Archive for May, 2007

New Films on the Border, Mexico, and Oaxaca

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 30, 2007
in APPO, Immigrant Rights, Mexico, Oaxaca, Mexico, UCSB and films
. 0 Comments

Yesterday, I attended an event sponsored by Acción Zapatista (a UCSB student organization) that featured three new exciting documentaries. Jill Friedberg, who also worked on the Award Winning film This is What Democracy Looks Like, presented Granito de Arena, which tells the story of the dismantling of the Mexican public education system. This compelling film highlights the power of resistance by educators, families, and students, who demand access to free public education and a living wage. In 2006, a year after Friedberg completed this film, Oaxacan teachers entered a new chapter in their struggle. Her new film, a work in progress, called Un Poquito de Tanto Verdad, traces the story of the recent Oaxacan uprising. I was thrilled to see the brave Oaxacan women who took over Channel Nine powerfully represented in this film. I remember Jill from my time in Oaxaca–she was always at the frontlines, documenting the uprising as it happened. You can learn more about these films and how to order them, from Corrugated Films.

We were also treated by Monica Hernandez’s film, Rights on the Line, which deconstructs the image and reality of the Minutemen Project, in particular their racist and controversial involvement in apprehending immigrants who cross the Mexican/US border. I loved the footage of Minutemen at the Arizona border. The American Friends Service Commission trained ACLU legal observers to document the activities of the Minutemen and other vigilantes. The film and trailer are availble from the American Friends Service Commission.

Corn and Immigration

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 24, 2007
in Immigration, Maí­z (Corn) and Mexico
. 5 Comments

I love Kohn’s analysis of NAFTA’s affect on Mexico’s corn industry and how it all relates to immigration. We can debate the section on ethanol…but her overall analysis is part of what I argue in my dissertation:

Corn-Fueled Migration
Sally Kohn
May 23, 2007

Sally Kohn is director of the New York-based Movement Vision Project, working with grassroots organizations across the United States to advance our shared values of family, community and humanity.

Thankfully, immigration reform is progressing in Congress. There are 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States who have made invaluable contributions to our culture and economy and deserve the basic rights and dignity that citizenship provides.

Yet some nasty provisions stand out in the compromise Senate legislation—prioritizing highly-skilled, English-speaking immigrants over working class immigrants and people of color whose families are already here, and blocking the opportunity of citizenship for future “guestworkers”, continuing the two-tiered system of discrimination and exploitation that currently exists. Instead, if we examined the root causes of migration, we might actually help—rather than punish—immigrants.

And here “root” cause is not just a metaphor. The seeds of the immigration dynamics we now face are planted on the U.S. side of the border, the kernel of which is corn. Corn is what causes migration and corn is the only way the injustices of immigration, on both sides of the border, will ever be solved.

As the birth nation of just over half of the undocumented immigrants in the United States, Mexico provides a good example. Although agriculture is less than 5 percent of Mexico’s gross domestic product, more than a quarter of Mexicans still make their living as farmers. And most of the poorest of those farmers grow corn. Over 60 percent of Mexico’s cultivated land is planted with corn, most of which are small family plots. In all, 18 million Mexicans, including farmers and their families, rely on corn for their livelihood.

Enter NAFTA in 1994, which opened the U.S.-Mexico border to trade. It’s worth noting that before the wealthy nations in the European Union like France and German expanded trade with poorer nations like Portugal and Greece, the wealthier countries first transferred huge sums of money to the poorer nations, to build their infrastructure and help get them to the equal footing necessary for trade to work. Not so with Mexico. The United States (1990 GDP: $23,130—a.k.a. Goliath) became “equal trading partners” with Mexico (1990 GDP: $6,090—a.k.a. David).

On top of that, corn production in the United States is heavily subsidized. Under the farm bill, which is up for reauthorization this year, we taxpayers give over $25 billion each year mainly to large, industrial corporate farms. And the more corn the factory farms produce, the more money they make. That means there are big corporations with mounds of corn on their hands that they can sell for cheap because they’ve already made plenty off the subsidies. Cheap corporate corn floods the Mexican market, drowning local producers.

