lessee - Latinos want Mexico to reannex SW US because it's Indian land ?

I'm really really confused by the messages coming out of the weekend's demonstrations over the proposed immigration legislation, and would love to get some explanations.

So I see demonstrators carrying signs that say that whites should go back to Europe and having been oppressing "us" (the demonstrators) ever since they got here in 1492. Fair enough (quite correct, of course, except for who "us" is, see below). I also see signs advocating that the SW US (the 'Aztlan' region) be returned to Mexico since the US stole it in a war in the mid-1800's. Not like no one's ever heard a claim like that before on the international political stage either.

The demographics concern me though. So if I review my history, Mexico used to be a Spanish colony until it became an independent nation. During the Spanish period, all indigenous people, the Aztecs and their descendants as well as the other Indian groups in the Mexican space, were brutally oppressed by the Spaniards, as well as by the Mexican administration, being that Mexican society was (and still is ?) harshly stratified along racial lines (and as usual racism and socioeconomic oppression exist in symbiosis, blah blah blah. Same sad story, same shit, etc.)

But so now who is the "we" in this situation ?

AFAIK, the current Mexican gov't continues to treat its Indio population like trash, and to brutally oppress them in many cases, as for example in Chiapas. So I can't imagine the Indios wrapping themselves in the Mexican flag and championing 'Mexican' domination of the gringos in El Norte. Even though they're the only ones who have a legitimate claim to membership in the original resident community which has been oppressed as described in the signage.

As for the rest of the Mexican population, expat here in the US or back at home, the claim to membership in the indigenous western hemisphere population seems to raise the specter of a schizophrenic remembrance of ancestry which is so looped as to suggest that it might be a lie. For: according to their signage the demonstrators would wish to assert both that they are native Americans, which as described most of them are not any more than any residents of the US are apart from native Americans, and yet simultaneously, they seek to advance the cause of Mexico, which is a product of the European colonialism they criticize. What gives ?

I do know that native Americans in the US do not find much common cause with the notion of easing immigration across the southern border, because they find that their cause, having always resided at the very bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, is not aided by the arrival of a large new population competing economically with them in their local environment. Quite understandable actually. So that assertions of commonality by the demonstrators would seem to be rather one-sided, to the point of suggesting falsehood.

I know that US educational standards are so low that probably these contradictions will never make it to the public arena to be discussed (DU not counting since it is a backwater of leftists and libertines residing in that great cesspool in cyberspace, the internet) but I do wonder if it is possible that people from the Mexican space are so unaware of their history that the contradictions do not give them pause and cause great confusion and consternation, among them rather than among us.

Of course, I may be missing fundamental understanding of the details of Mexican demographics and history, and would love to get my facts straight if that is so. Failing that, the suspicion is unfortunately raised by these blatant contradictions that the demonstrators do not actually mean what their signage conveys, and that they are actually just spewing bullshit with the aim of 'getting the gringos' (similar to the notion of 'getting whitey', not one of the most advanced tactics in the struggle for civil rights, and yes, it did exist in case you're suspecting that I might be a closet paranoid/racist) or attempting to turn the crank of the US liberal/conservative conflict system with the aim of creating much smoke and little light and turning that confusion to their advantage.

If anyone can offer illumination here (light, not heat) that would be great.

Use any excuse, grab any old rope and haul on it, to make your point. We should not imagine that people will always tell the truth when they have a point to drive home, especially when an emotional appeal will get everyone's balls in an uproar.

If the facts don't suit the argument, make some up, or twist them to suit your purpose--hell, they have one hell of an example to follow looking at the present administration. They made shit up, and got away with it!

The US is a nation of immigrants. Most families are so mixed up and blended nowadays, that if we all were deported, you'd have to send an arm to one country, a leg to another. And that assumes our historical motherlands would even take the likes of us...

But damn, if an argument can get the old blood boiling, it has a purpose!

Hell, for all we know, the Native Americans came across a land bridge up Alaska way...no one is suggesting they beat feet back the way they came, now?

