Immigrant boycott day May 1: Good idea?

[zamboniracer]

Tomorrow May 1 there are going to be a number of demonstrations and work boycotts by immigrants. At my Catholic Church in suburban Cleveland, which is not exactly a hotbed for this issue, the preacher today even made a point of saying that the Church supports justice for the immigrants, whatever that means. I suppose it could mean that they’re entitled to due process at deportation hearings but I don’t think that’s what the priest had in mind.

As I’ve said in other threads and in other places, I’m in favor of supporting poor American workers and American citizens over Mexican immigrant workers. I don’t think the boycott is a good idea, and I think that any student below age 17 who boycotts school should get an unexcused absence for the day and any worker who skips work should get a reprimand but that’s easy for me to say.

For a day I don’t think the US Economy’s going to take much a hit, if any from the boycott. It’ll shrug off the boycott likes it does a blizzard. What do my fellow dopers think?

[dalej42]

I strongly oppose it. I"m going to buy things on purpose as an anti boycott.

My church is very liberal but didn’t mention it today. Unfortunately, I expect immigration will be covered in next week’s service since the sheriff of Dallas county will be speaking. I’m quite sure I won’t agree with her.

[Frank]

@zamboniracer

It’ll shrug off the boycott likes it does a blizzard. What do my fellow dopers think?

I agree. It’s just a one day thing.

As to the purposes of it, I generally disagree. Though I absolutely support immigration to this country, I just as absolutely feel that such should be done legally. I’ll go along with an amnesty for certain folks - those who have been here for more than, oh, say, five years; those who have children who are U.S. citizens; and the like - but I will not support making this country open to any Tom, Dick, and Harry who happens to wander in. There is no country in the world that allows unrestricted, unregulated immigration, nor is there any pressing moral need for the U.S. to be the first to do so.

That said, if people want to go protest about it, more power to them. My opinions have no effect on their right to express their opinions.

[GIGObuster]

I’m mildly in favor of it, but I do really understand why it is happening:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603290001

In a March 28 editorial, The Washington Times claimed that opponents of a recent House immigration bill (H.R. 4437) have “disingenuously charged” that, under the bill, “anyone who helps an illegal immigrant would be considered a felon.” But the bill explicitly includes under “criminal offenses” any person who knowingly “assists, encourages, directs, or induces” an illegal alien to “reside in or remain in the United States.” So while courts would ultimately have to determine the scope of the conduct proscribed under the bill, critics – which include prominent religious leaders – can hardly be accused of “disingenuous[ness]” for citing its plain language.

…

Fox News political contributor and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA) made a similar statement about the bill on the March 23 edition of Hannity & Colmes: “*f I were asked by the Republicans in the Congress, I would urge them to drop the one section that relates to religious and other nonprofit institutions being good Samaritans. I think that that’s actually a legitimate criticism and worth dropping.”

Elsewhere, in other threads, there is the curious bit of dopers from the right saying that many will not show to work “because the rumor mongers are lying by saying raids are coming", problem is, on april 19th there was Michel Chretoff talking about the raid on IFCO like he was a member of the House:

http://www.democracynow.org/print.pl?sid=06/04/21/132239

JORGE MUJICA: I think it was a message. I think it was a message for us. It’s incredible when you read the declarations of Chertoff. He uses, time and over, the word “criminal”: “criminal,” “criminal alien,” “criminal alien.” You know, and he insists that this is an operation to remove criminal aliens from the United States. The wording seems appropriated to the Sensenbrenner legislation, which is the legislation that would turn 12 million people into criminals, but that doesn’t exist yet. You know, we are not criminals according to the law. To cross the border without papers is an administrative fault. It’s not a crime, legally. So why is Chertoff using the word “criminal, criminal, criminal,” time and over? It’s a message for us, I think.

AMY GOODMAN: And what are you going to do about it?