So what’s the result? Imported corn now dominates the Mexican market. For instance, in Mexico—the birthplace of corn—one-out-of-three tortillas is now made with imported maize. An estimated two million family farmers who can’t compete with subsidized U.S. corn have been driven from their land. They now have to buy imported corn to feed their families but don’t have the income to afford it. Meanwhile, American politicians following the instructions of corporate farm lobbyists start pushing ethanol. Even though the “alternative” fuel actually wastes more energy than it produces, it’s made from corn so agribusiness loves it. The new demand for corn drives up prices. And so the price of a tortilla in Mexico has risen 279 percent since NAFTA. The overall effect impacts not only farmers but all Mexicans, especially the poor. Since NAFTA, poverty in Mexico has increased. As of 2001, over 80 percent of people in rural Mexico were living in poverty.

So is it any wonder that as more and more U.S. corn flows to Mexico, more and more Mexicans cross the border to the U.S.? And corn is just the beginning. Migration around the world is the direct result of U.S. policies and actions. As immigrant rights leaders in England often chant, “We’re here because you were there.” Exactly.

Improving immigration policy in the United States is an important start and hopefully the legislation that comes out of Congress will be far improved over the current draft. But in addition, American farmers and factory workers who have also been devastated by U.S. economic policies must join with immigrant rights leaders to repeal NAFTA and other disastrous trade agreements and remove bloated corporate subsidies from the farm bill. And, as military occupation of Iraq goes hand-in-hand with economic occupation of the global south, the United States must start spending far more money on foreign aid and assistance than border enforcement and war. Maybe then we could start producing an abundance of fairness and justice on both sides of the border, instead of corn.

Disposable Society

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 23, 2007
in Immigrant Rights and Race and Racism
. 1 Comment

I enjoy the mix of political commentary and cartoons on Matt Davies’ blog, particularly this one:

cartoon
This cartoon was drawn in response to a local murder the circumstance of which exposes a sinister but familiar undercurrent in our society, shared by both those who want to kick out illegal immigrant laborers, and those who hire them because they’re cheap. We should show compassion for our fellow human beings, regardless of their status.

The more I research the connection between immigration, racism, day laborers, and crime against those who seek day labor, my anger increases. My recent blog on the day laborer that was killed at a counter-protest (as a result of a car accident), received an appalling comment by a racist Minuteman supporter. I thank Bryan for his creative response to this comment on his own website.

Excuses for Racism

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 18, 2007
in Immigrant Rights, Mexico and Race and Racism
. 2 Comments

Fighting between drug cartels in Cananea, a town near the Arizona border, escalated when 50 men executed four local police officers. USA Today’s story sounds like the scene from a movie (it is below). Mexican President Calderon deployed army troops to control the drug cartels. However, the National Human Rights Commission claims that the army is involved in local crime including rapes and other abuses. The public comments on USA Today’s website are racist and one-sided. Instead of using this horrible event to analyze the real origins of poverty and corruption, these comments use this event to justify their racism and the need for more border control. Not one comment offers a critical anti-racist examination of this issue. Here is the article - I won’t post the comments here; you can see them for yourself.

Mexico arrests 4 gunmen after battles near Ariz. kill 22
HERMOSILLO, Mexico (AP) Police and Mexican army troops arrested four members of a criminal assault force that overran a town near the Arizona border and set off gunbattles and executions that left at least 22 dead in violence linked to drug cartels.

Luis Pena Molina, town secretary of Banamichi, said Thursday that “helicopters are combing the whole area” looking for the remnants of the estimated 50 gunmen who assaulted the nearby town of Cananea, 20 kilometers (30 miles) south of the U.S. border. He said four gunmen had been detained.

The violence began Wednesday, when men armed with assault rifles and riding in 10 to 15 vehicles pulled four lightly armed city police officers out of their cars and executed them in a park.

The assailants fled to the nearby hills with authorities in pursuit. The gunmen ditched their vehicles, commandeered horses and forced ranch hands to serve as guides, according to an account from a man abducted by the armed gang.

