UNDOCUMENTED, not illegal, immigrants

the largest misconception on immigration is that people who are here without documents do it as a disregard to US laws. the fact is that not only is immigration a difficult and long process, not everyone is able to immigrate "legally." thousands of people are turned away from the whole process because honestly, you won't get papers to become a resident unless you are at or above US middle class standards. the only other way is to claim to be a political refugee; seeing as how many 3rd world countries are deemed "free" countries because they allow for sweatshops and worker exploitation how many people can fit under that? look to the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act for who is allowed to come here and who isn't. it is highly hypocritical for a country to claim to be about Freedom and democracy yet turn people away from citizenship.

foreign worker programs are also cop outs as well, the message that sends is "we want your labor, but we don't want you to become citizens."

the thing about the new immigration bill is that it leaves many situations for family separation. there are families with undocumented parents whose children are legal citizens; the parents are deported and the children are left to be raised by foster homes? or a citizen who married someone who was a legal resident for a while but stopped with their paper work and didn't tell their spouse. not only is the person deported, but the citizen is deported as well for housing an "illegal" immigrant (doesn't matter if they knew or not.)

also the immigration issue has been painted as a mexican issue. yet pilipinos have their "tnt"s, there are chinese immigrants, koreans, south east asians, not to mention eastern europeans, as well as the fact that the people coming from mexico are not just mexicans but people from all over latin america. after 9-11 many filipinos who had worked in the airports for over decades in the bay area were deported because they posed a "threat" to national security, many of these workers were 40+ year old women (yeah terrorist if i ever saw one). there are also the situation of the Aganda family in 2003, as well as the Cuevas family that was deported in 2004 who were "illegal" cause they were living on expired visas yet they've been applying for residency since 1996. frankly, there's a bunch of "natural born" people we waste our citizenship on, folks that don't know jack shit about this country yet wave flags and pander on and on about being "American." i'd rather deport them and give their citizenship to all the hard working "illegal" aliens at the drop of a dime.

however, the biggest root of the problem is American/corporate Imperialism across the globe. if not for worker exploitation, the stealing of resources from other countries, etc; there would be no "3rd" world nations meaning there wouldn't be so many people from other places seeking to find opportunity in the US. there would be no "brain drains," no sex industries, no broken families with parents working overseas. people would be able to make decent livings in their own countries. the only illegal immigration are corporations and nations muscling their way into the other countries to exploit both the land and their people.

Thoughts and Qutoes from Audry Lorde's Sister Outsider

within most patriarchal societies were are socialized and taught to respect, revere, and idolize the extraordinary. in addition to that we are taught that only the actions of men are extraordinary. thus it is only the heroes and not the heroines that are honored, and in addition to we are taught the lives and experiences of our sisters and mothers are not extraordinary. for a great deal of time i did buy into this paradigm, and the fact is it was only a recent realization that i did not have any females that i reguarded as being a person i could aspire to be. so here's some words from Audre Lorde that i found extraordinary.

from "Scratching the Surface: Some Notes on Barriers to Women and Loving"

Racism: The belief in the inherent superiority of one race over all others and thereby the right to dominance.

Sexism: The belief in he inherent superiority of one sex and thereby the right to dominance.

Heterosexism: The belief in the inherent superiority of one pattern of loving and thereby its right to dominance.

Homophobioa: The fear of feelings of love for members of one's own sex and therefore the hatred of those feelings in others.

THE ABOVE FORMS of human blindness stem from the same root - an inability to recognize the notion of difference as a dynamic human force, one which is enriching rather than threatening to the defined self, when there are shared goals....

from "Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic as Power"

...
But the erotic offers a well of replenishing and provocative force to the woman who does not fear its revelation, nor succumb to the belief that sensation is enough.