JORGE MUJICA: Oh, this backfired on him. If that was the intention, to intimidate people, it backfired on him. Over the radio in Spanish language, over the printed media, everybody’s so outraged at this operation that people that were not marching with us, that were not organizing with us, are now doing it. We were preparing the next demonstration for Mayday, Monday, and we were expecting to have 300,000 people. Now we expect to have half a million.
…

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Jorge Mujica, who is a former journalist, worked for La Raza, Univision, Telemundo, as a union organizer. May 1st, you said, the next round of major protest. Do you support the boycott that a number of immigrant rights activists are advocating for that day, the idea of a day without an immigrant?

JORGE MUJICA: No, actually, we don’t. And it might be a matter of wording, the action. When we invite people to march with us, we obviously are inviting people not to work that day or not to go to school. And anyone marching is not going to be buying anything, is not going to be selling anything. Economically, you have the same effect. But we are not calling for a boycott for a simple reason. We brought the labor unions on board as our allies, because we want to take away the only immigration and only immigrants aspect of this struggle. This is a working problem. If we bring them on board the labor unions on board, they cannot even by far touch the word “boycott,” because that’s illegal for labor unions to do. And so, we put things in a balance, and we decided, ‘Okay, do we talk about a boycott or we bring the labor unions to our side?’ And we decided, definitely, we want the labor unions. So forget the boycott. The economic impact is going to be there, anyway. But we are not calling for a boycott.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you very much for being with us. We will certainly continue to follow this debate, struggle, protest. We’ve been speaking with Jorge Mujica, who is a former journalist, who is a union organizer, one of the major organizers of the March 10 protest here in Chicago.

Interesting to note that a former La Raza member sounds more reasonable than what the demagogues of the right are telling their listeners or viewers are the “radical elements” that are “hijacking the protest”.

Incidentally, I do know illegals are are not doing the right thing, but I would not call them criminals, at least not yet, the protest are going on because of the efforts to make them so:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/18/D8H2G2A81.html
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0503h.asp

[GIGObuster]

Crud, here is the post with the correct quote:

I’m mildly in favor of it, but I do really understand why it is happening:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603290001

In a March 28 editorial, The Washington Times claimed that opponents of a recent House immigration bill (H.R. 4437) have “disingenuously charged” that, under the bill, “anyone who helps an illegal immigrant would be considered a felon.” But the bill explicitly includes under “criminal offenses” any person who knowingly “assists, encourages, directs, or induces” an illegal alien to “reside in or remain in the United States.” So while courts would ultimately have to determine the scope of the conduct proscribed under the bill, critics – which include prominent religious leaders – can hardly be accused of “disingenuous[ness]” for citing its plain language.

…

Fox News political contributor and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA) made a similar statement about the bill on the March 23 edition of Hannity & Colmes: “*f I were asked by the Republicans in the Congress, I would urge them to drop the one section that relates to religious and other nonprofit institutions being good Samaritans. I think that that’s actually a legitimate criticism and worth dropping.”

Elsewhere, in other threads, there is the curious bit of dopers from the right saying that many will not show to work “because the rumor mongers are lying by saying raids are coming", problem is, on april 19th there was Michel Chretoff talking about the raid on IFCO like he was a member of the House:

http://www.democracynow.org/print.pl?sid=06/04/21/132239

JORGE MUJICA: I think it was a message. I think it was a message for us. It’s incredible when you read the declarations of Chertoff. He uses, time and over, the word “criminal”: “criminal,” “criminal alien,” “criminal alien.” You know, and he insists that this is an operation to remove criminal aliens from the United States. The wording seems appropriated to the Sensenbrenner legislation, which is the legislation that would turn 12 million people into criminals, but that doesn’t exist yet. You know, we are not criminals according to the law. To cross the border without papers is an administrative fault. It’s not a crime, legally. So why is Chertoff using the word “criminal, criminal, criminal,” time and over? It’s a message for us, I think.

AMY GOODMAN: And what are you going to do about it?