An hours-long gunbattle erupted between the gunmen and police and soldiers. Fifteen assailants, five police officers and two local residents were killed.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Mexico | Cananea | Jose Luis Soberanes

The invasion of Cananea — a town that helped spark the 1910 Mexican Revolution when U.S. forces crossed the border to help put down a miners’ strike — showed the brashness and power of Mexico’s ruthless organized crime gangs.

The first outside authorities to arrive in Cananea on Wednesday found an eerie no man’s land where local law enforcement had melted away.

“When the state police arrived, there was not a single municipal police officer,” Sonora state Gov. Eduardo Bours said. “We had to take over the command. There wasn’t anyone there. They had all left.”

Bours added that he had previously asked for a federal investigation of the Cananea police force, apparently to determine whether it was infiltrated by Mexico’s Pacific Coast drug gangs

Federal Public Safety Secretary Genaro Garcia Luna blamed a turf battle between the Gulf and Pacific drug gangs.

“An armed command first abducted a police patrol, then went out on the streets of Cananea … abducting policemen,” Garcia Luna told reporters. “It is a group linked to the Gulf cartel, waging a turf battle with the Pacific people, for control of this territory.”

He praised Sonora state officials for their “efficient” response.

While President Felipe Calderon has dispatched thousands of army troops to fight the cartels, critics say troops trained for battle should not be acting as police officers.

The official National Human Rights Commission said Tuesday that there was credible evidence that some of the newly deployed troops committed rapes, illegal searches and other rights abuses.

“Soldiers are not trained to carry out police work,” said Jose Luis Soberanes, president of the rights commission.

In Cananea, there was little debate over the need for army troops: Mayor Luis Carlos Cha Flores had formally requested that federal police officers and army troops be sent to the town to restore order, the government news agency Notimex reported.

No Surprise Victory for the Hunger Strikers

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 18, 2007
in Activism and UCSB
. 0 Comments

The events at yesterday’s UC Regents meeting were predictable. The strikers were allowed to speak only during the public comment period, they refused to leave, and 13 were arrested. Here is an excerpt from the hunger strikers’ blog site:

The regents’ meeting began at 8 with an announcement. Because so many people had signed up to speak during the public comments period the regents elected to extend the time alloted from 20 minutes to a full half hour. Despite the extra 10 minutes not even close to everyone had the opportunity to have their voice heard. A number of the hunger strikers – for whom this was the ninth day without food – spoke out, as well as many supporters, including Jackie Cabasso of the Western States Legal Foundation, Professor Charles Schwartz of UC Berkeley and representatives from Physicians for Social Responsibility.

The comments were amazing to listen to. They exhibited the students’ depth of understanding of the issue with their detailed critic of RRW. They attacked the regents for continuing to choose to involve the university in the immoral nuclear weapons’ business. They conveyed the broad community support for severance. And, most importantly, they spoke of the passion and commitment of the students. One hunger striker reminded the regents that “We are not starving for fun”. Another described his aching body and then explained that the ache in his heart every time he thought about the University’s role in the creation of nuclear weapons was far greater. As he spoke the students – spontaneously – all held up peace signs.

After the public comments period everyone left the hall and gathered outside on the grass in a giant circle. One by one, going around the circle, everyone spoke. Unlike inside, there was time for everyone. Students expressed their joy of being part of this group that was fighting to steer the university towards a new, conscientious, path. They reminded each other that they – the students – were the real university; and, that they held the power to bring about a better future.

Next came the nitty-gritty, the planning. Everyone bunched up close together and, through consensus, decided how to proceed should the regents ignore the demands of their constituents and choose to continue with their regular business: the nuclear weapons business.

The group filtered back into the meeting around eleven. At first we were told that there weren’t enough seats but eventually everyone was allowed inside. We listened to the tail end of a presentation by the faculty senate which explained that the only way to maintain the quality and character of the university was increased state funding. Many in the audience were dismayed that the regents seemed unaccepting of this news.