The erotic has often been misnamed by men and used against women. It has been made into the confused, the trivial, the psychotic, the plasticized sensation. For this reason, we have often turned away from the exploration and consideration of the erotic as a source of power and information, confusing it with its opposite, the pornographic. But pornography is a direct denial of the power of the erotic, for it represents the suppression of true feeling. Pornography emphasizes sensation without feeling.

from "The Transformation of Silence into Language and Action"

...
And where the words of women are crying to be heard, we must each of us recognize our responsibility to seek those words out, to read them and share them and examine them in their pertinence to our lives. That we not hide behind the mockeries of separations that have been imposed upon us and which so often we accept as our own. For instance, "I can't possibly teach Black women's writing - their experience is so different from mine." Yet how many years have you spent teaching Plato and Shakespeare and Proust? Or another, "She's a white woman and what could she possibly have to say to me?" Or, "She's a lesbian what would my husband say, or my chairman?" Or again, "This woman writes of her sons and I have no children." And all the other endless ways in which we rob ourselves of ourselves and each other.

Q&A with Malcolm X after his speech "The Black Revolution" It's interesting the question he gets at the "Militant Labor Forum"

About school integration

"But a segregated school system isn't necessarily the same situation that exists ini an all-white neighborhood. A school system in an all-white neighborhood is not a segregated school system. The only time it's segregated is when it is in a community that is other than white, but at the same time is controlled by the whites. So my understanding of a segregated school system, or a segregated community, or a segregated school, is a school that's controlled by people other than those that go there.

But in an all-white neighborhood, where you have an all-white sschool, that's not a segregated school. Usually they have a high-caliber education. Anytime someone else can put on you what they want, naturally you're going to have something that's inferior. So the schools in Harlem are not controlled by the people in Harlem, they're controlled by the man downtown. And the man downtown takes all of the tax dollars and spends them elsewhere, but he keeps the facilities, the schoolteachers, and the schoolbooks, material, in Harlem at the very lowerst level. So this produces a segregated education, which doesn't do our people any good.

On the other hand, if we can get an all-black school, that we can control, staff it ourselves with the type of teachers that have our good at heart, with the type of books that have in them many of the missing ingredients that have produced the inferiority complex in our people, then we don't feel that an all-black school is necessarily a segregated school. It's only segregated when it's controlled by someone from outside. I hope I'm making my point. I just can't see where if white people can go to a white classroom and there are no Negroes present and it doesn't affect the academic diet they're receiving, then I don't see where an all-black classroom can be affected by the absense of white children. If the absence of lblack children doesn't affect white students, I don't see how the absense of whites is going to affect the blacks.

So, what the integrationists, in my opinion, are saying when they say that whites and blacks must go to school together, is that the whites are so much superior that just their presence in a black classroom balances it out. I can't go along with that."

Can Black leaders achieve their freedom without the help of white radicals?

"England became powerful because she had others to fight for her. She used the African against the Asian and the Asian against the African. France used the Senegalese. All these white powers have had some little lackeys to do their fighting for them, and America has had 22 million African-Americans to do your fighting for you.

It is we who have fought your battles for you, and have picked your cotton for you. We built this house that you're living in. It was our labor that built this house. You sat beneath the old cotton tree telling us how long to work or how hard to work, but it was our labor, our sweat and our blood that made this country what it is, and we're the only ones who haven't benefited from it. All We're saying today is, it's payday - retroactive."

An Oral History Project

Decolonization continues to be an act of confrontation with a hegemonic system of thought; it is hence a process of considerable historical and cultural liberation. As such, decolonization becomes the contestation of all dominant forms and structures, whether they be linguistic, discursive, or ideological.

