Demonizing the poor and turning to bigotry.

1. 59

   Josakposted 11 years ago

   What never ceases to sadden me is how predictable certain elements of our society are, I studied the recession as I imagine many hubbers have and the parallels are saddening, when things get tight economically the weaker and meaner of our society show their true colors. Hoover-ville was demonized as being full of the lazy and drunken rather than the starving and unable to find work, full of criminals and socialists (how reminiscent of Fox's coverage of Occupy and Romney's recent leaked tape) then the bigotry kicked in, the Mexican repatriation bill, forcibly deporting hundreds of thousands of Mexicans and Mexican Americans, blaming them for the economy and again we see that paralleled in the policies of several states the response of the bigoted looking for someone to blame.
   Now most all of us know that the depression poor were just people trying to get by in tough circumstances that they had no fault in creating and the forced deportations are one of the great unmentioned shames of this nation... let's not make the same mistakes again.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Ah more propaganda and lies. Let us deal with Hoover first:
      " "There is no evidence that Herbert Hoover ordered the deportation of all illegal aliens." And Matthew T. Schaefer, archivist at the Herbert Hoover Presidential Library in West Branch, Iowa, told us in an e-mail message: "President Hoover never issued a statement, executive order or proclamation ordering the deportation of all illegal immigrants."
      
      Many left voluntarily rather than be deported, however, there is absolutely no evidence of any Mexican Americans being deported nor being persuaded to leave. That is just false entirely.
      
      source: http://www.factcheck.org/2010/07/hoover … deporters/
      
      The reason it is an unmentioned shame is it is not true.
      
      No one is exactly blaming illegal immigrants either. They are merely stating that our economy cannot continue to carry the burden. If you believe that those here illegally do not draw benefits, you are sadly mistaken. I actually do not know anyone who wants to throw out all 12 million of those here illegally. Sorry, it is not bigotry to want to tighten the borders and keep illegal immigration down. It is not only an economic drain but you have no knowledge of exactly who is crossing your borders. Most may be just normal everyday people looking to better themselves, but you will also get a criminal element. Immigration Laws are FEDERAL laws and any state seeking to see them enforced has every right to do so. It is not bigotry, it is the law.

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         +1  Although I'm sure mistakes have been made over the decades and a handful of Americans were deported to Mexico I'm also sure it is very rare.
         
         As you point out, deporting citizens of a foreign country that are in the US illegally is not bigotry.  It is rather amusing, in fact, to see other governments (primarily Mexico) taking the US to task for the practice while maintaining much more stringent controls over their own borders and providing for much more severe punishment of their own illegal aliens.

         replyreport
      2. 0

         HowardBThinameposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Sassy, I was going to respond, but you covered all the bases...very well, I might add.

         replyreport
      3. 59

         Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         How can you be so wrong? even the link you posted covers it. Operation Wetback (which is a matter of public record.) and the continuing operations. As in the factcheck article "Officially, just over 2.1 million were recorded as having been deported or having departed under threat of deportation." I said hundreds of thousands, fact Check was responding to the claim it was 13 million which it was not.
         
         Wrong as usual Sassy.
         
         http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/onli … cles/pqo01

         replyreport
         1. 0

            SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            The article clearly states that it was just over 122,000 that were deported during his entire term. That is not hundreds of thousands and also clearly debunks that Hoover ever issued such an order. Operation Wetback had absolutely nothing to do with Hoover which was the information you stated in your initial forum. You should have kept reading as well:
            
            "The INS claimed as many as 1,300,000, though the number officially apprehended did not come anywhere near this total. The INS estimate rested on the claim that most aliens, fearing apprehension by the government, had voluntarily repatriated themselves before and during the operation. … Many commentators have considered these figure[s] to be exaggerated."
            
            
            The "Handbook of Texas," sponsored by the Texas State Historical Association, says in its entry on "Operation Wetback" that the number forced to leave is "probably less than 1.3 million":
            
               There is also absolutely nothing to the claim that these were legal Mexican Americans either. While their methods (not to mention what they called their operation) are deplorable, once again, these were people that were here illegally.
            
            Further Operation Weback lasted only a few months and there were no "continuing operations" as you state.
            
            Wrong as usual Josak.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Before I respond to the fact that the INS estimates 1.3 million were deported with the possibility that figure is exaggerated and I said hundreds of thousands (acknowledging the possibility of exaggeration).
               
               Where oh where did I say Hoover did this? The only time I mentioned Hoover in my initial post was Hooverville which has nothing to do with this.
               
               So so so wrong...

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  "in, the Mexican repatriation bill, forcibly deporting hundreds of thousands of Mexicans and Mexican Americans"
                  
                  Hmm...gee...I guess because you talked about the Mexican Repatriation Bill. Silly me.
                  
