Final Blog

The topic of illegal immigration has been a big issue across the United States. With the 2008 federal election campaigns, we are seeing an unprecedented focus on immigration. Some politicians believe by sounding tough on immigration, they will motivate these constituents to vote for them. Similarly, Sheriff Joe Arpaio is taking the same approach. According to the Arizona Republic article, “As an elected official, Arpaio answers ultimately to voters. And he has staked out positions that play well with the public” (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/29/20080629arpaiogascon06290.html). Critics say, “Sweeps are nothing more than his latest political stunt. The tactics Arpaio is using is easy publicity for him," said Esteban Escobedo, a Tempe attorney. "The immigrants here in Mesa are an easy target for him” (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/29/20080629arpaiogascon06290.html). Political stunt or not, we are seeing an exceptional focus on immigration in Arizona.

To fully understand the issue we must further discuss illegal immigration.

Who are the illegals and why do they come to America?

Illegal immigrants are primarily people from Mexico, Central and South America, who enter the United States illegally to enjoy a better lifestyle, make money and help support their families in the States and abroad. These illegal immigrants are fleeing oppression, chronic unemployment, and poverty. Others that are considered illegals, are people who entered the country legally but became illegal or "out of status" by virtue of overstaying their visas.

What are the demographics of Illegal Immigrants?


Unauthorized Immigrant Population: Countries of origin, 2000-2006

Countries of origin, 2006


Unauthorized Immigrant Population: States of residence in the United States, 2000-2006

States of residence, 2006




A better view of pie charts: (http://immigration.procon.org/viewresource.asp?resourceID=845)

A list of few pros and cons of illegal immigration.

Pros:

• It helps keep the economy moving by filling low-wage jobs


• It provides a better lifestyle for those who enter the country illegally


• It creates a pool of consumers for a variety of goods and services


• Farmers are able to plant and harvest less expensively


• Illegal immigrants pay sales taxes


• Illegal residents, who are property owners, also pay real estate taxes


• Millions of illegals rent properties in depressed areas where renters are hard to find


• They purchase real estate and generate commissions for agents and brokers


• Illegal immigrants contribute to mortgage loan profits


• They open bank accounts that yield interest and dividends to bankers
  

Cons:

• Difficult prosecution and justice when perpetrators flee the country


• Disparity between legal immigrants who follow the rules and those who don't


• They risk death when traveling the desert to reach the borders


• Those who successfully cross the border inspire those left behind to do the same


• Continued growth of the demand for cheap labor and low wages


• Potential negative effects on working and middle-class citizens


• Mortgage loan fraud


• Imbalance in authorized immigration quotas


• Immigrants, especially the poorer ones, consume a high amount of government resources (health care, education, welfare, etc.) without paying a corresponding high rate of taxes


• Less-skilled American citizens earn less money and have fewer job opportunities because they must compete with immigrants in the job market
  

The current problem with both sides of the social movement is the current immigration policy. After the 9/11 attacks, immigration policies have been created without terrorism policy in mind. According to article, “Suspect First: How terrorism policy is reshaping immigration policy”, immigration policy exists largely as a means of fighting terrorism. This merger of immigration and terrorism policy promotes the notion that immigrants are suspects first and welcome newcomers second, if at all” (http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/stable/3481320?seq=3&Search=yes&term=terrorism&term=illegal&term=immigration&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dillegal%2Bimmigration%2Band%2Bterrorism&item=2&ttl=806&returnArticleService=showArticle).

The pro immigration side claims they want to “Stop the genocide against immigrants” and want “Full rights for all immigrants” (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12578901/). A pro immigration activist, Isabel Garcia, of Derechos Humanos, says, "We have been encouraging them to come unlawfully for 100 years. They have followed our economic forces to build the richness of this country. So immigrants should have full rights" (http://www.kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?s=8259322).

Anti-immigration protestors, such as Patrice Habberstad says "We're fed up with our laws being ignored. We are for legal immigration. Immigration makes this country great. But when you do it illegally it's defeating our country” (http://www.kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?s=8259322).

Why is the immigration debate so complex?