Finally, the Committee on Oversight of the Department of Energy Laboratories convened. It was quickly clear that the regents did not intend to even acknowledge the moral quagmire they drag the university into, let alone resolving it by severing ties with the weapons labs. A group of hunger strikers stood up and demanded the regents respond to their demands. Regent Norman Pattiz assured the group that the regents had heard their message and that “[The regents] need to go forward with the business of the university.” Up on the screen was the first slide of a presentation entitled “Report on the National Nuclear Security Administration Vision for the Nuclear Weapons Complex of 2030” – i.e. the plan to revamp the nuclear weapons complex in order to restart production and create new nuclear weapons, the first of which (RRW-1) is already being designed at the Livermore lab.

The hunger strikers made it clear that so long as the regents chose “to go forward with the business of the university” when that business was creating new nuclear weapons and refused to even discuss the matter, the hunger strikers and their supporters were going to continue to demand accountability and moral responsibility from their university.

The regents brushed off the protest by saying it was not through proper channels. They seemed to think they were not responsible for nuclear weapons in any way. Someone shouted out to the regents “what would you do?” Pattiz told the hunger strikers “I hope you will go and have some lunch.” A chant of “Give Peace a Chance” was taken up by the crowd. Intermittently people would shout out things such as: “You don’t need to be a subsidiary to Bechtel.” “Listen to your students.” “The University’s business is the nuke business” “Don’t build new nukes.” Most of the chanters were still sitting peacefully in their seats, hoping the regents would at least discuss their role in nuclear complex and consider the demand for severance. Instead the regents eventually left and called in the police to clear the room. After the police announcement all, but thirteen, of the hunger strikers and their supporters left the room. The thirteen that remained locked arms and waited to be arrested.

Outside the room the energy continued with chants of “Whose university? Our university!” and “UC Nuclear Free!” as well as informal teach ins and in depth discussions of the issue. Liaisons kept in close touch with the police and a representative of the regents to keep track of the arrestees. The regents eventually resumed their meeting, but now without any public to witness it. The students moved outside the building, making themselves, and especially the hunger strikers, available to the media. A car was quickly dispatched to pick up the arrestees who were being cited and released at a nearby jail.

The LA Times also has an article on the event:

….
The group of about 60 anti-nuclear protesters began the day by attending the regents’ public comment period, during which some of them were allowed to address the board briefly. Organizers of the protest said about 40 students have been on some form of hunger strike for the last nine days.

“We are not starving for fun,” protester Adrian Cole told the regents. “You don’t need to be a subsidiary to Bechtel. This is your opportunity to get out of the nuclear weapons industry.”

Later in the meeting, some of the demonstrators began shouting protests against the nuclear program. Regent Norman Pattiz sought to quiet the demonstration by assuring them that the regents had heard their message.

“I want you to know that you are not alone in your concern on this subject,” he said. “Many of us on the regents share your concern. For those of you who have been on a hunger strike, I hope you will go and have some lunch. We need to go forward with the business of the university.”

Despite his plea, the noisy protest continued, and the regents ordered the room cleared. The 13 protesters, who were taken out one by one, were arrested on suspicion of trespassing and failure to disperse.

“No hard feelings,” one of the protesters told police as they pulled him to his feet.

In separate action, the regents postponed a decision on the controversial issue of whether to ban tobacco companies from funding research at UC.

The board agreed to delay a vote until its next meeting, in July, because one of the proponents of a ban, Regent John Moores, was unable to attend Thursday’s session.

Yesterday, I wrote on the history and critiques of the hunger strike. Now I wonder about its next steps. UCSB’s Daily Nexus claims that many protesters ended their hunger strike, but others will continue. Will they wait until the next regents meeting in TWO MONTHS?

UC Hunger Strike

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 17, 2007
in Activism and UCSB
. 1 Comment

About 14 hunger strikers from my university (UCSB) are at the UC Regents meeting today, hoping to persuade the UC to cut ties with two nuclear weapons labs. The issue has become a hot topic as Lawrence Livermore Laboratory won the bid to develop a new nuclear warhead (the first in 20 years). Although our tuition money does not directly go to the development and maintenance of these weapons, the strikers argue that the weapons are developed in our name. I am impressed with the strength of the protesters who are currently on day nine of their hunger strike, but their tactic of fasting is not without criticism. Many faculty and student organizations have come forward to support the strikers, but others are critical of their tactic for various reasons. While many of their critics are against UC’s management of the weapons laboratories and are long-time activists, some are concerned that the young students are a taking on a serious health risk without knowing of the dangers involved or proper procedure. Organization leaders argue that they have spoken with ex-hunger strikers and have educated themselves on the topic, however, their first official announcement of the action speaks ever too nonchalantly of fasting.

