URGENT ACTION NEEDED TO STOP DRAMATIC EXPANSION

OF DETENTION AND DEPORTATION

We just learned that the House Judiciary Committee will review and debate the “SAFE Act,” introduced by Rep. Gowdy (R-SC), on Tuesday June 18th.

If enacted, the SAFE Act will dramatically increase detentions and deportations and create an environment of rampant racial profiling and unconstitutional detentions without fixing the immigration system’s problems. If the SAFE Act passes, it would also be disastrous for the bipartisan efforts to win just immigration reform. Please see this analysis from DWN members National Immigrant Law Center and Immigrant Justice Network.

We need YOU to take action TODAY.

1. Contact House leaders TODAY and tell them not to bring the “SAFE Act” up for a vote.

Call 1-888-787-9658 for the Congress Switchboard. Ask for Representatives Goodlatte (HJC Chair R-VA), Conyers (HJC Ranking Member (D-MI), and Boehner (House Speaker, R-OH).

Script: My name is _____ calling from ­­­­­_____. The SAFE Act represents the views of the nativist, anti-immigrant extremist and is out of step with the views of the vast majority of Americans. The SAFE Act’s single-minded focus on immigration enforcement would dramatically increase detentions and deportations, and create an environment of rampant racial profiling and unconstitutional detentions without fixing the immigration system’s problems. I urge you to invest in your political future by opposing the SAFE Act, H.R.4437, and blocking it from coming up for a vote.

2. Call your Representative TODAY and urge them to vote NO on the “SAFE Act.”

Find out if your representative is on the House Judiciary Committee. Call 1-888-891-3271 for the Congress Switchboard.

Script: My name is _____ calling from ­­­­­_____. The SAFE Act is out of step with the country, and represents the views of the nativist, anti-immigrant extremists. As a constituent, I urge you to invest in your political future by voting NO on the SAFE Act, H.R. 4437.

The Justice Committee, a grassroots organization that has been working with families of NYC police brutality and racial violence victims, including the Graham family in a statement said:

“Although an outrage, Judge Steven L. Barrett’s decision to drop the manslaughter charges against Haste is not surprising. The District Attorney’s Office’s sloppy and inadequate handling of the case is also a story with which families who have lost loved ones to the NYPD are far too familiar. It is important for New Yorkers to understand that there is an inherent conflict of interest when the DA’s office prosecutes NYPD officers. This conflict is rooted in their daily reliance on one another. They are on the same side and part of the same system.”

This is why the JC and other organizations and individuals have demanded for some time a special Independent Prosecutor for all cases of police killing.

This isn’t the first time that an indictment against a police officer in the Bronx has been thrown out on a technicality, highlighting the close nature of the DA’s office and the NYPD. In March 1995, a Bronx grand jury indicted Francis X. Livoti on charges of manslaughter in the second degree. for the chokehold that killed Anthony Baez. Homicide charges were thrown out after an indictment with an incorrect charge was noted. In December 1995, Livoti was reindicted for criminally negligent homicide. But what happened between March and December wasn’t the Bronx District Attorney’s Office of Robert Johnson checking itself and making sure justice was served for the community. It was through the efforts of community activists including the mother of slain 29 year old Baez and other mothers whose sons were killed by police that a second indictment was obtained.

In October of 1995, Iris Baez, who usually walked around with her Bible and opened and closed vigils in memory of her son with prayers, risked arrest by sitting in Robert Johnson’s office, demanding he would reindict Livoti, who had a series of complaints against filed against him via the Civilian Complaint Review Board. Baez was joined by Margarita Rosario, mother and aunt of Bronx police brutality victims, Anthony Rosario and Hilton Vega, who were shot in the back while face down on the floor  by police officers, Patrick Brosnan And James Crowe,  who had once served as then Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s personal bodyguards.

Officers refused to arrest Baez and Rosario that day but activists like to credit their actions as applying critical pressure to get a second indictment of Livoti who ended up going to jail for violating the civil rights of Anthony Baez.

It’s not clear what the Graham family will do next. They have options including asking for federal intervention, seeking civil rights violations charges, and or a civil lawsuit against Officer Haste and the New York Police Department. They may also attempt to pressure and shame Robert Johnson’s office into getting another indictment. But none of those options will bring back the son they lost nor will they change the culture of policing in New York City and the entire United States that looks at people of color as perpetually criminal and deserving of less than human respect.