-Samia Nehrez

Antonio Gramsci defines hegemony as the consolidation of power through the coercion and consent of the governed (Omi and Winant 67.) There can be no perfect a description of the imperial and colonial relationship between the United States and the Philippines than that. While formal control of the archipelago was given back to the Philippine people on July 4 of 1946, a date selected to further ingrain US dominance post-colonialism, it takes little research to provide evidence that the US still wields a considerable amount of influence in both the politics and society of the Philippines to this date, or in other words the two countries maintain a globalized or neo-imperial/colonial relationship. In his work, Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said states: “imperialism did not end, did not suddenly become ‘past,’ once decolonization had set in motion the dismantling of the classical empires” (San Juan Jr. 65.) While state sponsored terrorism and repression have contained numerous movements for independence and equality in the Philippines; media, education, and other institutions and sites of power have psychologically impacted the Philippine people creating what is described by many as the “colonial mentality,” which could also be articulated as the consent of the colonized. It goes without saying the condition of the Pilipina/o diaspora, or even the very fact there is one, is a direct result of the legacy left behind by colonialism. Not only is this relationship both racialized and based upon class, but in considering Pilipinas, it is also gendered and sexualized; creating what Patricia Hill Collins describes as a Matrix of Domination (Hill Collins.) To further analyze this relationship I had interviewed my mother about her life. Through both her responses and reactions to some of the questions, I was able to receive insight into both the effects of the hegemonic relationship between the US and the Philippines in creating a matrix which situates Pilipinas at the bottom and how this and other forms of internal oppression become translated into future generations. Needless to say, the project became not only a critical examination of the life of my mother, but of how many of the events and beliefs that faceted my life went previously unquestioned.

My mother, Nenita Manansala Macapinlac, was born Nenita Miranda Manansala June 16, 1959 in Lubao, Pampanga in the Philippines. She was raised in the town of Santa Cruz which today, like much of the province, is very rural. While being part of the lower class, her mother only attaining a second grade level education, she was able to complete her associate’s degree at a local agricultural college. As part of the benevolent assimilation program placed by the United States at the start of the 20^th century, public education was one of the main institutions immediately implemented. Through these institutions many of the peasantry became able to have access to education which was previously reserved for the elite during the Spanish colonial period. However, this education was highly westernized and created an image or, what Benedict Anderson coined, an “imagined community” of what the United States was (Anderson). On May 19, 1980, at the age of 21, she had married my father, Pablo Manalansan Macapinlac. Traditionally within Spain and her colonies, people take their mother’s maiden name as the middle name. While more considerate than other European nations, this is still a patriarchal practice as the surname of the male has dominance over the female’s surname. My mother’s marriage to my father is significant as it is the catalyst for her move from the Philippines to the United States, as he was newly enlisted into the US Navy.

Seven months pregnant with my kuya, my mother moved to Oakland, California on April 1982. This was due to the fact that my father was stationed at the Navy base in Alameda. When asked why she did not stay in the Philippines she replied with an implicit tone of common sense: “To join your dad because he was working here [in America] in the military.” For my parents, the goal had been to raise their family in the “States,” not only due to notions of the imagined community within the United States which they were raised upon, but simply because the living conditions in their former home were so poor. The very nature of the Philippines as a Third World country is explained by its history as a colony to two imperial powers. While my parent’s subsequent move away from the Philippines can be read as a form of colonial subjugation, in considering the situation of Overseas Contract Workers (OCWs) and the desire of global capitalism in destroying the nuclear family in order to have a worker purely dedicated to their specific job; her move in order to protect our family can also be read as a form of resistance. While it can be read as a form of resistance in terms of imperialism, at the same time this prescription of women as guardians of the family can also be seen as a form of submission to gender roles.

