A new Latino nation? Texas, California, Arizona, New Mexico, to secede?

http://www.diversityalliance.org/docs/article_secede_000308.html

"Charles Truxillo, a professor of Chicano studies at the University of New Mexico, suggests "Republica del Norte" would be a good name for a new, sovereign Hispanic nation he foresees straddling the current border between the United States and Mexico.

"Truxillo predicts the creation of a Republic of the North, calling its birth within the next 80 years "an inevitability." He says the country would include all of the present U.S. states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, plus southern Colorado.

"Stretching from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico, it would also include the northern tier of current Mexican states: Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas.

"Its capital would probably be Los Angeles.

"Truxillo, 47, has said the new country should be brought into being "by any means necessary."

SNIP

related to this. And this professor is still teaching, so I don't think it's really irrelevant.

could cause this? Did a large Irish, Italian and Polish population in NY cause such a thing or were they simply blackballed and scapegoated by fearmongers once upon a time?

And the article falls a bit short on explaining why people who LEFT Mexico would want to become Mexico...but hey...that's what wild eyed speculation is all about.

Many Mexicans and Mexican-Americans say that the southwest was stolen from Mexico, and therefore the U.S. border shouldn't be a barrier to Mexicans.

And the prof. isn't pushing to become part of Mexico -- he's supporting the establishment of a new country.

After all, UNM is influential and all that

who are trying to make things work

I am very involved in the Mexican community out here in Chicago. I have never heard anyone seriously say they want to "take back the SW" or anything like that.

I was very involved with the Mexican American community because not only did I cover it for the newspapers where I worked, I also had lots of Mexican American friends.

And the only people who talk about this are a handful of academics and their students, who usually end up forgetting the idea once they graduate.

They are too busy getting their pain prescriptions filled and being denied medical treatment by their employers to stage a revolution

Thanks for listening.

I could travel ten miles from my house and find dozens of bat shit crazy people in all walks of life. They would gladly tell you things like the Pottowattami Indians in Indiana need to rise up and take back the state from the US or that the British and French should invade and reclaim the midwest states taken from them in the 19th century.

This post is silly and irrelevant in the extreme. It also is designed to fan the flames of nationalism and nothing more.

Who is reprinting this 6-year-old article as a "must-read"? Not Truxillo; it's the anti-immigrant groups that are trying to inspire fear & intolerance against immigrants. By reprinting this article from their site, you are feeding into that goal. IMO.

I didn't bother clicking on it the first time I responded so I didn't notice, but it was first published in Feb. 2000.

nation.

He's on the U. of New Mexico website.

And I always liked it for its tolerance, especially compared to its neighbor, Arizona.

This helps A LOT. This a-hole prof can only muster being interviewed in a coffee shop, yet the wingnuts will use this as HUGH!!!1 signs of Hispanic racism. I say, attach this article to the one about the impending earthquake in LA, so that the wingnuts won't be losing so much real estate.

influence?

http://www.unm.edu/~chicanos/FACULTY/truxillo.html

From the University of New Mexico website:

"In the fall of 1997, Truxillo was appointed to a Research Assistant Professorship with the Center for Regional Studies. He published a book, By the Sword and the Cross: An Ideological History of New Spain (avaliable at the UNM Bookstore), and an article, "Hispanic Catholicism in New Spain and New Mexico." From the summer of 1997 through the present, Truxillo has served as an adjunct faculty member in Chicana/o Studies. He has also lectured extensively to student and service groups. Throughout his career, Truxillo has exhibited intense dedication to Chicano issues and especially to mentoring students and serving community-based education. He lectures and organizes tours to Mexico and Spain. Moreover, Charles Truxillo has a lifelong committment to working in New Mexico and participating in the formation of an intelligentsia of the Chicano nation in El Norte."

this LONE nutcase "influencing" exactly? The only ones who benefit from your publicity for him are the wingnuts who will use him for their own purposes.

Do you think hispanics would agree with that characterization?

With regard to your question, he influences his students. I have no idea whether he influences anyone else.

Hispanics who would not even countenance his nuttiness. But your feeding of the hysteria will lead to internment camps for Hispanics.

the Southwest was illegally taken from Mexico and that the borders shouldn't be a barrier to Mexicans -- which is one of his major points. Do you really think 99.9 % of hispanics would view him as a "nutcase"?