All kidding aside, I’m going to try and post more regularly, sparked into (re)action by some of the voices claiming to be forging the future. This post is not about that. At least not directly.

While for many the future rests in the growth of huge online entities like Google and Facebook, living in the shadows of Silicon Valley are people whose lives exemplify the growing gap between rich and poor.

The clip below from Bill Moyers shares some individual stories painting what that widening gap looks like.

One of the things I was thinking about as I watched the clip is how the debate around immigration reform and who should be deemed the “worthy” ones to get a chance to “ganar la verde”, is how that sort of framework does more to increase that chasm between the affluent and the poor and working class. If visas and legal work permits end up limited to those few with certain technological skills, what happens to everyone else? Are they left to enter the US how ever they need to in order to eke out an existence? Have we really left people any other choice with free trade agreements that push down wages and rights in favor of profits?

Also, watching the clip and thinking about the statistics and images presented I had to stop and think about how much more that loss of personal income was felt by women of color, who experience much greater levels of income disparity. The roaring twenties, the post World War II boom, and today’s so-called economic recovery have not been felt in people of color communities, who bear the brunt of cuts in the social “safety net” i.e. health care, food programs, public education.

Also when you watch below catch how one of those big silicon valley companies avoided paying billions in taxes bu taking advantage of the colonial status of Puerto Rico.

All of these things really are interconnected. The sources of inequality cannot be countered unless we recognize how they work together.

Based on “real events” is the first thing we notice and see in the film Snitch. What “real events” they are focusing on is racially white youth being arrested, charged, and tried for drug trafficking with the intent to sell/distribute. Now, this is not often a film plot I choose to want to see, but like many of my friends, there’s Dwayne Johnson. Isn’t that enough? Let me tell you if it is…

Dwayne Johnson as John Matthews, a self-made wealthy man who owns a fleet of trucks in the midwest. His son, Jason Collins (Rafi Gavron) with ex partner Sylvie Collins (Melina Kanakaredes),  is a senior in high school who accepts a package that a “friend” sends to him via the mail and that package holds large amounts of narcotics in addition to DEA tracking devices. It was a set up.

What I find hard to believe from this starting point is: How does a big Black Samoan partner with a Mediterranean woman and have a racially white identified manchild? There’s just too much magical realism asked of me in that casting decision. I can’t suspend my belief that much to believe their child only identifies as racially white, but then again Jason does act like a self-entitled young white man (is it really an act?).

What continues is our viewing of John attempting to help his son get out of jail. The options John is presented with: help the DEA find more drug dealers and suppliers. John agrees to help the DEA (especially Agent Cooper performed by Barry Pepper who is costumed in all the working-class glory one can imagine) and John uses his corporate/wealthy connections to get an appointment with the District Attorney Joanne Keeghan (Susan Sarandon). DEA Agent Cooper agrees to work with John and DA Keeghan, and this is when the film really gets started.

What we learn is that the DEA love Dodge Challenger’s (that’s really all they are driving, and this may be wrong as it could be a Charger, but I can’t tell the difference so feel free to gently correct me in the comments section). We also learn that John makes it a point to employ ex-convicts, whom he uses to his advantage to get connected to drug suppliers. His contact is Daniel (Jon Bernthal of The Walking Dead fame). What we don’t learn and what I leave confused with, is Daniel Latino? From the character’s surname, I’m going to assume he may not be. I struggled with understanding if this “shot caller” who has a Latina partner and a Latino child is also Latino. He speaks Spanish, threatens, and receives respect from local Latinos we are lead to believe are gang affiliated or involved. Do racially white men get this treatment in people of Color neighborhoods or am I to believe they do for this film?

Surprises in the film include Benjamin Bratt as Mexican cartel leader Juan Carlos “El Topo” Pintera and Michael K. Williams as drug supplier Malik. These surprises made me happy, but it also reminded me that Michael K Williams is continuously tight-cast as a drug dealer and violent Black man (see The Wire for reference). I literally cheered when I saw both of them on the screen.