From Oakland, her family was moved to Norfolk, Virginia where my ate and I were born, and then another move to Honolulu, Hawai’i. From the time of her marriage in 1980 until 1987, my mother had dedicated her full time to the formation of her family. This corresponds to Anne McClintock’s analysis of the Cult of Domesticity which is the prescription of Westernized notions of the definition of true womanhood to women of the Third World (McClintock 34.) Without a doubt at the time, my mother had felt her place was in the private sphere of the home and that the duty of raising the family rested upon her back rather than her partner’s, or in other words a gendered division of labor. It was not until 1987 that she had decided to work at a sewing company, I can recall some of the clothing I wore as a youth as being sewn by my mother. Once again, this profession was a prescribed role for women. After our move to San Diego, another show of patriarchy as the family moves with the father, and after the birth of my younger sister; my mother would take another domestic role of babysitting other children in addition to my little sister. These other children would be from family friends who were also working class, which shows the nature of the extended Pilipina/o families. While the prescription of gender roles is fundamental to the patriarchal nature of American society, the standards of living coupled with the size of her family demanded that my mother enter the work force, which could also be described by McClintock as the reinvention of gender (McClintock 34.) In addition to working a full time job, she would also still be expected to perform such domestic tasks as preparing meals due to the fact that my father would often be away from the home at sea. While this would equate to the proverbial “second shift” performed by many working women, unlike the general stereotype her’s would be performed prior to her formal job as she worked the graveyard shifts. Other such domestic duties would be regulated to the children.

It was not until the mid 1990s that my mother would formally enter the work force. Before becoming employed in her current job she had a short stint working as a maid at the local Marriot Hotel. While not so much within California, it should be noted that the presence of Pilipinas working in hotels as maids is highly prevalent within Hawai’i, which also brings notions of gendered roles and similarities between OCWs, although my mother did not specify if that commonality had impacted her choosing that career. After around six months a family friend had referred her to where she currently works, which is Presidio Components. The use of networking is also described as a form of social capital, a more intangible capital as opposed to the more widely known forms of industrial and financial capital. When asked what she does, she had specified her job was as a “term operator, which covers the electrodes of semiconductor chips with silver and gold ink.” Essentially she stated it was an “electronics manufacturing company.” I had asked her whether the education she received was involved with her career, in which she responded that it did not. In viewing her surrounding co-workers, I had noticed that they were all primarily Pilipinas with very few Pilipinos. The majority of the workforce was composed of not only friends, but of family members as well, some which would be classified as second generation; my kuya being employed there for four years until recently. In terms of socioeconomic status, and social mobility I asked what her wages were and if there was any possibility for upward mobility in her company. She responded that she made around $10.30 an hour and that there was barely any mobility. She had also responded that she had been with the company for nearly nine years now. While much discussion of Pilipina-Americans is directed towards professionals and domestic workers, there is also a large mass that work in both textile and electronic manufacturing, which is described by Chandra Mohanty. Mohanty describes third-world women in the electronics industry as located “as mothers, wives, and supplementary workers” (Mohanty 15.) This is not only a racialized but gendered division of labor in which the “married woman” defines the job parameters. The management of the company my mother works for consists mainly of white males, with the only female being the wife of the owner, as the company is family owned. There are many factors which may contribute to the abundance of Pilipinas that work for the company: Pilipinas being a part of the model minority stereotype, the fact the company is family owned may also be a reason for them welcoming relatives and friends of workers, it can also be interpreted as a modern day “White Man’s Burden” to give needy Pilipinas work in order to help them and their families out. Ultimately, the reason why my mother does not seek to become further educated to move up the socioeconomic ladder is due to the fact that up until now three of her children were still in college, there are only two now, and that her working was critical in maintaining the financial stability of her family. This restriction is not only imposed by her gendered role as family guardian, but also by the socioeconomic level of her family.

In returning to the theory of hegemony, while power is gained by coercion it is not consolidated unless there is also consent; a feeling also shared by Machiavelli. In addition to formally controlling the government and people through physical means, colonial powers also colonized the minds of their subjects in order to consolidate control. The effects of colonization and hegemony equate to the re-engineering of illogical concepts into beliefs that are not merely ordinary, but common sense or even fundamental to our existence. As such, emigration from the home country is natural, children being raised by people other than their parents is natural, women taking jobs below their education level is natural, mothers leaving their families to work in another country for decades is natural. We as people are left to believe that our current conditions are the way that it has been, the way that it should be, and the way it will always be. In returning to Nehrez, in order to truly decolonize and enter a post-colonial era, we must contest these notions of normativity continuing to confront hegemonic systems of thought and the tangible institutions they form.