Sometimes, it's just too late. You can carp and gripe about what generations past did, before most of our families even made their way over here, but those people are long dead.

We gotta move forward, not squawk about the past...

one arm to Denmark, one leg to Germany, one arm to Prussia (which doesn't exist anymore), one leg to England, one torso stay here in the USA cause my blood was here 2000 years ago...

:shrug: Isn't it strange how I'm only 1/10 American Indian yet I feel 75%? Maybe because I AM AN AMERICAN?!

so it sounds like the notion is that the population feels itself native and descended from Aztecs and other indigenous people more than from immigrants, and thus is legitimate in proposing to reclaim the western hemisphere for themselves, its original inhabitants.

I see two problems, not insurmountable:

One, that they need to work on gently exfoliating 500 years of corrupt colonial society, and particularly individual cultural habits, left by a succession of tinpot self-serving 'rulers' and still represented by an overstuffed local socioeconomic ruling class which has always been the source of the region's problems - the local administrators left by shrewd occupiers in all episodes of colonialism. As long as wealth stratifies an overwhelmingly poor population into those who Have, those willing to play the game in order to join them, and those fucked by both, all this is just playing into the hands of the Man, and whether he's a dumb gringo from Crawford or named Vincente Fox doesn't matter one iota, two sides of the same coin.

Two, the proposal that the indigenous residents of America envision their future as reasserting the territorial claims of an ex-colony of the imperial power which slaughtered their ancestors has an air of sorry farce. All that's missing is evidence that this all is an Illuminati conspiracy and that the Aztlan crew is just the latest in the series of their dupes. (After all, Maximilian was German and the Jesuits were prominent in the formation of Latin America out of the primordial stew of PreColumbian life.) Just because you had an empire and a culture doesn't mean that you too can't be a dupe. Instead of looking to occupy East LA (some more) it might behoove the residents of the majority of the western hemisphere's land area to come to terms with their own native corruptocracies and make their own countries better places to live; complaining that the Big Gringo in DC keeps the tinpots in place only goes so far as an excuse, and after a while you start to suspect that some few of the revolutionary population are maybe not making out so bad with the scumbags in power back home.

but there is no way in hell it will have an iota of meaning to the poor and the working underclasses.. as to the revolutionaries, well they've had a vision for a very long time, in recent years it appears it has gathered momentum - especially with every attempt to criminalize their existence, the drive for self determination as a people, as a community grows stronger, and are more unified.

I think it's time labor and all of the working class, low wage earners started to have a few pow wows together and come to meeting of the minds on what's at issue and how we are all going to survive.

not an easy proposition, especially when most gringos don't even know what the hell is the significance of the The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, yet gringos better understand something about it because that is the doctrine which is basis and the evidence which gives ligitimacy to the cause:


http://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/ghtreaty/


The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo

In November 1835, the northern part of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Tejas declared itself in revolt against Mexico's new centralist government headed by President Antonio López de Santa Anna. By February 1836, Texans declared their territory to be independent and that its border extended to the Rio Grande rather than the Rio Nueces that Mexicans recognized as the dividing line. Although the Texans proclaimed themselves citizens of the Independent Republic of Texas on April 21, 1836 following their victory over the Mexicans at the Battle of San Jacinto, Mexicans continued to consider Tejas a rebellious province that they would reconquer someday.

In December 1845, the U.S. Congress voted to annex the Texas Republic and soon sent troops led by General Zachary Taylor to the Rio Grande (regarded by Mexicans as their territory) to protect its border with Mexico. The inevitable clashes between Mexican troops and U.S. forces provided the rationale for a Congressional declaration of war on May 13, 1846.

Hostilities continued for the next two years as General Taylor led his troops through to Monterrey, and General Stephen Kearny and his men went to New Mexico, Chihuahua, and California. But it was General Winfield Scott and his army that delivered the decisive blows as they marched from Veracruz to Puebla and finally captured Mexico City itself in August 1847.