Then my heart sank. Benjamin Bratt is forced to speak with a fake “Mexican” accent (see the trailer above). And then he was forced to wear some really ugly sunglasses at the same time he speaks with his fake “Mexican” accent. My heart also sank when the film was ending and I realized Dwayne Johnson was clothed the entire time! Talk about a disappointment! That would have been a super hot scene with Dwayne Johnson and Nadine Velazquez, who plays Analisa, his wife, getting it on! As my homeboy Sean said Snitch has “gotta be better than Tooth Fairy. Which I was disappointed that it was not about The Rock being a gay man with a oral fetish.” I can’t say it was better in this regard.

Additionally, I struggled with believing that a racially Black and Samoan man would ever choose to work on the side of racial profiling, exploitation, and structural white supremacy. All to help his racially white-identified son? Then I wondered: am I to suspend belief that Dwayne Johnson is playing a racially white man too? That’s NOT going to happen. I just couldn’t believe this was the “real events” of the story. I’d believed this narrative had Dwayne Johnson not been cast as John, but rather as El Topo. Had Bratt and Johnson swapped roles, this would have been more believable for me.

When thinking about the women and the roles they are in and presented as, this film does NOT pass the “Bechdel Test,” but I don’t use that as an assessment tool for films featuring women of Color. However, Susan Sarandon is the only woman who is seen with any type of power. Now, you may argue that John’s new wife Analisa is a source of support and constant encouragement of her husband, I’d argue what’s new? Sylvie cries 99% of the film, Daniel’s partner, Vanessa (Lela Loren), as a domestic worker/restaurant server and gets into the vibe of no longer being a single mother now that her partner has returned, and then SPOILER ALERT the real “snitch” is also a woman, a Latina at that! This is NOT a film women of Color will go to for seeing themselves reflected. We are not presented in any other way than to be the whiny mothers and partners of the men in the film. The only strong woman character is a white woman. What else is new?

To be clear, I’m usually going to be “team cartel” or “team drug dealer” in these Hollywood films that exploit the lives and experiences of people of Color. This is because I choose to view these films from the lens of understanding what structural and systemic issues come up that lead folks into underground economies. I don’t choose to view films that constantly murder Black and Latino men, but those are the only lives that are destroyed and eliminated throughout the film.

The fact that only Black and Latino men are murdered in this film speaks to the elitism we see as well. For example, I could not deal with all of the people who thought they were smarter, better, and “winning” over the drug dealers and cartels. Why do people think folks who work in underground economies are not intelligent? Just because John squirreled away some money and started his own multimillion dollar company does not make him smarter than a man who makes his millions in other ways.

Finally, as if to put the nail in the coffin for this film, the song “Informer” By Snow was not even on the soundtrack! Blasphemy! If I had a say in this film: Benjamin Bratt and Dwayne Johnson would switch roles, Jon Bernthal and Michael K. Williams would switch roles, clothing would not be readily available, and the song “Informer” would be used.

Alas! I’m not in charge, so all I can do is share with you what my concerns were watching this film. I was entertained, but I had a LOT of talking back at the screen think “Mystery Science Theater 3000: Vivir Latino Style.”

VL Verdict: 2 of 5 stars (1 star for each man of Color with multiple speaking roles, then minus one star for each one of them that is murdered).

I, along with my then five year old daughter participated in one of the larger of these marches, in New York City. My daughter, now a teen and her younger sister have grown up thinking the United States occupying nations from Afghanistan to Iraq is “normal”. That doesn’t mean that they are growing up thinking it is just.

On the anniversary of those protests, I wanted to share a statement I am proud to be a signer of, along with such critical thinkers as Noam Chomsky. I signed the statement because my family comes from a country that is currently a colony of the United States, Puerto Rico. My children have family who survived the aftermath of the U.S. backed coup of Chilean president Salvador Allende. The impact of imperial wars are not abstract ideas. They have roots here in the continued resistance of Indigenous peoples.

Please read the statement below (in English and in Spanish) and consider signing on or at the very least having a conversation about what resistance and survival beyond that looks like.

Ten years ago, millions of people around the world said “no” to war on February 15, 2003. Now, we say “yes” to peace; “yes” to demilitarizing, to having decent lives, including economic lives, determined by democratic principles.