Works Cited

Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso, 1991

McClintock, Anne. “The Lay of the Land-Genealogies of Imperialism,” Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest. New York: Routledge, 1995, pp.21-74

Mohanty, Chandra T. “Women Workers and Capitalist Scripts: Ideologies of Domination, Common Interests, and the Politics of Solidarity,” Feminist Genealogies, Colonial legacies, Democratic Futures. New York: Routledge, 1997

Omi, Michael and Winant, H. Racial Formation in the United States, From the 1960s to the 1990s. New York: Routledge, 1994

Hill Collins, Patricia. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1990, pp. 221-238

San Juan, E. Jr. After Postcolonialism: Remapping Philippines-United States Confrontations. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2000

change

5/26/05

the largest problem is that we as people have been conditioned by society to believe that the way things are is natural. that the way the world is is the way that it has been, should be, and always will be. we must challenge ourselves to search for a better way, to continually question, and to continually be critical of ourselves in every aspect of our lives.

Who Controls the Past Controls the Present

The major point in discussing racial formation is how various racial projects throughout history frame modern “common sense” about the racial hierarchy of contemporary society. Indeed, one such project is that of Black Sexuality. Patricia Hill Collins reinforces this aspect of racial formation as she asserts in her work “Why Black Sexual Politics,” that “Sarah Bartmann’s past frames J-Lo’s present” (Hill Collins 27.) What she finds important to express is that the new racism of this century does not replace the prior forms of racial rule, but instead incorporates elements of past racial formations (Hill Collins 32.)

In order to fully grasp Hill Collins’ thesis it would be necessary to understand who Sarah Bartmann was and the significance that her life and subsequent dissection play in creating the sexual stereotype of Blacks. Born into a tribe of Khoi Khoi, Bartmann was later captured and enslaved in South Africa. She was then put into a contract with the brother of her master to go to Great Britain. Upon her arrival she was treated similarly to a slave, while the country had just ended the slave trade. She was paraded around as a “freak” of nature for the size of her buttocks and sexual organs. After traveling to France, Bartmann continued to be announced as an oddity; however she was also submitted as a research specimen. It was not until her death in 1815, that researchers would dissect her and conclude that her African sexual organs were not human while scientists today conclude they were.

With the subsequent dissection of Sarah not only can we see how racism intersects between the various “schools” of academia, but how there is also the creation of the stereotype of the animalistic nature of Africans in terms of their sexuality. Hill Collins chooses to highlight Bartmann in comparison to J-Lo due to society’s fascination with both of their rear ends. While it may be argued by some that there is a clear difference in their treatment, Bartmann being considered a “freak” while J-Lo is considered a sex symbol; this is precisely the point which Hill Collins is making. Bartmann’s proportions helped frame notions of the hypersexuality of Blacks which evolved allowing for J-Lo’s butt to be considered sexy in this modern context. It is this very notion of the “wild,” animalistic sexual nature of Blacks which causes Destiny’s Child and other Black models to associate with animal skin print clothing and sets in which they appear in cages, etc.

Another interesting point Hill Collins chooses to discuss is how the technological advances of mass media allow audiences to view entertainment contained and safe in their private spaces. She questions “Just who are these videos for? What are the imagined race, gender, and sexual orientations of the viewers?” (Hill Collins 31.) There is a lack of accountability in the presentation of these images, “it’s one thing if Jennifer Lopez and Beyoncé Knowles profit from their own images…it’s entirely another if adolescent girls tap into this message of female power and head off to their eighth grade classroom decked in the same “bootylilcious” apparel,” (Hill Collins 50.) She reiterates notions of hegemony stating “contemporary forms of oppression do not routinely force people to submit” (Hill Collins 50.) It is through these seemingly benign forms of entertainment that consent is manufactured allowing domination to be achieved as “we lose our ability to question and thus collude in our own subordination” (Hill Collins 50.)

