Democrats, slavery, Irish, and Indians

[wetibbe]

Apart from being some interesting history, is this supposed to be going somewhere relevant to current events?

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by wetibbe

Apart from being some interesting history, is this supposed to be going somewhere relevant to current events?

Yes.

While it is futile to argue with brown supremacists, precisely because the brown racist aim is to distract from illegal immigration by turning the issue from illegal presence to that of white racism - seeking to both to inflict white guilt and sympathy to their cause. As well, in a whole catalog of half truths and whole lies they propagandize the past, with quite a bit of comparing themselves (descendants of immigrants from Latin America) and the modern influx to many things in the distant past. Among those is the general Irish immigration of the 19th century.

There is also the American brown racist denunciation of the American yesteryear as though the past is going on today, but the political party which grovels before them and which they are attempting to dominate was mostly a racially oppressive and imperialistic entity until the 1960's. You can't shout about the racism of Jim Crow without denouncing the Democrat party, because both were products of one another.

While it might not be productive to engage in a shout down, brown supremacists lose their power when the truth comes out and their slants and outright fabrications as well as their lies by omission are exposed.

1) "They come to feed their families".

I don't recall seeing any Mexicans fresh over the border who appear to be underfed. There are the trash pickers of Mexico City and Tijuana and undoubtedly there are some who would be in dire straights if it were not for remittances, but on the whole they have access to food in Mexico. They come for the cash not available in Mexico for materialism and the Mexican Government uses migration as a pressure valve for social issues and to distract from governmental reform. There are lots of jobs available in Mexico, but there are few wages beyond subsistence.

The Irish were genuinely starving.

2) "19th century Irish immigration experiences are proof of white racism against Latinos in the late 20th and 21st centuries".

The Irish were white English speakers, White German Speakers and foreign language Jews from Western and Eastern Europe didn't have the same rub with English descended Americans as Irish migration did. There were historical reasons for this, such as the 200 year split between the Roman faith, King Henry VIII Anglicism, and northern European Protestantism (which was drowned in blood on all sides) as well as all the truly tragic Irish and English blood drenching Ireland for about five hundred previous years to the Potato famine.

Nothing in history between Anglo America of yesteryear or multi racial America of today and Latin America in any century can even begin to compare with the history of the British Isles transplanted to and somewhat continued in America.

3) 19th century Irish, German, Jews, and modern Latin Americans resist(ed) assimilation. Subsequent generations of descendants of those people might pretend to still be their ancestors, but it is inevitable that some assimilation occurs. Many of modern migrants from Latin America are here to take advantage of American largesse rather than to become American, and their numbers and an institutional change among the government and education demands that they stay separate rather than assimilate.

4) Those who could do so among Irish immigrants sent remittances. Some among the American born and those brought very young became politically active with corrupt political institutions. The immigrants themselves appear to have been generally politically apathetic. There are parallels here.

5) There was overwhelming alcoholism and substantial violence and crime among themselves within what would now be termed "the Irish community". There is the obvious parallel in "the Latino community". However, you just don't see the genuinely terrible destitution among the new migration as was the experience of the former. As terrible as it is, Duroville in the Coachella Valley is a heavenly paradise compared to 19th century Five Points in New York. As well, who has seen any driving genuinely delapidated vehicles in the style of the Cesar Chavez days?

6) Both migrations were/are largely composed of the uneducated and unskilled.

7) The first of what could be called a welfare outreach was instituted within Five Points by a Protestant cause (Peese?). There was no cash or other off premises assistance and was largely composed of being cleaned up, dried out (sobered up), clothed and fed while learning an occupation. Some Irish Catholics opposed it because it was a protestant effort. Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall, himself having grown up in Five points, instituted the first government handout both as a Catholic response to the protestant effort as well as cynically farming votes. Tammany Hall was a corrupt Democrat political machine, and is the origin of the fact that California, with 12% of the US population, has 33% of the national welfare burden and LA county (California's ultimate expression of Aztlan), with 26% of the California population, has 39% of California welfare cases. California is a vote pandering, corrupt democrat refuge using modern migration and ethnic nationalism to gain political power.


Tammany Hall, the Democrat Party, La Raza Unida take over of local government and education system in Texas, etc, etc. Lots of parallels and important differences in the very different migrations, but both are much, much more complex than "Anglo Sajon racism" or the notion that everyone in a somewhat defined group are all the same person.