Or would they be offended that you think only a nutcase would have his views?

it's over. The vast majority of American Hispanics wouldn't survive a day living in conditions like Mexico's. I return to the point that you are just flamebaiting hysteria.

Have you asked them? If not, how can you assume what other people believe?

But I have heard quite a number of DU'ers talk about nations without borders, about opening up the U.S. to any immigrant from Mexico, etc. So I was wondering.

In the best tradition of academic nuts. I don't know any Mexican immigrants that would really support such an idea, & it doesn't seem like most DU'ers do either. There's a big difference between open borders & actual sucession. Academics can come up w/off-the-wall ideas & theories all the time, w/o it necessarily representing a real movement. Churchill comes to mind as another professor who's said some off the wall things - but that doesn't mean he speaks for everyone at his college, or that it's even supported by them. It's an interesting idea, in the abstract, but IMO it doesn't represent something that's actually planned or even possible.

Living in Southern California, my experiences lead me to believe that some (no, I don't know how many) hispanics would not only think he's not a nutcase, but would be happy to march behind him in the streets supporting his cause.

So what? :shrug:

There are all sorts of white supremacists who want to kill all minorities or deport them or whatever. Why aren't you concerned about that? Because they're just kooks who will never get anywhere.

Why is that such a typical rhetorical device on these boards?

Because you bring up one issue, you're accused of not being concerned about another issue.

Isn't it possible to be concerned about more than one problem? And to be concerned about extremes at both ends of an issue?

:shrug:

not a white supremacist.

over. People worry that their presence might incite violence. People don't like what they have to say. People argue over whether they should be allowed to march. But I have never seen anyone post seriously suggesting that their ideas might come about.

called KKK anymore. They're mixed in with the fundies.

When the KKK has a march, it's an issue. When a kooky white supremacist professor is found spouting such nonsense, it's an issue. There are websites for tracking people and groups like him.

Why?

Because if you don't meet the rhetoric with arguments, and expose the underlying assumptions, idiots fall for them. And there's nothing like undergraduate idiocy.

Well, ok, maybe highschool idiocy.

And you're right, the arguments of people like him should be met, not just dismissed as if they don't matter.

white supremacist faculty at colleges?

They teach high school. They can have science as their profession.

They used to be in colleges. I think they're just rare, and know to keep their traps shut.

There are still lots of sexists, i.e., male supremacists. They *haven't* all learned to keep their traps shut. (Overheard outrage in a dept. office on the first day of the fall term: Male dept. chair to pregnant student: "Oh, it's you! Are you ok? You're taking classes? (she nods) Really? You know, we didn't give you any funding because your due date is this term. You're actually to try to take classes? Will you be able to work on papers in your condition?" Student: "Yes, the fetus isn't in my cranium, it's in my uterus. My brain isn't really affected." Incredulous look from male head of dept. We witnesses were in shock, but nonetheless waiting for a come-back: "But now that you mention it, the fetus is urging me to bring a sex discrimination suit against your sorry retrograde asses right this second unless you cough up funding--how dare you think that a woman can't do college-level work just because she's pregnant! But if you're so stupid as to give the reasons for your sexist behavior with half a dozen witnesses standing right here, I can use the money." She didn't add that. Pity. She'd have gotten funding. Lots of it.)

GEEEZ...if that were the case everyone would be taking globla warming seriously! The guy is one radical with a handful of radicals who listen to him.

Your response to the poster above seems to denote that you enjoy fearmongering on the immigration issue. Would that interpretation be correct?

If not, please correct my mistaken impression.

cause for concern.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1484626&mesg_id=1484758

Do you really think some professor in New Mexico is really out to turn 5 southwestern states, one of which is the 5th largest economy in the world into Mexico? Do you really think Mexicans escaped a disorganized corrupt governement so they could come to America and form another disorganized corrupt government?

population of all those states, he has his work cut out for him:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html

Check out your numbers again.

and that number includes children of mixed marriages due to over a century of white/hispanic occupation

That always happens in diverse communities.

think this is a danger?