A second critique is the timing of the fast. The group of over 40 strikers is currently in San Francisco at the Regents meeting, but their issue is not on the agenda. Some argue that this can change and their story could sway the Regents to give them time at the meeting. However, most people agree that their hopes for this meeting are way too high; they will not get on the agenda and they are doomed to fail. The next meeting is not for two months. When will the strikers call it quits? In a set of interviews by a host of the campus radio station, KCSB, some of the strikers claimed that they will strike indefinitely until their demands are met, whereas others will strike up until the meeting (a few stopped today). Several of the strikers admitted that they do not foresee a victory, but that they see success in educating students and others about this issue. This concerns me because if I was involved in a hunger strike, I would want everyone to be on the same page, have the same goals, and a strong sense of collective identity.

If their plan is to educate, why did they not pursue a strategy that includes more from the faculty, administration, and other students? They ask for our support but did not pursue tactics that include us in building their community (i.e. teach-ins, meetings, and films). Despite a couple rallies and a class presentations, more could have been done to foster dialogue and support for these strikers. This is part of the reason why misinformation about the strike is rampant–and perhaps why I have so many questions.

After attending a recent rally at their campsite (a bunch of tents outside the administration building), I was moved by their sense of solidarity and passion for this cause. I was happy to see the faculty support an end to the strike. For me, I want an end to nuclear proliferation, I want a change in foreign policy, and I want these strikers to stay healthy. So I feel weird critiquing their tactics. And although I criticize the tactics and decisions of this group, I also understand that all organizations and social movements have problems. I believe it is useful to analyze effective strategies and tactics. We tend to idealize direct action and dismiss other forms of activism. But that does not mean one is “better” than the other. Sometimes one tactic is better suited than another, so I ask, was this the right time for a hunger strike? Could something else have been done? What does it mean if so many long-time activists are confused or upset by this action? How can the activist community become truly united around this issue? What will happen to the strikers who continue to strike after today’s meeting (if their demands are not met?)? Is it significant that most of the strikers are white women? And finally, should we be concerned that a few of the strikers are not enrolled UCSB students?

One can also argue that this group has accomplished something. More of us (including myself) learned more of the details of the UC’s connection to nuclear weapons and the new warhead that could be developed at Livermore. Along with education, this event has sparked an interesting debate on campus. Hopefully, interesting and productive dialogue can come from this. We will know more soon once we hear reports from the UC Regents meeting. I hope for the best. Despite our concerns of this strike, we can at least agree that the “conservative” student group that set up a pizza stand next to the hunger strikers is disgusting and inconsiderate, right?

Below is a video of day 3 of their fast:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLMy2sWimD4

Nudity to Sell Feminism? Huh?

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 15, 2007
in Gender
. 1 Comment

I love Belle’s latest blog entry:

Here are a couple of images of body parts: one with a certain context, one without:

feminismcollar bone

The first is the cover of Feministing blogger Jessica Valenti’s new book.

The second is a picture of Keira Knightley’s collarbone.

Yes, these images are related, and not just because they’re both cross-sections of slender female bodies.

I am more troubled by the first image because it is more than visual: it is expressive. It is an image in the service of textual speech, and it is a confusing message. But before I get into that, I’ll offer you some other people’s thoughts on this cover.