This thread is sort of an out loud personal exploration of the truth. Some of it goes back to determining just who is the ultimate enemy and who is the unwitting tool - the person in front of your face or the one in the cloaked background pulling the strings?

[ilbegone]

Within modern concerns of voter fraud, examples of which include the middle 1990's Congressional race between Loretta Sanchez (bitterly complaining in very bad Spanish on video in the last year or so that Orange County "Asians" were trying to take her "Latino congressional seat") and Bob Dornan. There was a great uptick with groups attached to the Democrat party in registering voters with the result that some groups registered people who weren't citizens.

One such group, Nativo Lopez's Hermandad Mexicana Nacional (Mexican Citizen Brotherhood) improperly registered over 600 people who were not eligible to vote. There were allegations that while the normal error is between 1-4%, HMN's rate was 60%. Then California Secretary of State Bill Jones said "Whether the district attorney is able to prove intent or not, the fact remains that hundreds of individuals are illegally registered to vote, and that is unacceptable." There was said to be a significant drop in Orange County democrats due to a post election registration purge. Sanchez may have been elected in that very narrow race with election fraud.

There has been a plethora of attempts to extend voting rights to people who are not legal residents (or use their presence to an ethnic nationalist end) from San Bernardino Unified School District Board of Education's resident racial lunatics Teresa Parra and Gil Navarro (likes to invoke Pancho Villa as a boogeyman for "Nativists") for direct vote by the illegally present to "community control" lawsuits by Lulac to replace at large elections with neighborhood districts which may not have a large amount of residents eligible to vote and where a great minority of race baiters might run "the community show".

Democrat voter fraud and "community control" began with the 19th century "Irish immigrant community". It is astounding the way the Democrat party in New York turned voter fraud into a brazen, weaselly art form. I'll continue next post.

[ilbegone]

I found a very cheap $3.50 plus shipping), used version of one of of racist ethnic studies professor Armando Navarro's books (peddling race enmity at the university must not pay all the bills - new retails around $60.00).

While I have read a first hand account in a book by Jose Angel Gutierrez of the events surrounding the take over of the school district and local governments in Zavala county in Texas during late 60's and early 70's, I was not aware of the extent to which Gutierrez assembled a get out the vote political machine for La Raza Unida.

It was much like Tammany Hall concerning organization and patronage of the poor and immigrants and was called Communidadados Unidos, United Community of which Gutierrez was the head. There is some alleged looting and embezzlement, but it would not have been on the grand scale of Tammany Hall nor even approached what my understanding is of what some of the United Farm Workers leadership did with the members dues.

Gutierrez realized that once an election had been won, the next election campaign immediately started and that the La Raza Unida party needed both a consistent cash flow in the form of contributions and consistent voter turnout for its platform.

Territory was divided into precincts with precinct captains over block leaders and volunteers under block leaders. There were sound trucks prowling neighborhoods, and radio stations played political spots.

This was funded through payroll deductions of Communidados Unidos members (presumably government and school district jobs handed out to reward political activism) along with fundraising dances and other entertainment. Communidados Unidos also campaigned for La Raza Unida by holding political and organizing fetes with free beer and food a la the Mexican PRI.

Employees of occupations controlled by the machine who were not favorable to La Raza Unida were ran off. While attention was nominally paid to all areas of the community, neighborhoods which voted La Raza Unida got first priority.

The leadership of Comunidados Unidos was comprised of elected officials, county and school administration, organizations which included the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and leaders within the community.

Saul Alinski's methods of community organizing were utilized as well as the universal racist tactic of polarizing racial consciousness.

Polarization of the races is what I mean when I say that racists need racial hatred. It is an organizing tool which invents racial grievances for propaganda purposes when the real deal isn't enough to legitimately address. The goal is to instigate regular people on both sides into hating each other so much that nothing can be worked out and only one side is going to win in an epic race battle - and racist puppeteers of that one side achieve their agenda.