But after a couple threads about immigration -- where many of the posters sounded like they would support this professor's ideas -- I wondered.

There IS a lot of talk on DU about how the southwest was stolen from Mexico and how we should be eliminating barriers to immigration from Mexico. This guy would say his ideas are the logical progression from that.

But DUers aren't saying that it's a logical progresion. This guy isn't saying it's a logical progression. You're assuming both what other posters would feel & what this professor would say. W/o those assumptions, all we have is the words of a single professor from a single article. That's not a real movement & not something that seems to have real support.

Sorry if this is seen as a region-bash.

Bunch of bullshit from wishful thinkers.

there is occasional talk about a group that wants to retake the land...but I haven't heard a peep about "seceding". I'll have to check with Gov. Richardson on that.....

right there

if he can pull it off! *snark!*

;-)

This from Wilson's 14 Points.


V. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.

IX. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality. (Substitute Mexico for Italy)

XIII. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant. (Substitute Republica Del Norte)

AKA "Self Determination".

After all, Antonia Villaraigosa was elected mayor of Los Angeles, so I suspect he is part of the grand scheme to take Mexico back.

Next thing you know we will be renaming American cities under Mexican surnames such as Los Angeles which will soon become known as....Los Angeles

:sarcasm:

I believe you were asking in another thread.

I found this website (with references to Truxillo) because I was looking for immigration information that didn't come from FAIR. So now are you going to tell me that this org is racist, too?

http://www.diversityalliance.org/

Pnwmom, that's as racist as racism gets.

posts on this thread.

Those of us who can read can clearly see the fear you are attempting to impart by using a website with a faux dedication to diversity which is funded the the SCAIFE FOUNDATION of all places to convince us that some professor piping off bullshit in New Mexico is wanting to turn the US southwest into it's own nation via some covert takeover plan.

and missed anything about the Scaife Foundation. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

"Triangulate all you wish but that is indeed the point of your many posts on this thread."

She's not "triangulating" anything. She's pointing out the rantings of a clearly "racist" Hispanic professor. But then, it's apparently OK to make a completely racist statement as long as it's against white people, and not by white people.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

In fact, just the opposite. Find me a post that endorses his statements that was not said in jest.

Reread the thread title. There are PLENTY of legal and practical barriers to any minority group TAKING over 5 states. The thread is fearmongering and nothing more. Even if 50% of the Latinos living in those regions agreed with him, they would be outnumbered.

No one that I can see is defending his ridiculous statements.

Meanwhile, throughout the thread, the threadstarter speculates that this guy has some kind of reach beyond a handful of radicals that he does not have.

There's a VERY big difference between Mexicans/ Latinos protesting to defend rights afforded to them by the constitution of this nation and protesting to turn the US into Mexico (but based on some of the crowd coming to the threadstarter's defense one would think that is what was being done.)

We have areas in Southern California known as "little Saigon" "Japantown" etc....I don't see anyone getting up in arms about that.

I don't think for a second that there's enough support for Truxillo's statements for there to be a real "threat" of those states seceding from the union.
I do think, however, he has enough supporters to deserve some public attention, discussion, and criticism. It certainly is worth pointing out that there are "pro-illegal immigrant" nutjobs out there.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

it's that simple.

Right wing organizations such as the Scaife foundation...

http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipientgrants.php?recipientID=1382

agreement between the US and Texas allowed for secession; Texas entered the union in a very strange way, and had very idiosyncratic stipulations.

Don't know if that agreement is still in force or not.

As for the rest ... some states tried that once.

That dude needs to lay off the pipe.

So, wait, a random professor makes a remark back in 2000 & this is news? This article is at least 6 years old. The "Diversity Alliance for a Sustainable America" needs to update their talking points. This is a right-wing conservative organization funded exclusively by Richard Mellon Scaife. Scaife is a billionare who has funded lots of right-wing propaganda machines like NewsMax, American Spectator, etc. through his foundations. This is pure right-wing propaganda, yet it can still find an audience at DU. That doesn't seem right, somehow.