The reasons are apparent contradictions of simultaneously promoting integration while insisting on separation. Ruben Navarrette explains,

• The hypocrisy. We have two signs on the U.S.-Mexican border: "Keep Out" and "Help Wanted."
• The racism. With lightning speed, the debate went from anti-illegal immigrant to anti-immigrant to anti-Mexican.
• The opportunism. Too many politicians are trying too hard to portray themselves as tough on illegal immigration.
• The simple solutions. "Build A Wall." "Deport All Illegals." A quick rule of thumb: If it fits on a bumper sticker, it's not a workable policy.
• The naiveté. People ask why Mexico won't help stop illegal immigration. Hint: Last year, Mexicans in the United States sent home $25 billion.
• The profiling. Dark skin and Spanish surnames shouldn't be proxies for undocumented status. Been to Arizona lately?
• The meanness. Nazi-produced Internet video games let players shoot illegal immigrants crossing the border. Fun stuff.
• The amnesia. Americans think grandpa was welcomed with open arms and that he plunged into the melting pot. Whatever.
• The buck-passing. Americans love to blame Mexico for their choices, yelling across the border: "Stop us before we hire again."
• The double standard. The same folks who have zero tolerance for illegal immigrants easily tolerate those who hire them.
(http://quiz.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/28/navarrette/index.html)

A brief history of contradiction…

The circulation of migrants has been driven by the complex set of social and economic forces. In the era of the Enganche, which was used toward Mexican peasants to recruit for work in the U.S, were mislead of believing that wages would be higher, conditions would be good and interest rates would be reasonable. Then the Bracero program was formed, which consisted of temporary importation of Mexican farmworkers, who became known as braceros, were imported to fix the labor shortage in agricultural. In the 1950’s, mobilized citizenry uproar for federal authorities to do something and to control the border. The INS responded and launched a well-published “Operation Wetback.” This managed to satisfy all sides, putting the INS simultaneously in good stead with growers, the public, nativists, and members of Congress (Massey & et al., 37). Then in 1965, congress passed amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act, extirpating overt racism from U.S. immigration policy. There are consistent “back and forth” policy reforms and actions on immigration and still today they continue to surface.

What position do I take and why?
At the beginning of this semester, I chose the pro-immigration side. I thought it was a great idea to research the anti-immigration movement to see if it would change my beliefs. What I come to realize is that I am still pro-immigration because the simple fact that this country is derived by immigrants. My parents are immigrants from Mexico and came into this country to better their quality of life. In order to get rid of the immigration issue we need to find a solution that both sides can agree with. This will be difficult to achieve.

Such proposals from a blogger named Logtar believes that 1) Send corporate America to rehab so they can get over the need for cheap labor. Not just from illegals, but also outsourcing to other countries. How? Make fines so steep that the cheap labor would never offset them. The current law conveniently allows employers to look the other way and say that they're not trained to verify the authenticity of documents. That means that employers who have been exploiting illegals for years would have to change their ways, become strict in hiring only people of legal status and finally start paying decent wages. 2) Introduce legislation streamlining naturalization for the people who are already in the country. Give a deadline for everyone to register as a guest worker and give them a Social Security Card so they can start paying taxes and 3) deny all government services to anyone who is not in the country legally(http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/05/02/131233.php).

After reading many people’s beliefs on the immigration issue, the most prominent belief is that we won't stop illegal immigration as long as it's still relatively easy to enter the country illegally and illegal immigrants can get jobs, free education, health care and the freedoms that are typically reserved to legal residents and U.S. citizens. But are we denying people (illegal or not) their basic human rights by doing so? I believe our current immigration policies are complex and we should not deny anyone to migrate into the United States (in my opinion) that are not criminals and terrorists. Those that are seeking to live a better life, have no criminal record, and are fleeing political repression, armed conflict, and economic crisis should not be denied to come to America. What I find interesting is like Obama, I believe we need to do more to promote economic development in Mexico. This will cause a decrease of illegal immigration (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/immigration/). Long term economic growth within Mexico will soon eliminate the incentives for international movement and allow that nation to move quickly over the migration hump to become a full partner in the global market economy.



Book Source: Massey & et al. (2002). Beyond Smoke and Mirrors. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Opinion Assignment #4

I agree with Naomi Klein’s assessment of activism today. The article, “Bon-ization of Activism,” describes this generation that is more likely to buy a wristband and ticket to Live Earth than hit the streets in protest.