The issue of the children of illegal aliens is one example of this tactic, they are tools, pawns, and propaganda fodder in a game not of their making. After all, goes the reasoning, who would be so hard hearted to throw out children who were born elsewhere but don't truly belong to their parents' country, and deportation of parents and other relatives will be long remembered in the political consciousness of children of illegal aliens from Latin America who are citizens by virtue of the 14th amendment. This is cynically accomplished by pressure on politicians by American brown supremacists not to enforce immigration law. Several goals are advanced in one stroke.

[ilbegone]

My impressions from Armando Navarro's book concerning La Raza Unida and the community are so many and varied that they can't really be condensed into a few words. Mostly it's "WOW". So many things from power consolidation (even includes a Latino beer franchise war) to education to political implosion and racial hypocrisy.

Navarro's general references and quotes from participants concerning brown people in Zavala county and beyond as "Mexicanos". This is further broken down into "Chicanos", "vendidos" (sell outs), and "Coconuts" (brown on the outside, white on the inside). In his writing, this is not so absolute as this paragraph seems to make it. The references to Caucasians are generally "whites" and "Gringos" (with the general meanings of oppressors, racists, or opposers of La Raza Unida) or Anglos (those in sympathy or at least neutral with La Raza Unida). While his prejudice is obvious, I do believe his assertion that he tried to leave his prejudices behind for writing the book.

There are several different impressions concerning brown people in the book. There were migratory workers with a home base in Zavala county and Crystal itself and there are no references concerning illegal residence or distinction between birth citizenship nationality or naturalization, but the story revolves around people who appear to have been American for generations. The Latino base for La Raza Unida support appears to have been poor people, it seems those with a middle class income tended to oppose La Raza Unida.

It may surprise some (I've understood this for some time), but a portion of brown resistance to La Raza Unida had to do with the manner of imposition and type of bilingual education in the local schools. There were parents who believed their children weren't learning English well enough under the party direction (instruction was primarily in Spanish) and Jose Gutierrez and the party turned a deaf ear to complaints. Some believed Gutierrez placed too much emphasis on race, that he needed to knock it back a notch.

Political machine Comunidadas Unidas (the power behind La Raza Unida) wielded complete control in the county concerning public and educational jobs, which were just about the only decent paying jobs in the county. There was influence in other occupations. Jobs were used to reward supporters of the party agenda and dissenters were fired. Gutierrez himself, without legal education, became a county judge.

Politics were nasty indeed. There was a lot of scurrilous polarization both between races and within the "brown community". Once in power, Communidadas Unidas engaged in voter intimidation and arranged such things as turning the power off to buildings hosting opposition meetings. There were threats of suing power companies and telephone companies which provided service to opposition groups. Proof of residency was sometimes required of whites and opponents in order to vote - contrasting with the fact that before La Raza Unida took power, Gutierrez brought in federal observers to ensure there was no white voter fraud. There was some voter fraud by Communidadas Unidas, but it was inconsequential to election outcome.

Towards the end, Gutierrez and his Machine were brought down not by hostile whites, but by (including but not limited to) increased brown hostility to policies, increased taxes, power consolidated in too few hands, resentments and aspirations within the machine, a police department which was infused with party politics and machine directives, bringing in people from outside the community to fill high pay jobs no one in the brown rural community were qualified to do, Gutierrez over reaching and dictatorial presumption, and the La Raza Unida trip to learn and bring back ideas from Cuba. Navarro quotes a local individual (which requires reading between the lines as to what is really meant concerning "Mexican" and self identity among multi generational Americans with Mexican ancestors):

They were totally Mexican. They were also citizens of Texas and the United States. I don't think ideologically they identified with Cuba, Nicaragua, or even Mexico.

These were people, regardless of ancestry, mix of culture, or status in society who had a mentality shaped by multi generational American experience.

In the end, there were even death threats by Latinos against Gutierrez, and three Latinos were apprehended by police trying to assassinate Gutierrez with a large rattlesnake with its rattles cut off. It was in a burlap bag and the intent was turning it loose in an enclosed area Gutierrez frequented. Gutierrez got a gun permit.

There was infighting within the machine (the machine grew so large Gutierrez had to subordinate some power) as well as attacks from a Latino opposition party - La Raza Libre (formed of long term opponents), and there lawsuits from within and without.

One of my more prominent impressions is corroboration of my belief that brown supremacists and ethnic nationalism need a continual influx of poor foreigners from Latin America and their children to shower goodies and privilege on as well as invoking the Anglo Sajon boogie man (the white man is out to get YOU!!!!) in order to fulfill their racist agenda.