The invasion of Iraq still began after the 2003 protests, but the violence wreaked by Bush was more limited than the U.S. government inflicted on Vietnam a generation earlier. Our vigilance was part of the reason for that. Had we acted sooner, we might have been able to avert the disastrous invasion. The lesson is we need more global protest and solidarity, not less. Indeed, had we continued vigorously protesting, we might not have seen the years since 2003 show a lack of accountability for the war makers, even as conscientious whilstleblowers are prosecuted.

This isn’t a reunion party. The same impulses that drove us to the streets in 2003 are still with us; the same war mindset prevails in world affairs. Politicians who backed the Iraq war dominate the U.S., UK and other foreign policy establishments. The dominant media’s demonization of Iran now is similar to what it did to Iraq. The U.S. escalated its war in Afghanistan and launched a series of smaller “dirty wars” in Yemen, Pakistan and elsewhere with illegal drone killings and now, with AFRICOM and other mechanisms, threatens perpetual war in Africa as well as the Mideast. The Obama administration’s “pivot East” threatens a Cold War or worse with China.

The Arab uprisings displaced some dictators — most successfully when done peacefully by the people in spite of violence by the regimes, as in Tunisia and Egypt. But the oppressive regimes of the Gulf have not only escaped real scrutiny, they are actually molding much of the rest of the region in conjunction with the U.S. and other outside powers — even as the U.S. proclaims its support for “democracy.” Much of the wealth from the Gulf states flows to Western banks, as well as the dictators and their cliques, rather than to benefit the people of that region. The Palestinian people continue to suffer not only neo-liberal dominance, as much of the world does, but also the settler colonialism of Israeli forces.

These issues are not unique to the Mideast — the U.S. has over 1000 bases around the world, some with explicitly colonial frameworks, as with “territories” like Puerto Rico. The U.S. and Russia have tens of thousands of nuclear warheads threatening life on earth. A fundamental transformation is needed. The United Nations has failed in its paramount duty to shield future generations from the scourge of war.

We don’t just say “no” to war — we say “yes” to peace, we say yes to building economic and social systems that are not dominated by central banks and huge financial institutions. We don’t just say “no” to war — we demand an end to massive resources being squandered on the military while billions are made poorer and poorer as a few reap huge wealth totally disproportionate to any labor or ingenuity of their own.

We don’t just say “no” to war — we reject an economic system that in the name of “economic competitiveness” pits workers against each other in regions and nations so they accept work for less and less pay in worse and worse conditions. From the seeds of antiwar that were planted ten years ago, we want a flowering of global democracy. So we can honestly say “We the People” without the hierarchies based on ethnicity, gender, class or nationality.

The rise of the “occupy” movement, the Indignados, Idle No More movement and others has been critical, but we must set up more durable structures, to go beyond merely occupying to liberating and to being connected across national borders. The quest for profit and perpetual financial growth has enriched a tiny minority while causing hardships to the vast majority. The quest for perpetual financial growth and profit has ravaged the earth so that we today face unprecedented threats to the possibility of sustaining a livable habitat for future generations. The quest for profit and perpetual financial growth has corrupted virtually every system in the society, from government to housing to transportation to education to the legal system. The dominance of finance and the military must end; the targeting of the social safety net must end. We, the people, must not pay for a crisis we did not cause, and for wars that are fought in the name of our security — but which ensure perpetual global insecurity and hardship.

Part of the needed building of durable structures that liberate is to globalize and coordinate protests. These could be done regularly, even monthly beginning March 15 and going onward.

Solidarity demands much greater communication between the people of the world, not elites planning for their continued dominance. The response to the decline of U.S. power is not a smarter use of power, or a balance of power with other elites with their own hierarchies. Instead, we issue “This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class, and nation” to establish meaningful solidarity with people worldwide.

Signers so far:

