Showing posts with label anti immigrant american tradition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti immigrant american tradition. Show all posts

Friday, April 10, 2009

Out of Thin Air: Another Astroturf Nativist Group

SOURCE: Southern Poverty Law Center

HATE WATCH
"Kepping an eye on the Radical Right"

Out of Thin Air: Another Astroturf Nativist Group

Posted in Anti-Immigrant by Casey Sanchez on April 9, 2009

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) the best-oiled anti-immigration hate group in the U.S., is known for manufacturing “astroturf” groups. These outfits purport to be grassroots organizations representing certain minorities but in fact are funded and directed by FAIR and have little support in the communities they claim to represent. The first ethnically based astroturf group was Choose Black America, which claimed to represent anti-immigration blacks. Next came the Latino version, dubbed You Don’t Speak For Me! The groups were clearly intended to deflect accusations of racism that have been leveled at much of the immigration restriction movement.

Now, FAIR is up to the same sleight of hand with Progressives for Immigration Reform (PFIR), essentially a FAIR front group that seeks to recruit progressives and environmentalists into the anti-immigration movement. (PFIR’s executive director is Leah Durant, who’s been a FAIR analyst and lawyer since 1995.) The Chicago-based Center for New Community, which first reported the launch of PFIR in the most recent edition of its E-newsletter, FAIR Exposed, called it “a gauntlet thrown down in front of the progressive community by the forces of bigotry.”

Choose Black America and You Don’t Speak For Me! have gained little traction in the mainstream media. But PFIR may enjoy more credibility, at least initially, since its board members are mostly high-powered environmentalists and Democratic activists, some of them drawn from the leadership ranks of the zero population growth movement.

One of them, Frank Morris, is the black former executive director of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, a left-leaning nonprofit group that promotes health care and education programs. In 2003, Morris ran for the board of the Sierra Club along with two other immigration-restriction advocates in a failed bid to take over the leadership of the national environmental group that was orchestrated by nativist activists. (The idea, which originated many years earlier with FAIR founder John Tanton, was to create a group opposed to immigration that appeared to come from the left — another bid to avoid the charge of racism.) In addition to his role with PFIR, Morris also currently serves on the board of the Center for Immigration Studies, a nativist think tank and offshoot of FAIR that produces reports blaming immigrants for a multitude of social problems.

Morris told Hatewatch that he was approached to join the PFIR board by Roy Beck, the executive director of NumbersUSA, which started life as a program of an organization run by FAIR founder Tanton. Morris declined to discuss the role of FAIR in forming PFIR, but he did dismiss the findings of an Intelligence Report exposé that showed that Tanton had for decades associated with white nationalists and their ideas. “I’m a 70-year old man with an M.I.T. PhD. I’m not going to be duped by some nativists or right-wingers or some crazy folks … who are against the interests of people in this country who I love,” said Morris. “I’ve been concerned for years about the plight of immigration on many of our low-wage American workers, many of whom, of course, are disproportionately African-American.”

Other PFIR board members include its president and chairman, William Ryerson, who is president of both the Population Institute and the Population Media Center, which produces pro-family planning soap operas for Third World countries; Jane De Lung, who for 20 years has been president of the Population Resource Center, a major pro-population control demographic analysis and public policy think tank; Kevin Lynn, who heads the Pasadena chapter of Democracy for America, a progressive political action committee; and Vernon M. Briggs Jr., emeritus professor of labor economics at Cornell University. Briggs also serves on the board of Center for Immigration Studies. Ryerson and De Lung did not respond to messages from Hatewatch.

This isn’t the first recent attempt by FAIR to bury its true agenda in the greenery of environmentalism. Last summer, another front group backed by FAIR — this one dubbed America’s Leadership Team for Long Range Population-Immigration-Resource Planning — took out full-page ads in The New York Times, The Nation and numerous other liberal or left-leaning publications that warned of immigration worsening traffic congestion and destroying pristine lands.

The language on PFIR’s website is sober by comparison: “It is the position of PFIR that immigration policy should consider and mitigate the effect of immigration on overall U.S. population and population growth, domestic water and energy supplies, open space and preservation of biodiversity,” it reads. The site expresses concern about greenhouse gasses and uses the term “undocumented” instead of “illegal.”

