This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
Maoist Internationalist Movement

Minutemen get a glimmer of recognition in Bush's speech

May 19, 2006

On May 15, Bush referenced the Minutemen in his televised address from the Oval Office. Days before, a Minuteman caravan had reached Washington, D.C. But momentum for the President to acknowledge the Minutemen had been building before then. The Minutemen are a vigilante group trying to stop people from entering the country, but only at the Mexican border.

Soon after their appearance on the national stage, the Minutemen drove the so-called immigation reform debate so far into the right-wing of self-defeating white nationalism that any proposal to the "left" was seen as somehow being moderate. The critics of Minutemen often immediately turned around and defended the repression of migrants, such as Arizona's notorious Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Arpaio back in April 2005 said a brazen vigilante was encroaching on the turf of his "Posse Comitatus," whom he wanted to be able to enforce federal immigration law. Arpaio, a pig with a badge, looked like a saint to some. Numerous others, including Demokkkrats, criticized anti-migrant vigilantes only to join others in calling for the enforcement of immigration restrictions and the repression of migrants who couldn't or didn't want to go through the immigration system.

Joe Arpaio, President Bu$h and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who criticized anti-migrant vigilantes, are now on national television lending credibility to one of various pieces of legislation and proposals that would increase the repression of migrants. Politicians were and are still divided over the Minutemen, making the Minutemen's image less than pristine and in some ways less suitable for uniting more sophisticated white leaders and their lackeys against migrants, but these differences have ultimately contributed to the strength of the anti-migrant movement by creating the impression of nuance and refinement within white nationalism and fascism.

The left wing of white nationalism has had a tense but conciliatory relationship with the Minutemen. Soon after the Minuteman anti-migrant vigilantes began their Arizona project a year ago, the Minutemen had popular support among Euro-Amerikans. Some Minutemen were in fact professionalized or disguised neo-Nazis. Most of their members, supporters and fans were not. Liberals still treated the Minutemen as a fringe group located safely outside the mainstream. They had an overly optimistic (utopian ultra-left) view of Euro-Amerikans. So did phony leftists who reached out to the Minutemen because they thought they all had something in common, which they did: U.$. worker chauvinism and vague opposition to some "bosses" and corporations. They also had in common a desire to defend imperialist living standards and other privileges that are parasitic on Third World people.

The idiotic and reactionary so-called left told Asians, Caribbeans and Latin Americans that the Minutemen weren't so bad and could be dissuaded. The Minutemen are even more indisputably popular and mainstream than before, but today they still prompt quaint calls for "multiracial," "multiethnic" unity with the majority of whites, rather than a struggle against the white settler labor aristocracy that created the anti-migrant movement, and against white chauvinism and white dominance. The pseudo-leftists expect some kind of white savior, yet even "minorities" in Congress are trying to sound tough on border security -- fulfilling a goal of the Minutemen. Not all Minutemen openly called for more immigration restrictions, though that was certainly a subtext. Calling for border security was just a way to get the rest of the population to enforce immigration restrictions, and a way to reinforce the idea that the restrictions, and maybe more like them, were needed.

The Minutemen confused the "best" of the so-called left in the United $tates, "socialists" who on paper opposed fascism but otherwise had ideological unity with the Minutemen, on questions such as ordinary Amerikans' living standards. The Minutemen are a movement of the Euro-Amerikan working class, showing its true face, and that confuses (or inconveniences) people who believe (or deceptively only want others to believe) that the white working class has a progressive nature. It hardly came as any surprise when Bush courted the Minutemen and reached out to their supporters, just as so-called leftists had done. Last Monday, Bush gave a nod to the very same anti-migrant vigilantes he criticized months ago. As Bush himself suggested, it was what Amerikans, uncomfortable with the unavoidable sight of massive migrant rights demonstrations, wanted to hear. Bush said, "On the streets of major cities, crowds have rallied in support of those in our country illegally. At our southern border, others have organized to stop illegal immigrants from coming in. Across the country, Americans are trying to reconcile these contrasting images." Bush then announced a plan to deploy National Guard troops -- military troops -- on the border, something that the Minutemen had always demanded. Bush put the Minutemen and their supporters on par with the millions of people who had demonstrated in the streets and rallied for migrants' rights. This was possible because the anti-migrant movement and even the Minutemen had widespread support among ordinary Euro-Amerikans, who want to have more control over migrant proletarians and prop up the borders that help make U.$. living standards, and the super-exploitation of Third World workers, possible. And many Euro-Amerikans who say they support migrants refuse to put their money where their mouth is and let the Minutemen speak for them. By referencing the Minutemen, Bush spoke to the reactionary anger of Euro-Amerikans.