From Blackademic:

im sorry. this is wack. for a number of reasons. why not just call it a young WHITE womans guide to WHITE feminism? why the WHITE NAKED torso of a woman? of course, i wouldn’t have prefered a black body, or any other woman of color either. my question is though, why the naked body of a woman at all? is it to sell more books? there are a number of other ways to visually depict an image of “feminism” - i am not sure why a naked body, reminiscent of the glossy images of tabloid trash had to be the way to go.

why does feminism have to be so overtly sexualized? (even the title is called “Full Frontal” - wow) is it because THE PATRIARCHY, which weyou are all so trying to defeat, really, has a stake in what books are being published on feminism? you know it’s true.

as feminists, we you guys are always up in arms about how women’s bodies are portrayed, and to go and reproduce those same images is ridiculous. is this what feminism is these days? is that what white feminism is these days?

From the Feminist Review by Ama Lee:

If you’re truly looking to find out why feminism matters, you’d be better served to flip to the booklist in the back of Full Frontal Feminism and read some of the titles listed there - including Colonize This!, Listen Up: Voices from the Next Generation, To Be Real, and The Fire This Time - because cool packaging is really great, but if there’s nothing of substance inside then what you are selling is just the packagings.

And what does the floating collarbone have to do with this? Well, read this article by the NY Times:

As the rest of women’s bodies recede in spring fashions, the clavicles, or collarbones, and the upper chest between them, is rising to prominence. Toned shoppers who want to show off their self-discipline in the face of dessert are choosing dresses with a low, but not plunging neckline, a look that is transforming the area above the breasts into an unlikely new subject for women to obsess over.

Some people think of it as an erogenous zone; others think it is noteworthy only as a barometer of whether a woman is at a healthy weight or has become too skinny.

This region has been emphasized by the skinny celebrity acolytes of the stylist Rachel Zoe, including Nicole Richie and Keira Knightley. Their ubiquitous deep V-neck tops show off sometimes skeletal frames, and other actresses have taken their cue and sized down as well, to the point that the Internet teems with fashion and celebrity bloggers and message board posters carping about protruding A-list clavicles.

Why the new emphasis on a body part most women — and more men — have paid little attention to in the past? Credit a swing of the fashion pendulum, and a malaise over “Girls Gone Wild” style.

Showing off your clavicle is “the opposite of showing your thong,” said Valerie Steele, director of the Museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology in Manhattan.

Courtney E. Martin, the author of “Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters: The Frightening New Normalcy of Hating Your Body” (Free Press, 2007), said that many of the girls and women she interviewed for her book “talked about how far their collarbone stuck out” with pride, as an indicator of their skinniness.

Ms. Martin contends that a generation of young women raised after Title IX and the women’s movement pursue slender figures with the same rigor as they pursue admission to an Ivy League university.

No, these two images aren’t linked by the game of Six Degrees of Ann Althouse, although Althouse did blog about the both the clavicle article and Jessica Valenti’s breasts (starting a small blog war of sorts).

Rather, it’s the not-so-novel idea that women’s bodies will be continued to be divided and dissected into parcels for commodification and sexualization, and this is done by women themselves. And it is supposed to be feminist or a repudiation of the fetishization of the overtly sexual body parts! Oh wait, but dysmorphia is the replacement for feminism in the wake of Title IX! Now that we have rights, we can start dieting again!

This ridiculousness not at all a new idea to those familiar with feminist theory. But it’s strange to admit that it continually surprises me year after no-more-eating-disorder-year, how many different parts of the body I am invited to self-fetishize, and who is doing the inviting. And I’m kind of sick of this.

read more of Belle’s blog…

Baghdad: Mapping the Violence

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 9, 2007
in War
. 0 Comments

I just happened to stumble on this intriguing interactive map from the BBC. It maps the location of bombings and the Iraqi death toll over the past 4 years.

Day Laborer Killed

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 8, 2007
in Immigrant Rights
. 5 Comments

This press release of a day laborer killed at a protest makes me think of a movie I just watched, Farmingville. It is a POV video documenting the fight over the influx of Mexican immigrants looking for jobs in the small town of Farmingville, NY. Residents all decide it is a problem…but half turn to racism and want the immigrants out at any cost. The other half push for a day labor center to remove the “visible” problem of day labor corners. Day labor corners are dangerous for the laborers and some claim it is dangerous for the neighbors. The town debate becomes heated after two laborers are murdered in a hate crime by two people pretending to hire them to clean a basement. I highly recommend the movie.