Media transparancy: http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:OxGFqY21RHsJ:www.mediatransparency.org/recipientgrants.php%3FrecipientID%3D1382+Diversity+Alliance+for+a+Sustainable+America&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4

Scaife: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife

is still teaching at UNM, and he's still pushing his ideas, so it doesn't really matter that the article is dated, IMO.

is an Asian with an ax to grind with Mexicans. Check out the articles on that site...the vast majority are written by her.

This organization seems to consist of one person & a website.

and no leadership seems to have arisen that can reverse that, I find it not unlikely that several different countries will exist in what is now the United States in the future.

Truxillo may not be the brightest bulb on the tree but his rhetoric calls attention to an important issue: to what extent should national boundaries depend on cultural boundaries? Once the Southwestern states have an overwhelming Hispanic majority, should they be forced to remain in a national political system that promotes Anglos almost exclusively? That combined with the enormous natural resources of the region seems like a sure road to serfdom. Unless American politics actually becomes color-blind in the next 30-50 years, the region in question will become more colony-like, a trend which already seems to be underway from my perspective on the ground.

http://www.factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-tm_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U_M00080&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U&-_dBy=040

And here's California's last census by race, so I think we have a bit further to go with 77 percent white:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html

44.5%
A minority.

But if we're going to draw new borders there's no reason not to draw one through the Tehachapis, there would probably be a Latino majority in that region.

It ain't gonna happen in your lifetime no matter how young you are

That number includes the 33% of the population that considers itself both "White" and "Hispanic."

IT really doesn't bode well for a new Aztec nation!

These are mostly Hispanics who say they are "White," which they interpret to mean not Indian or mulatto. "White" is a category within Latino culture as well, and many white Latinos can be passionately nationalistic.

I don't see any Aztlan rhetoric in Truxillo. Tejanos are white, even redneck, and a lot of the New Mexico Mexican-American population is part-Jewish. I think his argument is based on a mestizo, not an indigenous nationalism.

into the white category.

the census comes from self-identity mostly

Latino DU Group? Pues si. (Shameless plug)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=379

Hispanic white or Hispanic black. Given the choice, some groups (e.g, Puerto Ricans) tend to designate themselves Hispanic black. Others (most Mexicans) choose Hispanic white. But the census categories don't reflect the fact that more and more people (and certainly most American latino's) are of mixed heritage.

Just because they have to choose a census category doesn't mean they self-identify as white as opposed to Chicano.

Unless you group all minorities together against whites, whites are in no way a minority.

The tables contain two figures.

White persons, 77.2%
White persons, non-hispanic is 44.5%.

Baby Bowl XIX or something.

at least insofar as the subject matter of this thread is concerned. I don't see a Chicano nation in the cards in the foreseeable future.

What's the problem? :shrug:

The agonistic way you present statistical hypotheses. It sounds like you're betting on Whites vs. Hispanics. It's weird.

I am simply rebutting this fearmongering thread. Forgive me if I don't see Chicano nation happening any time soon with a white economic power base.

Even if it did...I wouldn't really care

I didn't take the thread as fearmongering as much as academia-bashing, but given that the poster is known to be "concerned" about immigration, you are probably right.

from the 70's Chicano movement has a sphere of influence FAR beyond his actual reach. I remember the La Raza movement and even know a lot of Mexican lawyers who were in my classes that were a part of it. Latino rights have been a big issue in California for many years since the workers are exploited so badly and have been for decades. That doesn't mean we are in any grave thread of them taking over.

Anyway...no issue with your posts but as someone who lives in a very diverse region I will say this...the middle eastern and asian population seems to have a more closed economic sub community than do the latinos in my area

of DU'ers that would be intrigued by his ideas and not think he's a "nutcase" at all.

I'm surprised that almost everyone here has been so dismissive.

Maybe a little angry. No one to look to for leadership. Probably a competent teacher. Believe me, his department keeps him around for some other reason than making embarrassing comments to the press.

Diversity of opinion and intellectual inquiry

areas of expertise that fill gaps in the faculty. When clearly unacademic people (John Tierney's my favorite) weigh in on tenure and such, they are talking out their ass.

I personally know of one professor who got tenure through a snafu - they didn't want to grant it, but his application sat on someone's desk too long and he got tenure by default. He is a dreadful professor - the students hate him and his peers despise him.

There certainly are DUer's that would be intrigued by these ideas, though I'm certainly not one of them.