At the same time, the anger has an economic basis in the kinds of jobs Euro-Amerikans are used to demanding. Here we have many former police and military people taking vigilante action and demanding more jobs for more border guards. This is a perfectly representative reflection of the whole insanity of decaying imperialism: whites are so removed from economic reality that they want jobs producing nothing just to guard the border against people who are doing the farm, manufacturing and transport work of Amerika. According to BBC, 6000 National Guard people will go to the border thanks to Bush's move to appease the labor aristocracy.(2)

Bush's indirect acknowledgment of the Minutemen is not surprising. From early on, many critics of the Minutemen only disagreed with the Minutemen's vigilante tactics and careless rhetoric sometimes bordering on open racism. And other critics only pretended to oppose the Minutemen's ideological positions. Now that the Minutemen have gained respect from the media, they have dropped this pretense. Still others are adjusting their stances due to the popularity of the Minutemen and the popularity of the most repressive proposals to come out of the anti-migrant movement. Emboldened by widespread anti-migrant sentiment, the media has put forward the Minutemen as the Amerikan majority's response to migrants' rights demonstrations. According to the white media, the Minutemen are emblematic of angry ordinary Amerikans, and this is true. The Minutemen, and their supporters among some imperialists, are a force to be reckoned with by politicians. There is still a rift between Bush and leading anti-migrant advocates, but Bush's Monday Oval Office address illustrates how much the bourgeoisified Euro-Amerikan so-called working class is shaping the outcomes of the anti-migrant movement, which it initiated with the help of extremely reactionary imperialists. Although Bush supported a temporary-worker program, Bush's speech reflected the demands of the Euro-Amerikan so-called working class. Various things Bush said indicated this, not just his recognition of the Minutemen.

Bush framed the immigration reform debate in a reactionary way, in terms of a tension between the United $tates' existence as an "immigrant nation," on the one hand, and lawfulness and security. Bush announced a plan to increase the number of Border Patrol agents, in addition to the temporary deployment of National Guard troops, and supported training and increased funding for local enforcement agencies to assist with enforcement---all a waste of resources that could go to making people better off here and in Mexico. Also, Bush wanted to make it easier to quickly deport any undocumented migrant who is caught, regardless of the distance he or she came from. Bush said additional detention beds and "expedited" legal processing had already helped and said he would ask Congress for more "funding and legal authority."

Euro-Amerikans use the idea that they are part of an immigrant nation to justify their presence in and dominance over North America. They pretend to be generous when "welcoming" new migrants. This also makes it seem like Amerikans deserve their privileges.

If allowing migrants in the United $tates is just a matter of generosity, then barring them then becomes justified for any number of reasons that Euro-Amerikans can invent. Implementing immigration restrictions in a more effective way -- intensifying the repression of migrants -- is also seen as legitimate. By supporting enhanced repression, Bu$h supported the demands of Euro-Amerikan settlers and the settler nation workers in particular.

Bush treated all the causes of migration as external and even said undocumented migration "[brought] crime to our communities." Actually, the United $tates is the biggest perpetrator of injustice on the planet. The snooty, hypocritical Euro-Amerikan labor aristocracy looks on the world's workers and wimmin with disdain. Bush flattered the Euro-Amerikan so-called workers. For example, bringing in Asian and Latino migrants actually reduces the drug abuse rate in the united $tates, according to Bush's own statistics, because those two ethnic groups have the lowest drug abuse rates.(3) The reason for that is obvious: the reason again is the decadence of u.$. imperialism that drives people to purposeless jobs like guarding borders and directionless boredom, the longer people stay in the united $tates and become privileged parasites. This is also another reason MIM supports the nationalism of incoming migrants: they may be able to carry out some economic activity without getting sucked into the u.$. drug culture and then go home.

