Skip to main content

Esperando todavía . . .


The boycott has come and gone, with marches "a la marcha" in Chicago, Denver, Houston, and LA, and marches que se esfumaron in Dallas and Phoenix. Mucha solidaridad. Lots of closed businesses and restaurants. Lots of customers and workers staying home. Bien. ¿Y ahora qué? Como siempre, even in the best and most detailed media coverage, the heart of the matter went untouched. Nadie habla del gobierno de México y su propia responsabilidad para su propia gente.

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, 78 percent of immigrants residing in the U.S. without documentation are from México. That's 9.36 million souls, as the maps of old used to say. Time and again, we are told they come here to realize the "American dream," to seek "our better way of life." ¡Que no! They come because they cannot survive in their homeland. No one leaves their home and family behind to work as a day laborer except in the face of dire necessity. These immigrants do not come here on a pleasure trip. They come to try to survive.

In México, a licensed nurse can expect to make $6 an hour, an experienced journalist up to $14 an hour, a school teacher with more than a decade of experience $5 an hour. And that's if they can find work at all. These figures are not estimates: they come straight from the 2006 Diario Oficial de la Comisión Nacional de Salarios Mínimos de México. These are not summer jobs or entry-level positions, but careers that require substantial education and preparation and pay $6 to $14/ hour. Unemployment is at 14%, with underemployment as high as 25%. The Fox administration has been a brutal disappointment to Mexico's hardworking middle and lower economic "classes." NAFTA has failed the country's people, if not its larger businesses. Walmart rises in the shadow of ancient pyramids.

As we, yet again, face strident debates over immigration and the rights of undocumented workers, I am struck, yet again, by the history of inept diplomacy and dysfunctional working relations between the U.S. and México. Why don't our governments make it a national priority on both sides of the border to address the crushing poverty that affects our countries so profoundly? Neither nation has made the strides in these areas that need to be made, yet these strides are profoundly possible. In just the first two months of 2006, the U.S. and Mexico's import-export business totalled more than $50 billion. With so much business between us, it would seem logical and straightforward to address these fundamental economic problems--the problem of survival for millions--as neighbors with mutual interests.

En fin, the boycott made an interesting and undeniable statement. But the core of the problem remains untouched. The problem begins in México. It cannot be solved inside the U.S. alone. Ask the Mexican father living in the U.S. who hasn't seen his children in two years. Ask the injured Mexican laborer who can't get medical care. Ask the Mexican mother who lives in fear that she and her children will be deported back home where she cannot find work even as a maid.

Note to those in power: Time for a new paradigm. Legislation won't fix this broken wheel. Note to those marching: Neither will a boycott on either side of the border. Will México's July elections provide a new administration that will truly and significantly accept responsbility for its own people? Will the U.S. play an appropriate role in helping this to happen? Esperamos con esperanza.

Post and image, Copyright 2006, Ysabel de la Rosa
Image: Sculpture Garden, Museo de Arte Moderno, México D.F.

Comments

Sinto Carlos said…
La manera media se necesita de nuevo.

A great post, Ysabel.

Popular posts from this blog

Life without Television, Part 2

I began life without television with relief, which was consistent Monday through Friday. The first few weekends, though, felt awkward, anxious, lonely. When PBS has good programming on Saturday nights, it is extraordinarily good. Father Brown, Phryne Fisher, New Tricks... Extraordinary acting, high production values, and I fantasize about the pudgy, brilliant priest just perhaps having an innocent crush on one of his special parishioners, which would be moi. 

I called a friend one Sunday. "Maybe television helped with my anxiety more than I realized," I said. She told me about her aunt who, after her husband's death, kept the television on in his "man cave" 24/7. He has been gone years now. The television goes on, everlasting, in his absence. I don't blame her. Much of my frequent and prolonged television viewing began with grief.

After my sister died, I would watch almost anything, especially late at night when sleep eluded me. I even watched Convoy with …

Whose day?

Years ago, I made some collages using pages from a desk calendar from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The image that leads this post is one. Inside the hearts and flowers is a picture from the MMA collection of  a Japanese screen made in the 16th century. It is titled Tagasode, which means Whose sleeves?  The title comes from a 10th-century poem:


The fragrance seems even more alluring than the hue, Whose sleeves have brushed past? Or would it be this plum tree blossoming here at home?
Iro yori mo ka koso awaredo omohoyure tagasode fureshi ado no ume zo mo
The word haunts: tagasode. Whose sleeves? The question floats in my mind like a cloud on a still day. The sleeves materialize in my mind's eye. I hear them move through hushed air. I can imagine, though not name, the scent of the person to whom those sleeves belong. It's not unlike smelling the scent of your infant's clothes, or holding the perfume bottle that belonged to your mother...you don't need to open it... you know tha…

Glad to Hear It

This past week, Larry Wilmore and company mentioned Rachel Dolezol again on The Nightly Show. I don't remember who made the comment, but either Wilmore or one of the panelists said, "Did Rachel Dolezol do anything bad? No, she really didn't. Why did we get so uptight about that?" I was glad to hear it. Three cheers for being human.

I looked briefly at what's on Google currently about her and the now much-discussed Shaun White. I intend not to enter any of that fray mentally or verbally. I still maintain that humanity trumps color. We have a long way to go until we can leave our "paint by numbers" mentality behind, but we've made progress. Good changes can come, even in the midst of chaos and controversy. Maybe White and Dolezal will help us see that eventually.

As long as I'm here and continuing on the subject of color, I think I'm not alone in the fact that I don't like being called "white." As for my background, it includes …