for a vigil. But people wanting to march paraded through the rally, and around 7 PM, at least several hundred people poured onto 6th Avenue and started marching, seemingly spontaneously. Marchers reached the Washington Mutual Tower and then the ritzy Horton Plaza shopping mall, and then returned to Balboa Park. In this march and even at the rally, there seemed to be relatively more Mexican flags than in Los Angeles despite the narrow theme indicated by the sign on the stage at the Balboa Park rally.
Many demonstrators were there in the evening because they had a day shift and couldn't miss work. Throughout the United $tates, corporate and Euro-Amerikan employers threatened to fire workers who walked out or didn't show up for work. Many people who attended May 1 events later in the day were some of the least privileged workers.
Marchers were very energetic. The march surprised marchers themselves and others, including diners and revelers who were eating and drinking at places for whites in downtown San Diego. There were several police officers at the Balboa Park rally. They protected anti-migrant activists, with signs such as "crack down on illegal alien," who showed up to harass ralliers. One marcher said people who marched were angered by the reactionary counter-demonstrators. The police later prevented marchers from spilling over into adjacent streets.
There weren't many people claiming to be march/rally security, with official-looking T-shirts, etc. One Latino youth, who didn't appear to be affiliated with any group, directed marchers away from sidewalks and store fronts. It is often claimed that police serve a public safety function at marches. But the pigs aren't needed for that. If organizers and marchers want security volunteers, they can provide them.
Not surprisingly, on this International Workers' Day, hardly any Euro-Amerikan so-called workers, actually bourgeois parasites on migrant proletarians and Third World workers, showed up in San Diego either. Most Euro-Amerikans who attended or stood observing the rally were "middle-class" types, people associated with Indymedia or Infoshop.org, or intellectuals, academics, etc. (The vast majority of Euro-Amerikan workers are petty-bourgeois; the Euro-Amerikans at migrant rights demonstrations are just more wealthy in general.)
As angry responses to the anti-migrant movement intensify, "Hispanic leaders" such as Antonio Villaraigosa, not to mention New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, and various imperialist lackeys brought on as guests by the white media, are distancing themselves even further from demonstrators. "Earned" legalization advocates are talking tough on border security and making snide remarks about temporary migrant workers and any migrant who is less than a "hardworking" "immigrant" who doesn't use "welfare." This, combined with the blatant racism of the supposedly "liberal" white media, and police repression and provocations at demonstrations, will politicize people more.
Several people at Balboa Park, unaffiliated with any organization, clearly were critical of more than just the Minutemen and HR 4437. Beside signs critical of borders, colonialism, and fascism, one sign criticized CNN's Lou Dobbs. Another expressed frustration with the legislative debate and political grandstanding, saying, "Stop the politics."
One sign said the land should be shared by everyone. Ultimately, property systems are oppressive, but opposition to the anti-migrant movement is partly a question of self-determination and reparations in relation to territory. The Euro-Amerikan settler nation has no right to continue dominating the Americas. Indigenous peoples', Mexicanos' and Latinos' struggles for land are just.
During the march, beside common chants heard at other demonstrations, some started chanting, "México, U.S.A.," at one point. As people learn more about the different forces involved in this struggle against repression, and progressive organizing advances, more will realize the drawbacks of trying to unite with the class and national interests of Euro-Amerikans.
Philippine flag in San Diego
Typical sign held by a Euro-Amerikan