JORGE MUJICA: Oh, this backfired on him. If that was the intention, to intimidate people, it backfired on him. Over the radio in Spanish language, over the printed media, everybody’s so outraged at this operation that people that were not marching with us, that were not organizing with us, are now doing it. We were preparing the next demonstration for Mayday, Monday, and we were expecting to have 300,000 people. Now we expect to have half a million.
…

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Jorge Mujica, who is a former journalist, worked for La Raza, Univision, Telemundo, as a union organizer. May 1st, you said, the next round of major protest. Do you support the boycott that a number of immigrant rights activists are advocating for that day, the idea of a day without an immigrant?

JORGE MUJICA: No, actually, we don’t. And it might be a matter of wording, the action. When we invite people to march with us, we obviously are inviting people not to work that day or not to go to school. And anyone marching is not going to be buying anything, is not going to be selling anything. Economically, you have the same effect. But we are not calling for a boycott for a simple reason. We brought the labor unions on board as our allies, because we want to take away the only immigration and only immigrants aspect of this struggle. This is a working problem. If we bring them on board the labor unions on board, they cannot even by far touch the word “boycott,” because that’s illegal for labor unions to do. And so, we put things in a balance, and we decided, ‘Okay, do we talk about a boycott or we bring the labor unions to our side?’ And we decided, definitely, we want the labor unions. So forget the boycott. The economic impact is going to be there, anyway. But we are not calling for a boycott.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you very much for being with us. We will certainly continue to follow this debate, struggle, protest. We’ve been speaking with Jorge Mujica, who is a former journalist, who is a union organizer, one of the major organizers of the March 10 protest here in Chicago.

Interesting to note that a former La Raza member sounds more reasonable than what the demagogues of the right are telling their listeners or viewers are the “radical elements” that are “hijacking the protest”.

Incidentally, I do know illegals are are not doing the right thing, but I would not call them criminals, at least not yet, the protests are going on because of the efforts to make them so:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/18/D8H2G2A81.html
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0503h.asp

[Autumn_Almanac]

Bad idea. Unless the message they’re trying to send is “We don’t fit in and we’re dangerous.” In that case, good idea.

[even_sven]

I’m all for it. Around here they are trying to send the messege “We are the city of Oakland”. Which is true. Seems like a reasonable thing to point out and a reasonable way to point it out.

[Apos]

I basically agree with Kevin Drum: holding a boycott on a controversial issue that is already sort of trending your way to begin with is a good way to stop that progress cold. So, dumb idea.

[John_Mace]

I said what I thought about it in my pit thread; Immigration Protesters: Make your message pro-American!

This whole immigration issue is a tough one-- I haven’t fully thought out my position. Amnesty seems crazy at a gut level, but maybe it is the only practical way to deal with the situation. It does seem, though, that if we go for amnesty, we really have to tighten up the border.

[GIGObuster]

@Apos

I basically agree with Kevin Drum: holding a boycott on a controversial issue that is already sort of trending your way to begin with is a good way to stop that progress cold. So, dumb idea.

Like on the quote I posted, I see that opinion is divided among organizers if the protest should include a boycott, To me it counts more that the most important groups in the protest are NOT supporting the boycott.

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/nation/stories/042006dnnatimmig.17114e6d.html

[asterion]

So, not only are they going to boycott, they’re going to do it on a day that makes people think they’re a bunch of Communists?

[Frank]

@asterion

So, not only are they going to boycott, they’re going to do it on a day that makes people think they’re a bunch of Communists?

May 1 is Labor Day in virtually all the world except the U.S. (It’s also the birthday of one of my sisters. When we were in Italy, she assumed all the ruckus was in honor of her.)

[cookeze]

Bad idea. You have, basically, a bunch of poor folks who snuck in to get work and they are all going to take a work day off, with no pay.

Any economic effect that a boycott will have will be far offset by the earnings lost for the demonstrators.

And their expenses will not go away. Still need food, gas, rent, and beer money.

What are they going to not buy? I’ll bet that if some businesses show a slowdown in their sales that day, that there won’t be a general loss of business when you measure the whole month.