As’ad AbuKhalil, California State University, angryarab.net, author The Battle for Saudi Arabia
Junaid Ahmad, Lahore University of Management Sciences
Christine Ahn, Korea Policy Institute
Michael Albert, International Organization for a Participatory Society and ZCommunications
Noam Chomsky, MIT, author of Hegemony or Survival and Power Systems
Daniel Ellsberg, author of Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers
Pepe Escobar, Asia Times
Bill Fletcher, former with TransAfrica and AFL-CIO, co-founder of the Center for Labor Renewal and author of Solidarity Divided
Margaret Flowers, co-director, ItsOurEconomy.US
Arun Gupta, co-founder of the Occupied Wall Street Journal and The Indypendent
Sam Husseini, Institute for Public Accuracy
Preeti Kaur, International Organization for a Participatory Society in Spain and blogger at Znet
Kathy Kelly, Voices for Creative Nonviolence
Mairead Maguire, Peace People, recipient of Nobel Peace Prize
David Marty, International Organization for a Participatory Society in Spain and co-author of Occupy Strategy
Maegan Ortiz, publisher of VivirLatino
Costas Panayotakis, New York City College of Technology (CUNY) and author of Remaking Scarcity: From Capitalist inefficiency to Economic Democracy
John Pilger, films include “War on Democracy” and “The War You Don’t See”
Norman Solomon, author War Made Easy
David Swanson, RootsAction.org, author of War is a Lie
Deborah Toler, Africa specialist, formerly of Institute for Food and Development Policy and Oxfam America
Kevin Zeese, organizer, October2011/OccupyWashingtonDC
(Organizations listed for identification purposes only.)
You can add your name to the statement at RootsAction.org.

And now in Spanish

Hace diez años, millones de personas en el mundo entero dijeron “no a la guerra” el 15 de febrero de 2003. Ahora, decimos sí a la paz, sí a la desmilitarización, a llevar vidas decentes incluso a nivel económico, vidas determinadas por principios democráticos.

La invasión de Iraq todavía tuvo lugar tras las protestas de 2003, pero la violencia provocada por Bush quedaba aún más limitada que la infligida por el gobierno estadounidense en Vietnam una generación atrás. Nuestra vigilancia fue en parte el motivo de ello. De haber actuado antes, tal vez habríamos sido capaces de evitar la desastrosa invasión. Lo que hemos aprendido es que necesitamos más protestas a nivel global y solidaridad, nada menos. De hecho, de haber seguido energéticamente con las protestas, tal vez en los años que siguieron 2003 no habríamos sido testigos de la irresponsabilidad de los que crean las guerras, incluso de cómo se procesaban a los que, sabiéndolo, denunciaron los hechos desde dentro.

Esto no es una reunión festiva. Todavía tenemos con nosotros los mismos impulsos que nos llevaron a las calles en 2003; la misma mentalidad de guerra prevalece en el mundo de los negocios. Los políticos que apoyaron la guerra en Iraq controlan los sistemas de política exterior de los Estados Unidos, Gran Bretaña y de otros países. La demonización de Irán por los medios de comunicación dominantes es similar a la que se hizo con Iraq. Estados Unidos intensificó su guerra en Afganistán y lanzó una serie de “guerras sucias” más pequeñas en Yemen, Pakistán asesinando con aviones teledirigidos (los “drones”) y ahora con AFRICOM y otros mecanismos amenazan con una guerra perpetua tanto en África cómo en Oriente Medio. El “giro hacia el este” (“pivot east”) de la administración Obama amenaza con una guerra fría o peor con China.

Algunos dictadores fueron sustituidos con las revueltas árabes, que alcanzaron un mayor éxito cuando se llevaron a cabo de manera pacífica por los ciudadanos, como en Túnez y Egipto, a pesar de la violencia impulsada por lo regímenes. Sin embargo, los regímenes del Golfo no solo se libraron de una vigilancia auténtica, sino que en realidad están moldeando gran parte del resto de la región en conjunto con EE UU y otras potencias de fuera. Incluso tienen a los EE UU proclamando su apoyo a la “democracia”. Gran parte de la riqueza procedente de los países del Golfo, al igual que los dictadores y sus camarillas, fluye en bancos de Occidente, en lugar de beneficiar a la población local. El pueblo palestino sigue sometido a no solamente la dominación neoliberal, como ocurre en muchas zonas del mundo, sino también al colonialismo de asentamientos de las fuerzas israelíes.

Estos problemas no son algo exclusivo de Oriente Medio. Estados Unidos tiene más de 1000 bases militares en todo el mundo. EE UU y Rusia poseen decenas de miles de misiles nucleares que están amenazando la vida en el planeta. Hace falta una transformación fundamental. Las Naciones Unidas han fracasado en su tarea esencial de proteger a las futuras generaciones frente a la lacra de la guerra.