3/01/05

Ethnic Notions: Illusion or Essential?

In their book Race and Critical Theories, Michael Omi and Howard Winant discuss the continued struggle of American society in coming to terms with the concept of “race.” They describe a dual temptation on the part of different groups to think of race as a mere illusion or as essence. This is echoed in the selection of “Ethnic Notions” as the title for the documentary. The combination of the word ethnicity with that of notion, or more precisely the very meaning of notion, suggests there is no concrete definition or description for race or ethnicity. This sentiment is found throughout Omi and Winant’s discussion of racial formation in the United States. Beginning by posing the deceptively simple question: What is Race? Omi and Winant move on to discuss the history of race, implying there was a beginning and possibly an end to this idiom; showing both the answer and the question itself are more complex than they initially seem. The discussion is then shifted to the usage of race in hegemony and the eventual practice of racism itself. In considering the formation of the concept of race and its necessity in developing hegemony, the portrayal of Blacks in popular media, as shown in the film, can definitely be described as not only a natural outcome, but also a necessity as well in both the developing and maintenance of that hegemony. In light of the treatment of Blacks and other marginalized people throughout history, I whole heartedly agree the relationship between these groups and politics as a whole lie in the concept of hegemony which Antonio Gramsci “understood as the conditions necessary for the achievement and consolidation of rule” (Omi and Winant 130.) He further argues consolidation of that rule constitutes a combination of coercion and consent, and it is here where the role of media and popular entertainment play their part.

While our “common sense” may tell us contrary, race as a concept is recent in nature. As W.E.B. Du Bois satrically points out in his book Darkwater, "The ancient world would have laughed at such a distinction. The Middle Age regarded skin color with mild curiosity; and even up into the eighteenth century we were ahmmering our national manikins in one, great, Universal Man." With the boom of science during the industrial revolution, essential biological notions of race appeared. Unsurprisingly, the rise of Social Darwinism comes in the wake of T.D. Rice’s minstrel act of Jim Crow. Blackface, Minstrel Shows, and their legacy would continue well on towards the middle of the 20th century, some would go as far as to argue it continues today. While there is no doubt that these forms of entertainment were negative and demeaning depictions of Blacks it is important to recognize that racism is more than just ill feelings or bad manners towards a particular group. What is far more important is to recognize how these forms of media helped to consolidate the power of the White ruling class. Through these media Whites were able to control the definition of what is Black and then to further imprint that definition with a badge of inferiority. Therefore notions of Anti-Blackness became “common sense,” it was perfectly natural that Blacks were treated the way they were. Coercion of that racialized power was no longer necessary as consent had been secured by Whites and even many Blacks as well. Through media and popular entertainment those in power are able to reach the masses and control the way they view the world, although it is also important to note that in part of that coercion and consent the hegemony must also entertain ideas contrary to their wants. Thus we find successful well to do Blacks in addition to the oversaturation of images of Blacks as criminals, drug addicts, oversexed single parents, and other negative stereotypes. However, just as it is important to realize that racism is more than simply bad manners, it is equally important to realize that the truth of stereotypes is not the issue; it is the effect that the stereotype has.

One final quote that struck me was that they felt it was crucial to “emphasize that race, class, and gender are not fixed categories” (Omi & Winant 132.) These categories are truly intertwined and constantly interact with each other on a day to day basis.

March 04, 2005


-----------

random quote not in paper

"How easy, then, by emphasis and omission to make children believe that every great soul the world ever saw was a white man's soul; that every great thought the world ever knew was a white man's thought; that every great deed the world ever did was a white man's deed; that every great dream the world ever sang was a white man's dream. In fine, that if from the world were dropped everything that could not fairly be attributed to White Folk, the world would, if anything, be even greater, truer, better than now. An if all this be a lie, is it not a lie in a great cause?"

- W.E.B. Du Bois Darkwater (1920)