Mexican officials and Nicholas Trist, President Polk's representative, began discussions for a peace treaty that August. On February 2, 1848 the Treaty was signed in Guadalupe Hidalgo, a city north of the capital where the Mexican government had fled as U.S. troops advanced. Its provisions called for Mexico to cede 55% of its territory (present-day Arizona, California, New Mexico, and parts of Colorado, Nevada and Utah) in exchange for fifteen million dollars in compensation for war-related damage to Mexican property.

Other provisions stipulated the Texas border at the Rio Grande (Article V), protection for the property and civil rights of Mexican nationals living within the new border (Articles VIII and IX), U.S. promise to police its side of the border (Article XI), and compulsory arbitration of future disputes between the two countries (Article XXI). When the U.S. Senate ratified the treaty in March, it deleted Article X guaranteeing the protection of Mexican land grants. Following the Senate's ratification of the treaty, U.S. troops left Mexico City.

###

They want to be able work without fear of deportation. They want to be paid fair wages. They want their children to have the opportunity to advance themselves through education.

They want what you want. They want what I want. They want what every American wants.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

But they're constantly told that this is not their country. That they are second-class citizens. That they are criminals because they crossed the border.

But the truth is, they didn't cross the border.

The border crossed them.

Human rights. No more. No less.

There are 3 general steps in the application process for lawful permanent residence for skilled workers. The first two steps must be initiated by your potential employer, and the last step by you and your accompanying relatives. The application procedures may be carried out either within the US at a USCIS office, or abroad at the U.S. consulate of your country of residence.

The first step involves your employer who files for a Labor Certification on your behalf. The reason that you are required to do this is so that the US Government can confirm that there are no qualified United States citizens available and willing to take the specific job that has been offered and that the working conditions and wages offered for the position will not have an adverse effect on the United States labor market. Therefore, you will be working with both the USCIS and the Department of Labor on this application.

If the Labor Certification is approved, you will then have to prove that you are qualified for this particular visa. Your employer will then file an Immigrant Petition for the Alien Worker (Form I-140).

If the Petition is approved, you will then file a formal request for lawful permanent residency or a green card application. This process can take place from the Country of Residence at the US consulate or from within the United States.

There are several factors that could impact the time it takes for the application to be approved. These factors may include, but may not be limited to: (a)Using the correct procedures when filing each type of application; and (b) quota availability. For example quotas are set by both visa type and by country, so, the country you were born in can also impact your timing.

To get a job washing dishes or picking crops in the United States.

That's the process you go through when applying for a white collar job.

(5) Labor certification and qualifications for certain immigrants.-

(A) Labor certification.-

(i) In general.-Any alien who seeks to enter the United States for the purpose of performing skilled or unskilled labor is inadmissible, unless the Secretary of Labor has determined and certified to the Secretary of State and the Attorney General that-

(I) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified (or equally qualified in the case of an alien described in clause (ii)) and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and

(II) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed.

(ii) Certain aliens subject to special rule.-For purposes of clause (i)(I), an alien described in this clause is an alien who-

(I) is a member of the teaching profession, or

(II) has exceptional ability in the sciences or the arts.


7) Documentation requirements.-

(A) Immigrants.-

(i) In general.-Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Act, any immigrant at the time of application for admission-

(I) who is not in possession of a valid unexpired immigrant visa, reentry permit, border crossing identification card, or other valid entry document required by this Act, and a valid unexpired passport, or other suitable travel document, or document of identity and nationality if such document is required under the regulations issued by the Attorney General under section 211(a), or

(II) whose visa has been issued without compliance with the provisions of section 203, is inadmissible.


http://uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20/slb-2112?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm

And I'm an professional writer who was educated in this country.

How do you expect an unskilled Mexican who doesn't speak a word of English to follow what you're saying, which I'm assuming is cut and pasted from some government document?

This is from the government's own website.