Oops, I was Wrong.

http://zapatopi.net/cascadia/

Just askin'.

:D couldn't resist!

If we get another six years of Bush (assuming Jeb runs and steals the election), I'm all for it at this point!

more in common with poor Mexicans than I do with Bushites. And I'm damned sick of paying the burden of taxes to an illegitimate, out-of-control federal government that slaughters tens of thousands of innocent people without a thought, and tortures many more, and lards their zillionaire buddies with billions and billions of unaccountable, no-bid contracts and tax cuts. What do I have in common with THAT? I am a poor, white (Irish, French, Scots, touch of Native American), old, native-born Californian, whose health insurance was consuming three-quarters of my income (had to drop it). Why am I paying taxes to people who hate me and hate poor Mexicans, and hate everybody but their own fatcat elite?

80 years is none too soon, from what I can see. I don't think it's very feasible, or realistic, in current circumstances, but why exclude it as an idea? The first American revolution wasn't very feasible either (rebelling against the mighty British Empire), but that didn't stop Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine, did it? Transparent, verifiable elections are also not very feasible, or realistic, in current circumstances. Does that mean we should ignore the fact that we DON'T HAVE transparent, verifiable elections any more, and not do anything about it?

Why do political ideas always have to pass the Freeper test? If Freepers don't like it, and can twist it to their own purposes, we don't get to say it?

I would be willing to discuss any peaceable idea that could free people from the Bush junta. Secession of the West. Throwing Diebold, ES&S and all election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor' (or some other convenient body of water). A General Strike. A gas station boycott. A taxpayer revolt. A state law banning use of our National Guard in foreign wars. A grass roots solar panel movement to get everybody off the grid. Whatever.

But I don't think posting this professor's ideas is particularly productive right now. It just encourages immigrant bashing. And everybody seems to ignore the fact that most of the people crossing the border have more right to be here than any white person does. Most of them have indigenous blood.

There is also the matter of the profound, peaceful, democratic Leftist revolution that is occurring throughout Latin America--with Leftist governments elected in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Bolivia, and Venezuela, and growing Leftist movements in Peru and even in Columbia, and Nicaragua, and all the way into Mexico, where the Leftist mayor of Mexico City, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrado, just edged ahead in the pre-election polls for President of Mexico (election next month).

In Bolivia, they just elected their first indigenous president, Evo Morales. In Chile, they elected socialist (and first woman president) Michele Batchelet (who was tortured by the US-backed dictator Pinochet). Brazil is headed by a former steelworker, Lula da Silva, who led the third world revolt at the World Trade Organization meeting in Cancun.

The Bush fascists have reason to be afraid. Their old brutal white fatcat men ways are being rejected by most of the Western Hemisphere. And as these more community-minded, family-minded, socialist-tending "immigrants" create (or rather re-create) their own cross-border culture--which I think of as Pomo Latino culture (the Pomos, indigenous to California, were the world's greatest basketweavers, a women's art, of hearth and home)--I think we will change, for the better, and maybe break off--who knows? Maybe we will break off in spirit, but not in legal fact. Maybe we will stop paying taxes to the fatcats, and find ourselves "occupied" by our own National Guard, who will beat us senseless and grab our handbags to extract their 20% out of our pittance wages.

The times they are a-changing, for sure. Maybe Abe Lincoln was wrong, and the Union will, indeed, "perish from the earth." Tears well up, as I say this. We were once such a bright hope, this beautiful country with its revolutionary heart. Is it over? Have the Bushites killed it?

But people will go on, one hopes--and will create something organic, something better. The brutal Bushites may annihilate the human race, through war or planetary death--or not. We have no control over what they do. We lost that to the election theft machines. But what may do them in is isolation--from the bulk of the world's people, including most Americans, who desire peace and justice, and from democratic and even non-democratic governments that view them as pariahs, and are appalled by their lawbreaking.

