Immigration

Netroots Nation: Day 1

Published August 14, 2009 @ 12:01AM PT

My first day at my first Netroots Nation was pretty amazing.  Not too surprisingly, the most productive interactions took place outside of the scheduled panels.  Here's my typically disgruntled take on the proceedings (though I was told tonight that I am an optimist, and I agreed):

9:00 - The Global Netroots: My hope is that the day will come when a "global netroots" panel includes bloggers from countries that are not the U.S., and no, I don't mean American ex-pats blogging from Prague.  I respect what these panelists are doing to raise awareness in the U.S. of social media activism in places like Iran or how they are engaging ex-pats in domestic U.S. politics.  I support their work, but please next time change the title to "The Ex-pat Netroots" or "Promoting Imperial Narratives Through the Persian Lens."  There's very little that's global about it as currently constituted.

10:30: Leveraging Strength: Effective Collaboration Between Online and Offline Organizations and Activists: I noted with interest James Rucker's account of the Jena 6 movement, which very effectively combined online and offline activism in the effort to push back against the prosecution of six black teenagers in Louisiana.  Rucker made the point that I know is true from my work representing immigrants in court: money gets you justice in this country.  Without money, you can't count on justice.  I would love to see something comparable to Jena 6 develop around the Dream Act, but I'm afraid of what horrible thing might have to take place for that to happen.

Robert Greenwald urged attendees to take the long view and focus valuable time on issues that will change the way people think about things, not just reacting reflexively to the hot topic of the day.  I agree.

I don't remember what sparked this thought during the panel, but I decided that online communities are imagined communities just as national communities are.  You often never meet the people you interact with online, but you are connected to them in sometimes powerful ways.  I continue to wonder how online communities can be pushed out beyond national borders, and what those communities would look like.  This is the future of online organizing, and perhaps later the future of social interactions and one day political organization.

3:00 - How to Work with Unions in Your District: Elana Levin, who works for Workers United (whose members make Obama's suits), made a good point, which I agreed with in part and disagreed with in part.  She said that her union supports immigrants because it is made up of immigrants, and it has always been made up of immigrants.  She said tensions between unions and immigrants are exaggerated.  I agree that unions have been how immigrants organized since the unions' inception, but the historical tension between native and immigrant labor is well documented in Zolberg's A Nation by Design.  And it still exists today.  I applaud the unions for working to move forward with common purpose in spite of those tensions.

Then there was Bill Clinton's speech. 

What can I say.  The man mentioned immigration only once, to say that George W. Bush had a fairly progressive position on immigration in 2000.  Well, ok.  That's not very informative.

What did Bill Clinton think about the fatally-flawed enforcement-only immigration bill (IIRIRA) that he signed into law in 1996?  What does he think about the thousands of families living apart because of that bill, or all the U.S. citizens living in exile with their loved ones abroad?

What does Bill Clinton think about immigration reform today?  What do mainstream Congressional Democrats think about it?  It seems clear they would rather not think about it, and wish it would just disappear so they could focus on other issues.

I agree that health care reform and a climate change bill are vitally important.  I fully support both those efforts, even as I wish those bills were better than they are.

But don't gear us up just to be let down.  Don't throw immigrants under the bus again, as they were in 1996 (IIRIRA), 2003 (NSEERS), 2005 (REAL ID), 2006 (CIR Fail), and 2007 (CIR double-Fail).  If you screw this up, if you don't get this right, then I believe this movement will change the status quo in ways you never imagined and can't possibly predict.  But maybe that's the optimist in me talking again.

(Back to health care, I realized tonight that we as pro-migrant bloggers will serve the interests of the immigrant community better by supporting health care reform now while our efforts can do the most good.  By informing and educating the gatekeepers and the public that the bullshit the insurance industry is peddling about immigrants and health care is factually incorrect and morally repugnant.  And by supporting coalitions that can lend their support during the bruising immigration debate.)

Share this Post

Related Posts

Comments (4)

  1. Karla Bennion

    It's so discouraging to see the administration abandoning the public option.  I have begun to mistrust the words "stakeholders" as much as I now mistrust "family values"--it means something different than what appears on the surface.  At this point, "stakeholders" as it applies to health care reform, means "the companies who have made an obscene amount of money over past decades and want to put off true reform for at least another decade of obscene profits."  It's also very disheartening to put one's faith in a a party and politicians, and discover (as one suspected all along) that they really are bought and paid for by industry lobbyists.

    Posted by Karla Bennion on 08/17/2009 @ 01:39PM PT

  2. Dave Bennion

    who is this lurker?  :)  thanks for commenting!  you should know as well as anyone the machinations of the insurance companies, fighting them as you do and having uninsured and underinsured children with children of their own.

    i realized tho that the party isn't very good, but i think obama is trying to move things forward.  he can't do it on his own, tho--we have to make the change ourselves, we have to be the change we want to see.  no one else is going to do it for us.

    Posted by Dave Bennion on 08/20/2009 @ 11:35PM PT

  3. Reply to thread
  4. ...don't gear us up just to be let down.  Don't throw immigrants under the bus again, as they were in 1996 (IIRIRA), 2003 (NSEERS), 2005 (REAL ID), 2006 (CIR Fail), and 2007 (CIR double-Fail).  If you screw this up, if you don't get this right, then I believe this movement will change the status quo in ways you never imagined and can't possibly predict. 

    Eso es!  But keep in mind that a bad CIR bill -- one that penalizes and criminalizes immigrants -- may turn out to be worse than no bill at all (I'm not suggesting that, just saying). I agree with what Roberto Lovato's perspective on this:

    Beyond building and saving existing hate crime reporting infrastructure, by far the most important thing the immigrant rights movement can do is stop the debate from including any more legislation that directly or implicitly reinforces the constitutionally dangerous notions of immigrant criminality.

    In other words, in an environment in which visual, verbal and physical anti-migrant violence has gone viral, there should be a moratorium against ANY AND ALL LEGISLATION PREMISED ON DANGEROUSLY FALSE NOTIONS OF THE IMMIGRANT AS CRIMINAL NEEDING AND DESERVING PUNISHMENT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Such notions only further legitimate similar notions proferred by pols -Republicans and Democrats-, mainstream media and the racial extremists whose ideas they give a platform to.

    We no longer need to give extremists and their ideas a platform by legitimating them thru “tradeoffs”, “compromises” and with toxic talk of more enforcement and punishment. There has to and is another way: stop.

    http://ofamerica.wordpress.com/2009/08/10/white-nationlist-anger-and-violence-a-preview-of-even-greater-anti-immigrant-violence/

    Posted by a d on 08/17/2009 @ 03:09PM PT

  5. p.s. Thanks for the feedback for those of us who couldn't attend.  As a writer, I'm comfortable with "imagined communities" but I do think we need to take it to the streets now and again to be effective.

    Posted by a d on 08/17/2009 @ 03:14PM PT

  6. Reply to thread

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author
Dave Bennion

David is an attorney in Philadelphia, PA, where he helps immigrants to the U.S. navigate the complex immigration legal system. Views he expresses at change.org are his alone and don't represent the views or opinions of his employer, Nationalities Service Center. The information contained on this site is intended for educational and advocacy purposes only.

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.