And don’t Mexicans live in, ummm, Mexican neighborhoods with Mexican businesses?

I don’t think some people have thought this thru entirely.

[GIGObuster]

@cookeze

Bad idea. You have, basically, a bunch of poor folks who snuck in to get work and they are all going to take a work day off, with no pay.

Any economic effect that a boycott will have will be far offset by the earnings lost for the demonstrators.

And their expenses will not go away. Still need food, gas, rent, and beer money.

What are they going to not buy? I’ll bet that if some businesses show a slowdown in their sales that day, that there won’t be a general loss of business when you measure the whole month.

And don’t Mexicans live in, ummm, Mexican neighborhoods with Mexican businesses?

I don’t think some people have thought this thru entirely.

I guess I have to say it in a different way: only the less important members of the protest have not thought this thru. Cool your jets.

[even_sven]

Well, apparently it is worth it to them. It’s a little patronizing to say they don’t know their own priorities. Most immigrants are not living an entirely hand-to-mouth existance, but isntead of having their families, hoping for a promotion, saving up to buy a new car and loking forward to the start of summer- just like everyone else.

My BF works at the Port of Oakland, which employs a huge number of Mexican laborers (it’s not polite to ask someone’s legal status, so I couldn’t tell you much about theirs). At his place of work, it’s all been very civilized. All of the dockworkers asked for the day off, the managment realized it wasn’t worthwhile to fight them, and so instead they’ve made arrangments to halt dockwork on Monday. I think the dockworkers are largely using their vacation days and have been working extra hard to make sure they get Monday’s work done early. The managment plans to use this time to catch up on paperwork if they can get in. It’s actually working out quite nice for everyone and there is no tension or hostility.

It’s not a battle here. These people are our community- 50% of Oakland is foreign born, and we support them doing what they need to do to have their voice heard on a national level.

[GIGObuster]

@even sven

Well, apparently it is worth it to them. It’s a little patronizing to say they don’t know their own priorities. Most immigrants are not living an entirely hand-to-mouth existance, but isntead of having their families, hoping for a promotion, saving up to buy a new car and loking forward to the start of summer- just like everyone else.

My BF works at the Port of Oakland, which employs a huge number of Mexican laborers (it’s not polite to ask someone’s legal status, so I couldn’t tell you much about theirs). At his place of work, it’s all been very civilized. All of the dockworkers asked for the day off, the managment realized it wasn’t worthwhile to fight them, and so instead they’ve made arrangments to halt dockwork on Monday. I think the dockworkers are largely using their vacation days and have been working extra hard to make sure they get Monday’s work done early. The managment plans to use this time to catch up on paperwork if they can get in. It’s actually working out quite nice for everyone and there is no tension or hostility.

It’s not a battle here. These people are our community- 50% of Oakland is foreign born, and we support them doing what they need to do to have their voice heard on a national level.

I have to add that the number of people who are confusing the protest with the boycott amazes me. Although related, if members want to do a boycott they are free to do so, but the most important members of the protest are discouraging the boycott, They however support the protest as long as school and work is done or permission is obtained, same goes for the most serious Latino media.

What it is notorious is that the local Latino media was very conservative in tone, more in tune with Republicans, looking at the current edition I have to say Republicans are losing the support of many Latino business owners and media people.

[DrDeth]

Well, I’ll be nice and not word it as strongly as I normally would- IT’S THE STUPIDEST FUCKING IDEA IN THIS CENTURY!

I am being nice.

1. The GoP had no intention at all of passing that stupid House bill that makes everyone Felons. NONE. The whole idea is to divert the USA away from the real issues- the War and the Deficit, where the Administration is going straight to hell in a handbasket. And they know it and they have no way out, so their only chance* of us not rising up in a body and tossing them out on their asses is diverting us away on a super-divisive issue. Which this is, in fact not even everyone on either party can agree here. So, by getting all this attention, the dudes who have proposed this silly damn law will win, even if it loses.