The Roman Empire fell in just this way--from peoples' hatred of their bullying, and their endless expansionary wars, and from their own loss of their republican ideals. They drained the Empire dry to fatten the very rich. It took Europe a thousand years to recover from it. It has taken the Latin Americans only a hundred years or so to recover from Spain's imperium and only a decade or so to recover from the additional U.S. imperium, and all it took was transparent elections (the hard work of the OAS, EU election monitoring groups, the Carter Center and local civic groups). What might it mean to us, to have this infusion of people from across the border who EXPECT transparent elections? Nothing but good, I think. And if the West secedes, who can say that it will be the brown people who instigate it? Us white 'Californios' have a couple of grievances with this junta, too.

And it's still retarded today.

then it is inevitable that we will have a war one day, no secret has been made of the fact that many mexicans think we stole their country and they want it back, at least the wealthy areas that you mention

endless warfare forever in our future, because this can't happen peacefully

anybody remember a little thing called the civil war? it gets ugly when people are having territorial disputes in your own front yard

some science fiction writer -- maybe it was bruce sterling -- wrote of the "let bygones be bygones" principle, and i kind of like it, we need to just sit down and tell everyone, OK, it was shitty what happened in the past but we are going to freeze the borders where they were in 2000 (or whatever) and NO MORE fighting or bitching about it, you are all just going to have to get along and people who try to start more wars to shift borders are terrorists and need to be dealt with as same

otherwise we will have war forever because everybody lives on stolen land

unfortunately human nature being what it is, i think it more likely that we will keep killing each other over lines on a map until the last human is dead in the sand

as a post script, i agree w. those upthread who point out that MOST hispanics are too busy worrying about job injuries, crappy pay and working conditions, etc. to be much concerned or even aware of this movement

but fear not, genetics (from mixed couples) will eventually cause the "brown-out" some of youse fear so much.

There is no way in hell that the US is going to let our main economic engine, California, split off from the US. Nor is it going to let its main weapons development grounds in New Mexico go away either.

This is simply more fear mongering and veiled bigotry to keep the right wing dopes scared up and occupied while the neo-cons in office pick their economic bones clean.

:rofl:

Steal Mississippi.

quite a few years ago

It didn't work out too well for them last time. They even held a popular vote to do it democratically. Didn't matter. They got their butts kicked anyway.

this article. In my opinion, it is wise to pay attention to and shed light on extreme ideas that many would prefer to believe do not even exist. Pnwmom didn't posit the idea of "Repubica del Norte," she merely noted that someone who at least has an audience among his students thinks this idea has a future. She asked for opinions. I for one would prefer to know he's out there rather than pretend he and others like him are irrelevant. Awareness isn't the same as fear.

of the new country and Spanish its first language!! I'm running out to buy a few more guns.

We already know that the federal government has a bigger army and bigger guns than the rest of us, and is not afraid to use them.

This story belongs on the "future fiction" shelves next to "Ecotopia" by Ernest Callenbach.

edited for typo

Hekate

where we are.... I do contend the US as we know it is dead... whatever rises from the ashes will be interesitng. One possibilty is truly the break up of this country.

...not giving up territories that are already held.

I mean this in all sincerity. Read no further if you can't stand looking into my personal nightmare -- which I readily concede may not come true at all. I certainly hope not.

I fear that the very soul of my nation is being murdered by the evil spawn now ruling from Washington DC. I fear that all of the ideals that have animated us as a people and that have held us together for so long are now being sacrificed on the twin altars of power to the powerful and false security for the people.

As unchecked power accrues to the Executive branch of our government, and as more benign government functions are ceded to "private" megacorporations, and as the military-industrial-complex feeds off our taxes -- what we have is not just the blueprint of a non-democratic empire, but the fleshing-out of its skeleton...

I wonder sometimes how it felt to be a Roman citizen in a minor town in the Empire. I think it probably wasn't so bad, as long as the taxes weren't too burdensome and your son wasn't drafted. If your family was poor, though, serving in the Imperial army probably seemed like the best way out. Regardless, politics would not be your concern because nothing you did would really make a difference.

It's just -- I don't think my mind and heart could make that transition in this lifetime without paying a terrible price.

On the other hand, the Roman Empire didn't have the sophisticated means our government has of spying on its citizens and keeping them in line. But you really don't need spy satellites and help from AT&T: Orwell's "1984" was a grim look at one possible future, and was based on his years living in Burma....