The internet is a new form of protesting. The article mentions how on-line protests and blogging has taken the heat of direct action. This form of protest takes away from followers to get out of their homes and join street demonstrators; it is safer and eliminates direct contact with other people.

The event of attending concerts to raise money for the cause, in this case to end poverty, to me it’s a way of how people can directly incorporate to the cause. Klein believes, “I think people go to concerts because its fun but I don't get a sense from anyone I talk to that it's effective politically." I agree and disagree with Klein about this. Yes, many people will go because a popular celebrity (that they happened to like) is singing in the concert. But, concerts are used as tactics to attract people (possibly to recruit) in to joining and raise money for the cause. Concerts cost money and this money is contributing to the anti-poverty campaign. Klein explains, “It was the stadium rock model of protest -- there's celebrities and there's spectators waving their bracelets. It's less dangerous and less powerful (than grass roots street demonstrations).”

I believe that in certain movements it’s appropriate to have certain kind of protests which some belong on the streets and others on the internet and/or both. In this case, the Bono-ization does not have the government involved and in order to recruit and have people engage into the anti-poverty protest is to actively promote through television commercials, internet websites, and attend concerts. I don’t see this social movement actively out protesting on the streets. I believe the Bono-ization campaign is not a form of protest, but it brings a solution to the problem by asking people to donate money. This campaign will not end poverty, which claims it will, but it will certainly help a lot of people that are fighting poverty.

In my opinion, the reason that people of this generation are less likely to be out in the streets protesting is that there are many social movements that many people believe in. This class gives a good example of how there are many social movements going on today and people are less afraid to talk about them. That’s why many actively join and talk about their issues on the internet. I believe, it’s easier to have people come together and blog on the internet about a social issue, than try to gather people together in a location to protest an issue.

I don’t think there is enough evidence that today’s activism is less effective. The message is still clear and gaining attention. There are still media coverage of campaigns and other social issues that are televised. The use of the World Wide Web is a great tool that many social movements use to contact others to discuss these issues. I do agree that activism today is less dangerous because it gets out of harms way. We are able to speak our minds on the internet, such as use of profanity and hateful language that will not cause us physical harm to ourselves or others.

Technology is the major factor in which why activism by young people today is different from that of the Freedom Riders and/or anti-Vietnam protests. The use of the internet by computers and cell phones created a new way of protest. It gives us a new way to connect with other people in the country and everywhere around the world. The ability to connect with others anywhere around the world is potentially powerful. Video clips that are used in class are all from youtube (the internet). Media coverage is a forced view of what is to be seen. For example, the video clip on WTO anti-protest showed how the media wanted to portray these protestors as violent individuals, but in fact they were not violent. The internet allows the individual to watch whatever we please. The clip on youtube of the WTO anti-protest showed us in fact what really happened during these protests. Media coverage as they described is biased and showed the view in which major corporations (that partially own the televised networks) wanted to show.

Text-Based Assignment #4

Todd Gitlin writes about the media’s involvement in covering student social movements such as the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) which symbolized the New Left. The SDS marshaled anti-war, pro-civil rights and free speech concerns on campuses, and brought together liberals and more revolutionary leftists. In the article, Gitlin emphasized the role of the media in the amplification of the SDS social movement. Gitlin states, “The observer changed the position of the observed” (G& J, 301). Gitlin refers to the media as the “observer” and while the changing view of the “observed,” which is referred to the audience, indicates the media’s interpretation of social events can greatly influence the public’s perception of the event that is covered.

In the case of the student antiwar protest of 1965, the media played a vital role in this transformation and helped to refine and focus the movement across the nation. Gitlin describes, “The New Left proceeds into national reform politics from its narrow social base, the movement hope to end the war only by mobilizing wider constituencies. Therefore, attempting to affect government policy in a hurry, it was forced to rely upon the mass media to broadcast the simple fact that opposition existed” (G&J, 310).

I believe the media has affected many social movements that we have read and learned about this semester. The media coverage highly affected the civil rights movement by its presence. The civil rights movement started out in local churches, sit-ins, etc. that went fairly unnoticed. As time progressed with boycotts and marches, the media coverage help attract new members and help the movement grow substantially. In this case, the media had a positive affect once MLK gained national attention with his non-violent tactics. The goals of the movement were portrayed accurately and forced change on desegregation of public facilities and business, voting rights, etc. and also help emerge new forms of protest that demanded structural change such as the labor movement and sexual liberation groups.