2. Most of the great middle class of middle america has no idea of how many "illegals’ are out there and what they do. If they did know, they’d go ballistic. So, if the boycott and demos work, then Middle america will rise up and demand we deport all of them right now. AND built a wall that will make the Maginot line and the Berlin wall both look like picket fences.

On the other hand, if it doesn’t work, if there is no huge effect, then everyone will think that the Mexican vote/power base is a paper tiger.

It’s a lose/lose.

• well, that and the general recent leadership less-ness of the Dems, who seem to be completely hapless and clueless, and they aren’t even pointing out that this is a diversion!

[GIGObuster]

@DrDeth

Well, I’ll be nice and not word it as strongly as I normally would- IT’S THE STUPIDEST FUCKING IDEA IN THIS CENTURY!

I am being nice.

Well no, I will be nice: did you read the thread? Not all the protesters that will show up tomorrow are illegal, I think many who are illegal will not risk it. And many will not play a part in the boycott.

1. The GoP had no intention at all of passing that stupid House bill that makes everyone Felons. NONE. The whole idea is to divert the USA away from the real issues- the War and the Deficit, where the Administration is going straight to hell in a handbasket. And they know it and they have no way out, so their only chance* of us not rising up in a body and tossing them out on their asses is diverting us away on a super-divisive issue. Which this is, in fact not even everyone on either party can agree here. So, by getting all this attention, the dudes who have proposed this silly damn law will win, even if it loses.

2. Most of the great middle class of middle america has no idea of how many "illegals’ are out there and what they do. If they did know, they’d go ballistic. So, if the boycott and demos work, then Middle america will rise up and demand we deport all of them right now. AND built a wall that will make the Maginot line and the Berlin wall both look like picket fences.

On the other hand, if it doesn’t work, if there is no huge effect, then everyone will think that the Mexican vote/power base is a paper tiger.

It’s a lose/lose.

• well, that and the general recent leadership less-ness of the Dems, who seem to be completely hapless and clueless, and they aren’t even pointing out that this is a diversion!

Not quite, the moment Middle America sees the cost of deporting all they will finally realize their chains were pulled, you can not fool the people all the time.

[DrDeth]

@GIGObuster

Well no, I will be nice: did you read the thread? Not all the protesters that will show up tomorrow are illegal, I think many who are illegal will not risk it. And many will not play a part in the boycott.
Not quite, the moment Middle America sees the cost of deporting all they will finally realize their chains were pulled, you can not fool the people all the time.

1. So?

2. They don’t care what the cost is now, and they’ll never know until after it happens.

[BMax]

@DrDeth

Well, I’ll be nice and not word it as strongly as I normally would- IT’S THE STUPIDEST FUCKING IDEA IN THIS CENTURY!

I am being nice.

1. The GoP had no intention at all of passing that stupid House bill that makes everyone Felons. NONE. The whole idea is to divert the USA away from the real issues- the War and the Deficit, where the Administration is going straight to hell in a handbasket. And they know it and they have no way out, so their only chance* of us not rising up in a body and tossing them out on their asses is diverting us away on a super-divisive issue. Which this is, in fact not even everyone on either party can agree here. So, by getting all this attention, the dudes who have proposed this silly damn law will win, even if it loses.

2. Most of the great middle class of middle america has no idea of how many "illegals’ are out there and what they do. If they did know, they’d go ballistic. So, if the boycott and demos work, then Middle america will rise up and demand we deport all of them right now. AND built a wall that will make the Maginot line and the Berlin wall both look like picket fences.

On the other hand, if it doesn’t work, if there is no huge effect, then everyone will think that the Mexican vote/power base is a paper tiger.

It’s a lose/lose.

• well, that and the general recent leadership less-ness of the Dems, who seem to be completely hapless and clueless, and they aren’t even pointing out that this is a diversion!

That’s the most concise analysis of this situation that I’ve read yet. Thank you.