No solo decimos “no” a la guerra, decimos además “sí” a la paz, decimos sí a la creación de un sistema social y económico que no esté dominado por bancos centrales y grandes instituciones financieras. No solo decimos “no” a la guerra, exigimos que se acabe con el despilfarro masivo de dinero en los ejércitos, mientras miles de millones de personas se están quedando cada vez más pobres, ya que unos cuantos obtienen enormes fortunas totalmente desproporcionadas con respecto a cualquier trabajo o ingenio suyos.

No solo decimos “no” a la guerra. Rechazamos un sistema económico que, en el nombre de la “competitividad económica”, enfrenta a los trabajadores en regiones y estados para que acepten trabajar por cada vez menos y en condiciones cada vez peores. A partir de las semillas anti-guerra plantadas hace diez años, queremos que la democracia global florezca, de tal manera que podamos decir en serio “Nosotros, el Pueblo”, sin las jerarquías basadas en origen étnico, sexo, clase social o nacionalidad.

More visually rich than Lines, Blue Metal Kettle opens with Martinez asking herself and readers the question : is the internet stunting our communication, changing how we communicate and our expectations on how others interact with us?

If Martinez’s zine is any indication, then the answer is no. Many of the pieces in the zine are cut up into short, twitter appropriate character counts. But don’t take this to mean  that they are banal updates of what she had for lunch.  Quite the opposite, the snippets offer glimpses into Martinez’s life and also challenge our relationship with words and their function.

pressed between
musty yellowed paper
you’ll find verbs
waiting to react

In fact, Martinez lets the reader know that she doesn’t think communication has changed that much except perhaps in reference to the speed of messages getting from one end to the other. She writes almost with nostalgia about courtships conducted via letters.

Domestic chores such as ironing and cooking are repeated themes throughout the zine, but the acts themselves don’t even seem the point. It’s what’s happening while the work is being carried out : a thought, a conversation, a memory. Daily rituals of eating become sacred acts but no less painful because of associations. Masa, raspas de melon, coffee are all consumed but Martinez clearly has swallowed and digested more with each bite, every sip and sometimes they don’t sit well with her or with us, the readers.

Blue Metal Kettle seems in many ways to be a study in oppositions. Flowers in bloom versus rotting fruit. We see forces working against each other even in the images used throughout.
Skeletons and bones contrast with seascapes, mermaids, and hearts. Or perhaps they are not even opposites of all but representations of the space we have, do and will occupy: the depths of the dirt where the bodies (but not the almas) of our ancestors live, the bottom of the ocean to the heavens and all that hangs there.

Blue Metal Kettle is part of a two zine set that comes with Lines. You can have these beautiful words on paper for only $4 and support independent mujer media. Buy them here now for you or for someone else. If you prefer paypal, you can send $4 (or mas) to  csdistro@gmail.com.

The Social Revolución  is dedicated to highlighting visionaries and change-makers in the online comunidad. As a nominee last year, I welcome the chance to individual and collective efforts online to voice and represent critical issues and solutions for Latin@ communities. So much work goes into many of these efforts, work that is often undervalued and under celebrated.

I personally will be nominating peeps and orgs for the  the Revolucionario Awards on behalf of VivirLatino and invite you, the readers to do so as well. Nominations for the Revolucionario Awards fall under three categories:
+ The New Americano
+ The Mobilizer
+ El Innovator

You can nominate via this handy online form.

Stay tuned for information about nominees!

Zines and zine making handmade, folded, glued, printed  booklets have always felt just beyond my reach. Coming up as a media maker whose mediums are primarily digital and verbal/performance, I never felt like my hands were skilled enough. I would rather leave that to artists like Martinez who lays out her poems  and thoughts on paper in a way that is an art all on its own.

Lines from acedia to apatheia is a perfect example. Organized around the ideas of interior peace and it’s supposed opposite, rage and grief, this zine asks the eternal question of “why am I here” and answers through words that Martinez writes “never found a home” but here they do.

Some works deal with coming to accept the painful but loving relationship between our bodies and our environments. From our bodies/ the dirt :

roots intertwine with wooden legs dying specs of light sometimes our bodies – the dirt fills the morning

Our environments include our histories and the places and people that inhabit those houses and the impact the past has on our present identities.

all the house we’ve lived in have been torn down

this ain’t for the dad
who fucked me up at 9 or 10 or 11
either

this poem is about
the girl who asks
me her father’s name
you know how good it feels
to hear -
I wanna be a momma just like you.