The media has a great affect on the current immigration issue. For those that don’t live in the U.S.-Mexico border or don’t live in the vicinity, possibly don’t have a clue of what’s actually going on. We rely on the media to educate us about these current social issues. According to the article by the national society for Hispanic professionals, “Pro-immigration demonstrators (of April 2006) are a reminiscent of the civil rights protests and anti-war demonstrations of the 1960s and 1970s, the coast-to-coast rallies displayed what organizers said was emerging social and political forces as immigrants find their voice” (http://www.nshp.org/?q=node/1610). The article mentions that the Organizers of the Washington rally estimated turnout at nearly a half-million. These rallies were protest of a House-passed bill that would make illegal immigration a felony and could mean jail sentences for anyone offering to help to illegal immigrants. After the protest, sponsors of the house bill say the legislation has been misinterpreted and have promised to agree that illegal immigration would be a misdemeanor. The media coverage helped gain momentum and during the week many other cities had their own demonstrations on pro-immigration.

A video clip by Fox 6 (http://www.fox6.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoID=348621), San Diego, CA gives the interpretation of two different perspectives of a deported illegal immigrant (an activist), 1) she is the “Rosa Parks” of the immigration movement and 2) some believe she is an illegal immigrant that had a deportation long overdue. FOX 6 gives the audience both views of the social issue dealing with immigration law. The deported woman was forced to choose to leave or take her U.S. born child with her to Mexico. In this case, the media allows the viewer to decide what is right or wrong about this particular case. This is an example of how the U.S. immigration laws are so complex.

Assignment #3 (Opinion)

Radicals focus on criticizing dominant values. According to Bernstein, “Radicalization in the movement can stem as much from reaction to movement leaders as from reactions to the political context” (G&J, 240). This means identity deployment in the political realm will depend on the structure of relations among movement organizations, the degree of political access and the type of opposition. There are “radical” tactics and practices discussed in this week’s reading.

Clothesline project is rape-awareness event that use t-shirts to name alleged rapists. The act of having names on t-shirts seems “radical.” According to Glenn Sacks, “A significant percentage of allegations of sexual assault are false”. Some of these t-shirts were naming individuals that were wrongly accused of being rapists. The power of naming is a “radical” tactic that I don’t believe is acceptable. There have been certain situations in which people have gone to jail and had their reputations ruined for false accusations from allegedly rape victims. I believe there are many other tactics this movement could use. They can write nicknames of victims and give their ages, but not the rapists, because we don’t know if most of these cases are legitimate. Like Glenn Sacks put it, “It could defame and harm innocent men.”

The sidewalk picketing by the pro-life movement, I believe is very effective. This is more of “in your face action,” but to some may be “radical”. The fact these protestors are standing and waiting for people entering to the abortion clinics, and just trying to change their minds by showing pictures of babies being aborted is to drastic. I feel those that choose to go to the clinics feel pressured by the protestors to leave and think about it before doing the procedure. These are the protestor’s motives to “save a life” and to stop them from entering the abortion clinic. I believe its “radical” but effective.

Act up is an organization that started in 1987; it was based on frustration that lacked progress from other gay/lesbians movements that were not doing anything about the Aids issue. Maxine Wolfe describes her frustration about the whole aids situation and how she didn’t know what to tell a gay man about aids. According to the Article, “Act up was the people who did the civil disobedience training and they were the marshals.” They wanted to turn anger, fear, and grief into action. The “radical” protest was that they went to Shea Stadium and had banners up during the Mets game. This seemed radical because the baseball game is seen as a family friendly event. I believe the location was inappropriate, but again it was effective because it was seen not only by everyone in the stadium it was also seen by many others on television.

I do believe there are circumstances under which “radical” or even anarchic protest might be a valid option for a social movement to undertake. During the civil rights movement, activists associated with direct action with sit-in tactics. The sit-ins were the early efforts to mobilize for non-violent protests (G&J, 229). 1960 sit-ins became a mass movement and tactical innovation, but it did not bring a lot of attention. The more aggressive and “radical” protest from Malcolm X mandate “by any means necessary” was an effective approach. This gained more attention by the media and just added fuel to the flame. It sparked more emotions to the civil rights movement. Malcolm X used more of “in your face” tactics just like other movements that we read in this weeks readings. I believe that each movement should start out with an organized non-violent protest to gain respect by others and really try to express what the issue is and what needs to be done. Radical approaches that use “in your face” tactics can be successful and could be used after nothing has worked for the movement. I do have to disagree with using violence as a tactic. The only reason to use violence is to protect yourself from bodily harm, not to use it as a protest. For example, the anti-WTO protest that took place in Seattle, Washington was a non-violent protest that turned into violence because a few individuals broke glass windows at a Starbucks, which gave reason for authorities to use physical force and other forms of violence to gain “social order” on the streets of Washington.