We Americans stand at a crossroads in our history. What seems to be coming to pieces is our devotion to our essential liberties and to each other as fellow citizens of one country. Somehow, though, I really don't see our borders diminishing -- that happens at the end of empires, not at the beginning.

Yours for better days, speedily and soon,
Hekate

But I think we're about to take a sudden decline -- we've already passed our peak. We are in debt up to our eyeballs, and we won't fare well with peak energy or global warming.

I believe you're right about the direction the Bushies want us to take -- but I think they're going to fail, and they'll drag all the rest of us into the pits along with them.

what exactly would be "new" about that?

a Hispanic secessionist movement in the Southwest is pure fantasy that no one in thier right mind would support. The other half of the open-border advocates posting here think that the creation of Aztlan is a swell thing. So, which is it? You can't have it both ways.

I think I'll take note of the people on this thread who are tickled by the thought of destruction of the U.S. It will make it much easier to call them on their bullshit when they try to argue elsewhere that illegal immigration is harmless. Again, you can't have it both ways!

But you said it better than I could.

(since somebody managed to kick this thread up again...)

In all of the threads since the issue of the (Southern) border exploded (& I've read most of them), I can think of only ONE person who advocates "open borders," a poster who is very idealistic, of the LENNON/"Imagine" type of person.

When the issue of the (Southern) border started taking off, a red flag started flapping in my face because the issue can take many forms, but all the forms all too often are cover-ups for basic racism.

The Minutemen claim to screen out overt skinheads, Nazis, and other racists, but the reality is that the overwhelming number of their sympathizers don't bother one whit to disguise this core value. My local radio wingnut talkshow host complained that "the border" can never be discussed without somebody yelling "racism." But that is because the issue of the the border is more often than not MIXED UP with other issues. The Minutemen and their supporters claim to be interested in "natinal security," but they can never answer why the 9-11 terrorists came across the NORTHERN border.

I'll go back to the mantra I posted numerous times WAY back then when the "issue" was simmering:

We (here) are Dems: We are interested in and watchful of CIVIL RIGHTS, SOCIAL JUSTICE, and HUMANE TREATMENT-------of everybody HERE or ANYWHERE. We are NOT for "illegality." We ARE for national security. We are NOT for "open borders" (except for that ONE, beautiful DUer).

Note that once I've staked out CIVIL RIGHTS/SOCIAL JUSTICE/HUMANE TREATMENT, I don't get into specifics about "amnesty" and such. Discussion is legitimate about how to fit our Democratic vision into specific options. There are sincere DUers who have honest concerns about the impact on Labor of the influx and about how these economic refugees are exploited.

What are NOT legitimate are xenophobic hysteria, strawmanning, smearing, and other such flamebaiting. I hope this thread is put out of its misery. I only posted in it again because it is back on page 1, and I won't prolong it by responding anymore.

notice how a couple people keeping declaring that DUers are advocating for open borders just because we don't fall for this RW bullshit. Transparent....

than you recognize. Whether its neoliberal globalists, individuals who think that the Southwest was stolen and belongs in the hands of Mexicans, or people who think everything would be okay if we just link hands and sing kumbaya - these types make up a sizable minority at Democratic Underground.

You may believe that pointing out this tendency at DU is somehow racist but for me its all about national sovereignty. The twenty million illegal immigrants in this country are citizens of other countries, foreign citizens who fail to acknowledge America's laws and boundaries. It doesn't matter where these people are from, or what race they belong to - we should honor their basic human rights, but the only entities that owe them any other rights and privileges are the countries that they belong to.

How about some "CIVIL RIGHTS/SOCIAL JUSTICE/HUMANE TREATMENT" for the millions of Americans whose wages are being depressed by the huge increase in labor supply? I don't see anyone on these threads, and I've read them too, who is racist. I see people concerned about their future, trying to get a handle on how illegal immigration affects their ability to continue to earn a living wage. All these charges of "fear-mongering, xenophobia, hyping a "wedge issue," etc. are ridiculous. And what's more, the only hate I see on these threads is always spewing forth from the mouths of those open border, pro-amnesty advocates calling us racist, hateful, white nationalist...the list goes on.

And based on the responses I get when I post, that one "beautiful Duer" has plenty of friends here.

brought to you by the same people once again.