                  Firstly, no it wasn't Mexican Americans. It was those here illegally. Secondly, most were not even forcibly deported. Most went back on their own rather than be deported. It was really that Mexican American thing that I was disputing to be honest, because I have no issue with illegals being deported. Then because you read about Operation Wetback in my source, which was NOT what you were initially referring to, you are trying to claim that makes you correct. It does not because they are two seperate things years apart. However, again, other than some of their more questionable methods and the deplorable name, I am fine with illegals being deported. Again, illegals. Not Americans.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Yup never mentioned Hover.
                     
                     If you are OK with people being rounded up based on their Mexican appearance, jailed and then deported based on questioning then that's up to you, does not surprise me. But I consider it to be bigotry. Nothing else to discuss.
                     
                     http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/467 … 37&s=4

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        1. Your "source" is not a factual document but a thesis report.
                        2. Your "source" is not even complete.
                        3. Your "source" lacks any concrete facts or anything to back up its claim.
                        4. The very use of Mexican Repatriation Act refers to Hoover given its time frame.
                        5. I do believe I covered their methods in my response. I'm not surprised you failed to comprehend it though.

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           DMartelonlineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Here is what  PBS says about Operation Wetback
                           
                           In 1949 the Border Patrol seized nearly 280,000 illegal immigrants. By 1953, the numbers had grown to more than 865,000, and the U.S. government felt pressured to do something about the onslaught of immigration. What resulted was Operation Wetback, devised in 1954 under the supervision of new commissioner of the Immigration and Nationalization Service, Gen. Joseph Swing.
                           
                           Swing oversaw the Border patrol, and organized state and local officials along with the police. The object of his intense border enforcement were "illegal aliens," but common practice of Operation Wetback focused on Mexicans in general. The police swarmed through Mexican American barrios throughout the southeastern states. Some Mexicans, fearful of the potential violence of this militarization, fled back south across the border. In 1954, the agents discovered over 1 million illegal immigrants.
                           
                           In some cases, illegal immigrants were deported along with their American-born children, who were by law U.S. citizens. The agents used a wide brush in their criteria for interrogating potential aliens. They adopted the practice of stopping "Mexican-looking" citizens on the street and asking for identification. This practice incited and angered many U.S. citizens who were of Mexican American descent. Opponents in both the United States and Mexico complained of "police-state" methods, and Operation Wetback was abandoned.
                           
                           http://www.pbs.org/kpbs/theborder/histo … ne/20.html

                           replyreport
   2. 56

      rrhistorianposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I guess I do not understand your stance - are you implying that we take care of illigal immigrants prior to taking care of citizens?

      replyreport
   3. 83

      Don Wposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      We are genetically programmed to behave like this. Of course that doesn't mean we can't behave differently, but doing so starts with understanding why we behave like it in the first place.
      
      Forming social groups is a biological imperative. That behaviour enabled our genetic ancestors to compete with others for resources, helping them survive. We have inherited it from them. In modern society that behaviour still exists. It's just wrapped up in a layer of socialisation. Nationalism, xenophobia, religious hatred, even snobbery are all aspects of us forming groups and competing with "others".
      
      This behaviour is the cause of every war there has ever been. That notion is intolerable to self-aware, 'civilised' creatures such as ourselves. So wars become about religion, politics etc. rather than about a biological imperative to compete with other social groups. This is an example of rationalisation (a psychological self-defence mechanism that makes undesirable notions consciously tolerable).
      
      The demonising of "certain elements of our society" is stage one. It's part of the identification of "others". The next stage is dehumanising them. The last stage is physical violence (made easier by the dehumanisation). Sadly, there are many examples in history (including recent history) where you can see all three stages played out to their ultimate end. The ultimate end of the process is genocide. We are biologically programmed to commit genocide. It's literally in our nature. This is a difficult fact that we have to get to grips with. Until we do, we can't fully address the problem. Trying to rid the world of religion, combative politics etc. does not address the issue. There are a miriad of ways we can rationalise such behaviour.
      
      How do we overcome this behaviour? I don't know. I do know that our behaviour is adapted to suit out environment. Different environment, different behaviour. In our current environment (with finite resources) we adapt to compete for resources. Infite, renewable resources, would remove the need to compete, therefore removing the advantage of identify "others" to compete with. So it's imperative that we throw as much effort as we can into achieving such an environment. Harnessing energy from nuclear fusion would be a good start.
      
      In the short term it's important that the type of bigotry you are talking about is (and thankfully in most developed societies it is) countered and resisted. It's interesting that one type of environment leads to the worst humans can be, another could lead us to the best we could be. Thanks for the thought provoker.

      replyreport
2. 67

   ptosisposted 11 years ago

   Whatta crap thread. What about Woody Guthrie's 1942 aluminium album where he talks  & sings about the dustbowl refugees and when they hit the California state line were told to go 'back' if didn't have a 5 dollar in their pocket?
   
   “Yes, as through this world I've wandered I've seen lots of funny men; Some will rob you with a six-gun, And some with a fountain pen”. Woody Guthrie

   replyreport