Assignment #3 (Text)

Emotions permeate all social life including social movement. Without emotions, there would be no social action at all. According to Jasper, “As an integral part of all social action, affective and reactive emotions enter into protest activities at every stage” (G&J, 157).

The primary emotions that encourage anti-immigration members are frustration, anger, dislike and disappointment. These emotions are felt through the protestors because of the current laws we have with immigration. These emotions are related to tactics being deployed by the organization because they seek to enforce current policies. Some organizations such as the Minutemen project want there members to be at the border line and affectively help catch illegal immigrants when crossing the border. On their website they discuss that civil protest, demonstration, and political lobbying are used to achieve their goal. Chris Simcox, co-founder and chairman seeks to influence policy and legislation to secure the borders. Their current focus is on “Electing Borders First, Borders Only, Borders Now, No Amnesty representatives to Congress” (http://www.mcdcpac.com/).

The “face” of the anti-immigration puts forth to its members is not different from that presented to members or potential recruits. The goals of different organizations that are anti-immigration state their goals are all the same, they want to enforce current immigration laws. They want more border control and encourage concerned citizens to join their efforts to secure America's borders.




Identity deployment is a way to contest stigmatized social identities for the purposes of institutional change (G&J, 238). The emotions and tactics that currently are sanctioned in the anti-immigration movement are using identity deployment to simply educate legislators or the public of the growing problem of illegal immigration. Pro-immigration movements do the same; they’ve had successful rallies in the U.S. and very effective tactics such as utilizing posters, songs/chants, to get their point across. This is similar to the rally that took place in Seattle, Washington in 1999, that included 75,000 people to protest against the World Trade Organization. They used many tactics to display their cause. However, the anti or pro immigration movements have not come to violent situations such as the Seattle, Washington protest where they had to be gassed and OC sprayed.

Text-Based Assignment #2

Frames allow organizers and potential participants to achieve a common definition of a social problem and a common prescription for solving it (G&J, 52). In order for a movement to successfully attract people to join and remain committed the movements issues be presented or “framed” so that they fit with the beliefs, feelings, and desires of potential recruits (G&J, 52). According to Goodwin and Jasper, “Such frames can be appealing stories, powerful cluster of symbols, slogans, catch words, or attributions of blame for social problems” (G&J, 52).

Collective identity as explained by Goodwin and Jasper, “Is another concept used to get at the mental worlds of participants that might help explain participation: in order to devote time and efforts to protest, people must usually feel part of a larger group they think they can help” (G&J, 52). The sense of belonging to a collective identity group will be so strong that it will overcome other aspects of the person's personal identity.

The anti-immigration movement claims to have one collective identity, which is the “Untied States Citizen”. The United States Citizen includes people of different ages, races, and class. For example, The AIC (Americans for Immigration Control) claim to have “more than a quarter of a million members - citizens of all races, creeds, and colors” (http://www.immigrationcontrol.com).This social movement used many frames to help understand and organize their movement. They use these frames to express their beliefs and offer ways of seeing social problems that resonate with the views and experiences of potential recruits. The AIC use slogans as “Take Action” and use presidents quotes to contribute to their protests such as “Our present immigration laws are unsatisfactory…all persons should be excluded who are below a certain level of economic fitness…" —Theodore Roosevelt. Operation Generation is a minuteman project seeks American patriots of all colors, that specifically targets people of ages 18 to 39 years old. They use catch words such as,” If you are tired of pressing “1” for English, then do something about it” (http://www.myspace.com/operation generation). Many anti-immigration protestors use attributions of blame for social problems such as immigrants stealing jobs from teens and use free social services.