You just cut & pasted a small snippet of a statute w/o providing any context. That code, Sec. 212, lists the classes of people who are definitely ineligible to come to the US. This includes people w/diseases, money-launderers, terrorists, and any alien who comes to the US to provide labor. Laborers cannot come to the US solely in order to work.

Under the section you cite, the Dept. of Labor may, under special circumstances, ask for an exception to that rule if there is a shortage of certain workers. Under this exception, the Labor Dept. can certify that there are not sufficient Americans who are able or qualified to do a specific job, & immigrants in this area won't affect Americans' wages. In practical terms, this exception is invoked to import highly specialized workers (often in the sciences). It has basically no relevance to the situation of unskilled illegal immigrants.

And that post talked about BOTH skilled and unskilled workers so I don't get your point.

If you weren't referring to unskilled laborers, why was that post headlined "Dishwashers & pickers?" Dishwashers & pickers can't use those Labor Certification provisions & you know that. That made the post misleading, IMO. That rule can be followed by employers of Ph.D's, or astrophysicists, yeah. But employers of housekeepers or poultry workers can't successfully file a Labor Certification. So, that provision doesn't seem very relevant to a discussion of illegal immigrants.

Then the question becomes - how can an unskilled laborer become a legal US immigrant? And the answer is very simple - he can't. There's no process or rule that can be used to obtain legal residency (barring exceptions for family or asylum-based petitions). So what rule are they supposed to follow? I think this is one thing that many Americans don't understand - there isn't a legal way for unskilled immigrants to enter the US anymore (compare that to the early 1900's Ellis Island period, when the ancestors of many Americans emigrated). In contrast to simply criminalizing illegal immigration, I think we should create some provisions that allow immigrants from poorer countries to obtain residency legally.

ETA: Responding to your edited post - I guess you're referring to the first post (#8), where you explained the process for obtaining a Form I-140 green card. If you're saying that form can be used by both skilled & unskilled workers, you're incorrect. I-140 is the visa for "Aliens of Extraordinary Ability." In order to get that green card, you need extraordinary credentials (like a Nobel Peace Prize, or an Oscar). Only very skilled professionals can receive these green cards. Unskilled workers cannot qualify for legal residency under this provision.

Overview of I-140 petition for "Aliens of Extraordinary Ability."- http://www.isso.uc.edu/forms/permanent_resident/I140_Aliens_Extraordinary_Ability.pdf

Which applies to UNSKILLED workers as well.

If the Labor Department has not issued a certification, then unskilled workers need not apply!

The certification has to state:

(I) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified (or equally qualified in the case of an alien described in clause (ii)) and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and

(II) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed.

Only a few highly-specialized professionals actually qualify for these visas. So it's sort of moot when discussing the unskilled laborers that constitute the vast majority of illegal immigrants. You don't mention the process for unskilled workers, for a very good reason - there isn't one. Unless a laborer has an immediate relative who is a US resident, he's not getting a legal visa.

You posted that in response to someone who said that these people just want to be able to work w/o fear of deportation. And you said, they can do that & become legal residents if they follow these provisions. That seemed to be the point. But now, you're saying that there's no way that illegal aliens can become legal, and that's the point. Those points seem mutually contradictory.

Making felons out of more than 10 million working people? (plus anyone who aids them!)

The answer is in offering realistic ways to make them legal citizens and I don't mean amnesty, which only perpetuates the problem.

If there were to be an armed conflict between Mexico and the US - which side would they choose?

It's not as one-sided as you make it out to be, and the border is where it is. They either want to become Americans and protest waving the American flag (not the Mexican flag) - they can't still have allegiance to Mexico and reap the benefits of this country.

Flame me if you want, but my Irish ancestors didn't come here, hang the Irish flag in front of their house and pledge allegiance to Ireland. The minute they got off the boat, they became Americans in their own mind, even if they weren't accepted wholly.

Irish cultural center and the flag is on every issue of their newsletter.

And the southern border is only where it is because the United States illegally invaded Mexico in a war of aggression.

And, the US signed a treaty -- which they have violated since it was signed.