Prometheus 6

I think the immigration debate is difficult for Black folks because it really seems like one side is a future competitor and the other is a union of current competitors and active self declared haters of all things non-Confederate. My own immediate reaction was to leap to the defense of anyone who has Pat Robertson's panties in a bunch.

But toward the beginning of the debate, Courtland Milloy wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post saying no one should worry about immigrants taking people's jobs because it's Black people's jobs they're taking, and Black people don't want to work anyway. And Milloy is Black.

This made it pretty clear someone needed to look out for that sort of thing from both sides of the debate. It gave me a legitimate excuse not to take a side.

Besides, as I see it, corporate interests will prevail. And either way, we need to be ready for the winner.

Nanette

Political and cultural icons - who owns them, who can use them, for what or whose purpose should their names brought forth? I intend elaborate on all this in comments, but my short answer is - use 'em or lose 'em.

It's not that anyone will forget them– MLK's words, especially, are remembered (selectively), and, at times used against Black people – "I have a Dream", "content of their character", so on. Less remembered is MLK's "Justice is indivisible." Their deeds are also sometimes remembered only within a specific framework from which they are rarely allowed to escape. Their life's work, the movement for civil rights and justice – has more the feeling of something encased in amber and placed on a shelf to be admired, than something living and breathing and growing.

That said, I also believe that much of the language used around the undocumented immigrant debate needs to be retooled and opened up - broadened to give more people a sense of ownership of the issue - I think it is a mistake to center it around Latin@s, although I understand the reasoning behind doing so.