The framing of the pro-life and the environmental movement use similar ways to transmit their ideas through marketing and resonating. Beliefs about abortion were seen “framed” as religious beliefs. The anti-abortion and pro-abortion sides renamed themselves as pro-life and pro-choice as the pro-life movement sought to position itself to reach out to people who did not necessarily share their religious understandings of the issue, and the pro-choice movement defensively repositioned itself to emphasize its defense of contraception and personal responsibility. The environmental movement use collective action frames to communicate their vision of the world. There framing is based on protecting wildlife, preserving the countryside, and our national heritage of buildings (Cotgrove & Duff, 72). They give a higher priority to the protection of the environment. The pro-life seeks protection to life. The anti-immigration movement seeks protection against illegal’s and terrorists.

The anti-immigration movement does not have a particular iconic face. However, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the nation's oldest and most influential immigration restriction group, was formed by John Tanton in 1979.
Those who are against the anti-immigration movement believe that those that lead this movement are white supremacist and racist people, which includes John Tanton.

The anti-immigration movement have strategies for recruiting people because currently anti-immigration activists are predominately white and are considered white supremacist and racist. According to Duke Falconer, “Minuteman leader Jim Gilchrist intentionally chose a black Los Angeles neighborhood in hopes of attracting more diversity to his cause” (http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070205_immigration_p1.html). Jim Gilchrist, the president and founder of the Minuteman Project completed a tour of several states where Congressional races were very close. Many candidates believe that Gilchrist endorsement will give them the edge to win their contested races. While on tour Gilchrist spoke on dozens of radio and television shows about the recent amnesty bill and the dangerous direction the U.S. Senate is taking. Gilchrist was featured on WOR radio station and was an honored guest on Fox and Friends television show. This is one leader of this social movement that used television and radio to recruit members to the Minutemen Project.

The strategies that anti-immigration leaders use to retain their members is by utilizing the internet. Leaders use the internet websites to promote protests and communicate by e-mail and radio archives. The use of video clips, “action alerts,” newsletters, journals, etc. and the constant updating of information on the website, keep members informed and committed.

The persons that have been primarily responsible for framing the anti-immigration movement have been upper middle class, middle-aged white males. For example, “John Tanton, founder of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman Project, and Palmer Stacey as the founder for Americans for Immigration Control (AIC).

Persons that might join the anti-immigration movement would be typically similar to the leaders of this movement. The salient characteristics of the anti-immigration members are typically white, male, middle-class to upper middle-class, Christian, and republican. Such member as Tom Tancredo a Republican from Colorado.

The intersectionalities that the anti-immigration movement may present is the race differences between members. The race differences may have challenges posed by their intersectionalities because this movement is directed against brown skinned people (Mexicans). Although, there is a Hispanic anti-illegal immigration group called “You don’t speak for me” (http://dontspeakforme.org/news.html), there might be tensions between the Hispanic and non-Hispanic anti-immigration groups. According to the Article Anti-Immigration Groups and the Masks of False Diversity, “Mark Potok, who has tracked such groups for the Southern Poverty Law Center, these front organizations have become more common "because the (immigration control) movement is overwhelmingly white, there's a great desire to throw off the accusations of racism, and the easier way to do that is to have groups that are not white" (http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070205_immigration_p1.html).

Leaders of the anti-immigration movement want to portray their members as United States citizens of all different races. The reason for this is so they can diminish the beliefs of them being racist. According to the article Anti - Immigration Groups and the Masks of False Diversity, “The Vdare is a group founded by Vietnamese-Americans who felt that the current immigration laws favored Latinos and, more importantly, that any change that allowed for legalization of current undocumented immigrants further discriminates against Asians in general and Vietnamese in particular. With some other recently formed ethnically-oriented anti-immigration groups, the driving force behind the group is not in fact a Vietnamese-American, but rather a local Caucasian businessman” (http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070205_immigration_p1.html). Obviously, minority groups typically Mexicans are excluded from this group.

According to Duke Falconer, “Col. Al Rodriguez, the founder of the group, and the other members of the group forgot to mention as they made their rounds of media appearances including those on FOX and Lou Dobbs. This group of concerned citizens of Latino descent did not spring solely from minds of its participants, it was midwifed in its birth by the nation's preeminent anti-immigration cabal; the Tanton organization” (http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070205_immigration_p1.html). Falconer later describes how on the website on Col. Rodriguez's interviews with cable news there was no mention made about the Tanton organization's association with You Don't Speak For Me. Oddly, however, the contact information given on the press page of the website lists Ira Mehlman and Susan Wysoki as the primary contacts for the group (http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070205_immigration_p1.html).