[ilbegone]

I'll get back to the Irish, democrats, and voter fraud after one last diversionary tirade concerning Armando Navarro and his book "the Cristal experiment".

I'm not sure where to start, and there is so much I'd like to say - and my head hurts with it all.

Navarro seems to be preoccupied with the concept of "internal colonialism", that "whites" invade a geographical area, take economic control of all the resources and export the money from the community to white held bank accounts elsewhere. Brown people are purposefully prevented from becoming educated and excluded from the fruits of their manual slave labor. http://academic.evergreen.edu/b/bohm...rnalcolony.htm

In other words, purposefully racist, oppressive capitalism with the solution being redistribution of wealth and property as well as "community control" and takeover of industry. His words dance all around an implied mission of driving "whites" out without coming right out and saying it.

The first observation is that Navarro is a hypocrite in this regard. His students are over a barrel with the requirement to buy his overpriced books for study, as many as three per class. The "Cristal experiment" retails $60.00 new, and his latest book “Global Capitalist Crisis and the Second Great Depression” is listed at $90.00.

Does that not make Navarro an opportunistic capitalistic pig working the system? "Who Are We?" by political scientist Samuel P. Huntington sells for less than thirty bucks hardcover big box new.

There were a lot of things wrong with race in the 1950's which needed to be righted. On the other hand, Navarro and his racist buddies don't understand that it's not 1956 anymore.

Zavala county was and is farm and ranch country, with a Del Monte processing plant and government being the only stable industries in the area. Yes, the farm workers are paid a pittance. So, what happens if they strike for higher wages? Their distant cousins flood across the border to displace the striking farm workers and work for even less. Uncontrolled oversupply of labor much more than white racism plagued Cesar Chavez all his activist life. Same thing happened to construction, with a great degradation to quality of workmanship.

If it weren't for the Anglo American of 200 years ago, there would be nothing worthwhile to emigrate to. The sparsely populated Spanish colonies along the Rio Grande from the Gulf of Mexico to southern Colorado and along coastal California were separated from populated Mexico by a whole lot of desert and hostile nomadic Indians. From California to Mexico, the trip was by boat. And, when Mexicans (from Mexico, not the US) began moving into Los Angeles around the 1880's, the Californios of the Hispanic California 1769 through 1848 era moved out. They might have had Mexican governors for 27 years (I believe a majority number from California), but they weren't Mexican. As well, Californios didn't participate on either side of the 1810 Mexican war of independence.

It's as if Manifest destiny took the best part of Mexico, the part that was paved and had all the modern conveniences as well as high incomes for everyone (non producers included) and free medical for all.

I would love to see the drop out rate of Latinos improve. However, brown takeover of school district management and bilingual education have done nothing to change the Latino drop out rate - which has been virtually unchanged since the 1960s. White racism can't be blamed for that and no amount of money thrown at education is going to fix the problem until it is recognized for what the problem truly is.

Navarro, as assimilated as he is, assails assimilation to American culture.

There is a lot of the remnants and reverberations in my house of a long ago Mexico, a mixture of cultures. However, lets imagine that the course of the 1775 American Revolution followed the course of the 1910 Mexican Revolution.

King George III would have been exiled with his successor being an unrealistic dreamer from the upper class. The successor would have been assassinated by a drunken Army General who assumed the throne. After a long, bloody war the General would be exiled, whereupon all the revolutionary factions would war with each other for power. By the time everything settled down, nearly all captured prisoners from all sides would have been executed, the population would have suffered depredations from all governmental and revolutionary sides, a large segment of the population would have fled the empire, and the biggest change from one era to the other would have been that the king could only stay on the throne 6 years instead of over forty and the successor would be hand picked by the king himself. As well, the revolutionary generals would assassinate one another in turn, which would be the only way to become a cultural hero and unspeakable treachery would be a virtue.

And America would be an east coast country and we wouldn't have all the paved streets and modern conveniences.

[wetibbe]

I'm reading your posts?

Interesting but where are you going with this?

I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.

No doubt the readers appreciate someone who cares enough to post.

I haven't as yet been able to peg you and determine where you are coming from and where your allegiance lies !!!!

If you keep on posting I will keep on reading.