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 6, 2007

CONTACTS:
Suzanne Foster: 310-486-8499
Jose Calderon: 909-952-1640
Veronica Federovsky: 818-515-0782.

Day Laborer Leader Killed During a Minutemen Protest in Rancho Cucamonga

WHAT: Press Conference
WHERE: Corner of Arrow Highway and Grove Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA
DATE: Monday, May 7, 2007
TIME: 11 a.m.

On Saturday, May 5, 2007, José Fernando Pedraza, a day laborer, was struck and killed by a vehicle on the corner of Arrow Highway and Grove Avenue in Rancho Cucamonga, California. At around 12:30 p.m., two vehicles collided in the intersection, causing one to veer into the day laborer corner. Several workers were hit; two sustained minor injuries. José Fernando Pedraza was airlifted to a nearby hospital but died from his injuries. Though day laborers are typically not looking for work at that time of day, Pedraza and workers were present yesterday because the Minutemen and members of Save Our State, anti-immigrant, vigilante groups, were staging a protest against them.

José Fernando Pedraza, 57, leaves behind many friends and loved ones. He was the father of five children and the grandfather of seven. In the last five years, José Fernando was a leader at the day laborer corner, mentoring young day laborers. He fought tirelessly for the creation of a day laborer center. He attended several meetings of the Rancho Cucamonga city council to advocate for a day labor center and joined in numerous marches in the region to support the legalization of immigrant workers. The day laborers have lost a brother, a friend and a leader.

We are all deeply saddened over this tragedy. Day laborers and community members will come together on Monday to express their outrage and frustration that they continue to be targeted by groups such as the Minutemen and Save Our State. As one of Fernando’s fellow day laborers and friends, Carlos Mendez, stated, ” This would never have happened if we did not have to be there to respond to the Minutemen.” He continued, “This would never have happened if the City had provided us with a safe space to stand and look for work. It should not take a death to push the City to provide us with a day laborer center.”

The accident in Rancho Cucamonga is an example of the precarious reality for day laborers across the country. Vigilante groups, whose members shout insults at workers and use intimidation tactics to discourage employers from hiring them, routinely target day laborer corners and centers. Of high concern to the workers and their organizations in Rancho Cucamonga is the fact that the frequent protests by the vigilante groups cause a chaotic environment, potentially distracting drivers and leading to accidents such as Saturday’s deadly incident.

The strongly anti-immigrant nature of Save Our State and the Minutemen protests create a
climate of violence and hostility that encourage hate crimes against day laborers and migrants in general. Last week, a newly opened day laborer center in Gaithersburg MD, was targeted by arsonists and in the fall of 2006, day laborers at a center in Laguna Beach, California were injured when two individuals drove a car through the center’s property attempting to run down workers. Day laborers and their organizations also fear an increase in violence in the aftermath of the repressive tactics that the Los Angeles Police Department used during the May Day march and rally at McArthur Park. Groups also fear an escalation of violence, hate crimes and hate incidents as federal legislators engage in the immigration debate in Washington DC in mid-May.

Day laborers and their advocates call for an end to the hostilities against day laborers in Rancho Cucamonga and throughout the country. We demand that Minutemen and Save Our State members end their demonstrations against innocent workers whose only crime is to look for an honest day of work. If at all, day laborers are the victims of injustice, they don’t cause any harm to anyone in the community. Day laborers and their organizations demand a detailed investigation of the incident. We also demand that the City of Rancho Cucamonga establishes a day laborer center for workers and employers to meet and carry out their negotiations in peace and harmony with the community.

To the vigilante groups, day laborers and their organizations send a message of peace and reconciliation. We don’t hate you but we don’t fear you either. End hatred and hostilities now.

As part of the healing process, day laborers, their organizations and allies will join together in an ecumenical service on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 11 am to mourn José Fernando Pedraza’s tragic, untimely and unnecessary death. Press is welcome at this service.

A Bank Account is being established for donations for the family of José Pedraza. The account number will be announced tomorrow during the press conference.