It would be difficult to allow Hispanics to this particular anti-immigration group because this movement deals with issues in the U.S.-Mexico border. Many leaders such as Gilchrist have claimed that he refuses to work with white supremacists, but the SPLC report questioned his sincerity. The report interviewed a former volunteer in Gilchrist's campaign who said that "they were basically allowing skinheads and white nationalists to work the phone banks and do IT and distribute National Alliance fliers targeting non-whites”(http://www.splcenter.org/center/splcreport/article.jsp?aid=150). The only way to re-frame this social movement to be more inclusive is to change many of the members racist beliefs and to promote more diversity, without a doubt that would be extremely hard to do.

Opinion Assignment #2

The Crenshaw article on intersectionality explains, “Minority women suffer from the effects of multiple subordination, coupled with institutional expectations based on inappropriate nonintersectional contexts, shapes and ultimately limits the opportunities for meaningful intervention on their behalf their own terms“ (Crenshaw, 5). The article further explains how women of color experience racism in ways not always the same as those experienced by men of color and sexism in ways not always parallel to experiences of white women (Crenshaw, 5). A short speech by Sojurner Truth questions the movement of fighting for women’s rights. She is furious because she is being overlooked because of her race. The article by Neil J. Young explained how the women of the Mormon Church helped defeat the equal rights amendment because these women seized the opportunity of a political engagement to serve their church, to secure their eternal fate, and to expand their own power within Mormonism by working to defeat the movement for equality for all women in the United States (Young, 4). These women and their supporters had similar characteristics such as being Mormon, middle-aged females, and had families of their own. The poem from Castillo, gave a message of how women were portrayed and maybe some (other parts of the world) may still believe it.

Considering this weeks readings, it will be difficult to choose an ideal figurehead for the women’s rights movement from 2008 and beyond. I find that it would be quite difficult to find a “ideal” figure for a women’s movement because members want to relate to their leaders that share similar experiences. For example, shared experiences and shared similar beliefs such as activists against the ERA. If I had to choose, I would say my ideal figure for a women’s movement from 2008 and beyond would be a person of color, middle-aged, educated, Christian religion but not be a strong follower, and be part of the green party.

The ideal figure would have to be a woman of color because they deal with more oppressions such as sexism, racism, and some cases classism. She would have to be educated in order to intellectually convey her message and be in her mid 30s to late 40s. I find this important because Claudette Colvin was considered as a highly emotional 15-year-old 11th grader (Hendrickson, 1). However, Rosa Parks was more of small, modest, ascetic-looking, 42-year-old. According to the article, “It’s both that she is known to be a committed civic activist and that she’s known to be a ‘lady’ ... She has a gravitas that encompasses a clear sense of quiet, spiritual strength” (Hendrickson, 10). The ideal iconic figure will be educated to gain respect from fellow supporters and her faith would not be an issue because her beliefs should not be based on what her religion tells her what to believe in. Also, she would be affiliated with the green party because they are similar to my beliefs (and I would have to relate to her).


The benefits of having a iconic figure for the social movement is so that the potential role model can lead the cause. Benefits may include the other people that may agree or disagree with the movement, may remember that iconic figure as what they represent and what movement they belong to. Other benefits may include that this iconic figure will be in charge of talking to the media, while other members of the movement can focus on marketing their cause. However, some potential pitfalls may occur because that one person that represents the movement may be under scrutiny. The media may scrutinize the iconic figure by enclosing discreet information about their personal lives or family background or whatever they can find negative about the person. The issues of the social movement may not be discussed because of these potential distractions that may occur.

The civil rights movement might have developed differently if Claudette Colvin had been chosen spearhead the Montgomery Bus Boycott instead of Rosa Parks because of their different backgrounds as well as there age differences. Rosa Parks was considered respectable by her peers in Montgomery. She had more experience in life than that of Claudette Colvin. Colvin came from a poor family and she became pregnant after the arrest, but she was still seen as not the right role model. Despite these differences, I believe there would have been a similar outcome. Unfortunately, aspects of Colvin’s life were deemed more important than her brave act.