Behind all this stands FAIR, which has its own history of sensationalized fear-mongering about immigration. That kind of rhetoric was reflected most recently in a post by FAIR board member Donald A. Collins to VDARE.com, a racist website named after Virginia Dare, the first white child born in the English New World colonies. “The immigration invasion is more like a cancer than a whirlwind,” Collins wrote, “but equally deadly as it advances to its present level.”



Powered by FeedBurner

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Shades of Shameful Past in Anti-Immigrant Agenda

SOURCE:

SOMOS AMERICA / WE ARE AMERICA COALITION

24-10-2008

Shades of shameful past in anti-immigrant agenda

By Peter Schrag

Article Launched: 12/31/2007 01:38:55 AM PST

Who said this?

"Immigration to this country is increasing and is making its greatest relative increase from races most alien to the body of the American people and from the lowest and most illiterate classes among those races . . . half of whom have no occupation and most of whom represent the rudest form of labor.

"The immigrants who come to the United States reduce the rate of wages by ruinous competition, and then take their savings out of the country. Home as a foreign country. . . . They have no interest or stake in country and never become American citizens." Many, he went on, are genetically prone to crime, insanity and disease.

The author, in a pair of articles on "The Restriction of Immigration" for The Atlantic magazine in 1891, was Rep. (later Sen.) Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts. His undesirables were Jews, Italians, Poles and Hungarians, people like GOP Rep. Tom Tancredo's Sicilian great-grandparents. In those days, of course, everybody was undocumented.

So you can say that the current debate among GOP candidates Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney about who would be the meanest, toughest guy on illegal immigration is in an American tradition almost as old as immigration itself.

The tradition goes back to the Salem witch trials - and "No Irish Need Apply" and "The Chinese Must Go," and "Japs keep moving." Not all of it was overtly racist. The official targets of the Great Red Scare of the 1920s were communists and anarchists,

although most of them also happened to be Italian immigrants. And there was, of course, the pursuit of communists, alleged communists and "fellow travelers" in the 1950s, and the blacklists and loyalty oaths that came with it. Americans were encouraged (and often pressured) to denounce colleagues and associates they suspected. Hollywood producers, politicians and university trustees, including the regents of the University of California, folded under the pressure. Many of the blacklisted never recovered.

The present furor about illegal immigrants isn't quite like any of those things. But the attempt to exploit anti-immigrant rage and fear by politicians such as Romney and Giuliani and by the radio talkers that thrive on the issue comes awfully close.

Some Republicans, Karl Rove probably included, are tearing their hair. Rove and his former boss, George W. Bush, worked hard to appeal to the growing body of Latino voters. But like John McCain, they got ripped for their sponsorship of the comprehensive immigration reform bill that got filibustered to death by hard-liners last June.

And now that immigration is again a hot-button issue, Romney and Giuliani, among others, have taken a page from former California Gov. Pete Wilson's old 1994 playbook, trading short-term political gain for disastrous long-term losses in support from the growing ranks of Latino voters. "Some in the party seem pleased," said former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson. "They should be terrified."

Until recently, McCain and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee were the honorable exceptions among the GOP candidates. Huckabee, who got whacked by Romney for backing in-state tuition for the children of illegal immigrants, replied, "In all due respect, we are a better country than to punish children for what their parents did." But since then, as he rose in the polls (and read the polls) he's signed on to his own version of the Tancredo creed. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, like Giuliani another recent convert who's read the same polls, is running for cover.

The damage is not only to rational discourse about immigration but also in the futile diversion from the real sources of the real fears - about off-shoring and job security, health care, corporate power and fraud and a long list of fading certainties - that feed the issue. Sooner or later we'll probably look back at this episode with the same embarrassment and shame as we did the others, but it could be an ugly time until we get there.

RELATED ARTICLES

The Mexican Repatriation Program -- La Repatriación Mexicana
Operation Wetback!
The Bracero Program!
Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME
NATIVISM

Powered by FeedBurner