José Pedraza Vive!

20,000 Naked Mexicans

Published
by
Jennifer
on May 7, 2007
in Mexico
. 0 Comments

naked in the zocaloWhat a beautiful sight. I love this story reported in the LA Times and at the Mex Files. Here is the story and pics from the LA Times:

MEXICO CITY - People usually strip for love or money. But Isaac Esquivel and thousands of other Mexican men and women dropped their clothes in neat piles early Sunday and pranced naked around the main plaza of this capital just for the heck of it.

New York photographer Spencer Tunick, famous for rounding up people to pose naked in cities around the world, brought his fetching artistic gimmick here. His goal was to persuade more than 7,000 residents of this very Roman Catholic country to disrobe in front of God, one another and a media army perched on the roof of the downtown Holiday Inn. City officials estimated as many as 20,000 people might have taken part.

“At first I was really nervous,” said Esquivel, 25, who also is a photographer. “I kept thinking about what they tell you before you make a speech, you know, to imagine your audience naked.”

He didn’t have to wait long. At 6:50 a.m., the disrobing began at Tunick’s signal, and, after tossing aside their workaday identities, people began running to the center of the capital’s historic plaza, known as the Zocalo.

‘Part of human life’

naked in zocalo2Within minutes, the square was filled with pink flesh and dark hair, a chanting, shouting, gleeful party in the light of dawn, the gathering framed by the Metropolitan Cathedral, City Hall and the National Palace.

“Nudity is part of human life,” said Liliana Velasco, 30, an anthropologist. “Being naked is being in the moment, and being naked in the Zocalo gives everyone a chance to celebrate our culture.”

Not quite, maybe, what the 16th century Spaniards had in mind when they set aside the plaza for the heart of their new empire. The giant square is the scene of concerts, political rallies and parades. Hundreds of thousands of protesters have raised their fists here. Most years, the Mexican president gives the annual cry for liberty from the balcony of the National Palace to kick off Independence Day celebrations.

Esquivel said he found his own freedom Sunday. “After you take off your clothes, you see that everybody is the same,” he said. “That’s when I stopped being nervous and started to have fun.”

That didn’t last too long either. Tunick and his assistants began herding the naked volunteers for the first say-cheese moment.

“Everybody take a stone,” barked Tunick, referring to the large stone squares that form the floor of the Zocalo.

The one-person, one-stone command lent order to the crowd. Tunick asked them to pose in the Mexican salute, which is held not at the forehead but chest-high. A woman lost her nerve and ran out of the crowd. She dressed and left in a hurry.

‘Otra, otra!’

After he finished with that pose, the crowd chanted, “Otra, otra!” Another one, another one.

Tunick then asked that they lie down on the cold stones, feet facing north. Mexico City is in its warm season, but the early morning temperature was in the 60s. By 7:30 a.m., the crowd was kneeling, head down, curled up in the so-called snail pose. It looked as though they were bowing to the cathedral, Mexico’s oldest.

A few shouted for Cardinal Norberto Rivera Carrera to join them. Tunick had promised while negotiating for city permission that he would not include the cathedral in any of the photographs.

Shortly after 8 a.m., Tunick dismissed all the men - about three-quarters of the crowd - and broke the spell that for a couple of hours had united several thousand strangers in an odd intimacy.

Tunick and his helpers corralled the women into a corner of the Zocalo for one last shot while the men dressed. Most stuck around to watch. And some began to cheer, injecting a bit of wolf-whistle attitude that was absent when everybody was naked.

“Thank you for participating, but would all the men please return to the street, please!” shouted one organizer. “No photographs please. No cellphone photographs, please.”

Everybody was dressed by 9 a.m. as the street sweepers gave the Zocalo a once-over.

“What a great moment for the Mexican art scene,” Tunick said later. “The heart of Latin America is now in Mexico.”

Maybe we should be naked more often. Maybe it would solve more of the world’s problems. Or would the US government us it as an occasion to tear gas us again? Sorry, I shouldn’t say such things. We value art in our schools…that is why our children all take mandatory art and music lessons in elementary school (note the sarcasm please).