The zine also explores expectations put on us and internalized, even when we think we think they are our own invention. Martinez writes, in a stream of consciousness style, a series of questions and thoughts that I know I related to – as a former single mami, as a woman working in a job to provide for my family but that slowly is sucking the life out of me, as someone struggling financially, as I age, as a Latin@, as a border dweller in multiple senses of the word. Do you relate to any of these identities? Chances are there is something that will resonate, ring a bell, pull at your alma.

but then why do I feel that this
feeling I get of just “being” is some
sort of flat living. Maybe it’s the
media, …

But make no mistake this zine is rooted in the Rio Grande Valley of south Texas, in the land of Gloria Anzaldua, cooking colors between borders.

Visit all the raspa stands in Elsa,
Edinburg, McAllen, Pharr, San Juan,
Alamo, Weslaco, Mission, Donna, San
Isidro, Harlinggen, Brownsville, San
Benito, La Joya, Los Fresnos, Los
Saenz, Port Isabel, La Blanca,
Edcouch, Roma, and Mercedes.

The valley is not a book or a stanza
The valley is not in tune. The
valley is not seasonal.

You can purchase a double zine set including Lines from acedia to apatheia via Martinez’s Etsy page or if you prefer you can use paypal and send $5 to $7 to csdistro@gmail.com

Obama’s speech was short on details and long on perpetuating a hype machine that obscures what the administration has been doing and continues to do in terms of immigration enforcement.

Four years ago the chant “si se puede” was everywhere. Even my then two year old was saying it. This year “now’s the time” is being ushered in, as if the last four years hasn’t been filled with advocates letting the administration slide with it’s never ending release of memos and activists continuing to point out the record breaking deportation numbers thanks to the expansion of programs like Secure Communities.

What Obama did in his speech in Vegas was promote the “good” vs “bad” immigrant binary and expand upon it even by creating a hierarchy of “desirables”. Much of this was based in the language of middle class-ness or aspiring to get to that. Obama invited entrepreneurs, and engineering students while making invisible the domestic workers, street vendors, and day laborers.

The baseline of the president’s speech was naming the eleven million or so undocumented as “rule breakers” above everything else and that before any path to citizenship or legalization they need to make that right – pay taxes (which most do already), paying fines, learning English and getting to the back if the mythical line. Obama admitted that the road to citizenship would be long (10, 20 more years?) but said at least everyone could be comforted by knowing their time would come.

I’m not comforted and neither are some of my undocumented friends whom I went out with the night of Obama’s announcement.

Obama patted himself on the back for border enforcement and misrepresented who has been getting deported. He said deportation of criminals is at its highest level ever. What he didn’t acknowledge was that deportation of everyone is at the highest level ever. In the afterglow of his speech, both Obama and his favorite Latina spokesperson, Cecilia Munoz, acknowledged that yes “others” get caught up in the system. But this is why they need congress to act. The White House continues to wash it’s hands from separating millions of families. They are back to blaming Congress.

Obama also praised his administration for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), the temporary response that fell far short of demands for administrative relief in the wake of the DREAM Act failing to pass in 2010.

Obama also laid the groundwork for making problematic and flaw ridden employment verification systems like E-Verify mandatory so that both workers and business can “play by the same set of rules”. The errors in this program will not just prevent the undocumented from working and keep business from hiring them, they will potentially keep hundreds of thousands of “legal” workers from employment.

Today there is the first of what will likely by many hearings in the House of Representatives on comprehensive immigration reform. So far the middle ground being offered creates more lines of separation – a hierarchy of the worthy and maybe not even a path to citizenship. I will write more on this in the coming days.

Day by day I grow increasingly more frustrated by how immigration is being talked about and about the constant and consistent reinvention of history by politicians and organizations. I can’t even imagine how undocumented communities feel. the deportation machine keeps on working while everyone else keeps on talking.

I will share the links with you as they become available.

One great conversation I had was with Peter Hart of Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting for their show Counterspin. (Full disclosure: I have contributed twice to their publication Extra!). In the interview, I talk about the hype or spin that’s dressing up the proposals and give a bit of a reality check.

You can listen here.