Bush told Amerikans to remember that undocumented migrants "work hard" and "support their families" and "lead responsible lives." This was also a way of pandering to Euro-Amerikan so-called workers, who think of themselves as hardworking. In the same sentence, Bush also pandered to the labor aristocracy's fear of crime and nervousness about "external" threats to their white communities and white enclaves, which are based on violence and theft against the world's exploited and oppressed.

Moreover, Bush supported increased enforcement of immigration restrictions. "We will construct high-tech fences in urban corridors, and build new patrol roads and barriers in rural areas. We will employ motion sensors infrared cameras and unmanned aerial vehicles to prevent illegal crossings." This policy would likely increase the number of migrants' deaths near parts of the border away from urban areas.

Bush later in the week, after his address, expressed support for massively increased border fencing. Some find this remarkable, though Bush has long supported the construction of at least some new fencing. Border barriers versus so-called virtual fences is a debate in which both sides are reactionary. Border fences should not be opposed just to support a virtual fence. High-tech virtual fences are also repressive and partly serve to deflect criticism of border militarization by making it seem less tangible.

On Monday, Bush talked about a middle ground between automatic citizenship and mass deportation. Another middle ground Bush and others are implying is a middle ground between a physical barrier all along the southern border with Mexico, physically dividing it from occupied Mexico, and an invisible barrier with surveillance. The middle ground is a combination of both physical fencing, and aerial and electronic surveillance and more border patrol personnel. All of these supposed middle grounds are openings for increased repression. Furthermore, high-tech equipment and systems for border repression come at the expense of super-exploited Third World workers.

The debate over so-called guest-worker programs is also reactionary at this time. Many people are not opposing the overall repression of migrants or even at least calling for a reduction in immigration restrictions. Anti-migrant activists and some labor unions both cite exploitation and abuse of migrants, adverse effects on U.$. workers, and knowledge of braceros' conditions, as reasons to oppose temporary-worker programs. Yet, hardly anyone talks about abuses of migrant workers in current temporary-worker programs. Not only is the imperialist exploitation of workers in the Third World ignored, even when it comes to documented temporary migrant workers already in the United $tates, these reactionaries aren't seriously interested in opposing exploitation, and when they do talk about abuses of migrants in the temporary-worker programs, they manage to smuggle in the demands of white workers. The "guest worker" debate is primarily a debate among white nationalists who accept the legitimacy of the U.$. imperialist border. Opponents of temporary-worker programs seek to decrease the number of migrants who can enter the United $tates. They support existing immigration restrictions and additional restrictions. Opposing temporary-worker programs in this context is just another way to repress migrants. Amerikan labor unions and liberals who oppose temporary-worker programs and want to legalize some undocumented migrants are pursuing a strategy of assimilation toward migrants, and they want to maintain their superior economic and political position over migrants. The most liberal pole of the anti-migrant movement just wants to assimilate migrants already in the United $tates, not decrease immigration restrictions, much less end the repression that makes legal status desirable to some migrants.

Bush said migrants should learn English to assimilate. "English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening a grocery from cleaning offices to running offices from a life of low-paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own." Contrary to the impression given by CNN's special on undocumented migrants, showing an undocumented migrant in a management position in a restaurant (CNN has broadcast this special repeatedly since fall 2004 to scare the "middle class" and inflame the jealousy of lower-wage white workers), the vast majority of migrant proletarians won't have a bourgeois career even if they learn English. English requirements are discriminatory and will only favor English-speaking European migrants while undermining the economic and social self-determination of Aztlán and helping to discourage migrants from having an identity separate from Euro-Amerikkkans. Bush also suggested that willingness to join the Marines was a sign of assimilation and upheld one injured Latino Marine as an example of migrants whom Amerikans should welcome.

In the so-called immigration reform debate, the only alternative to temporary-worker programs is an "earned path to citizenship" that excludes millions of temporary migrants. This debate, about how to repress and assimilate migrants efficiently, must be rejected. Legalization takes the form of assimilation and leaving out other migrants, not ending repression. Assimilation is not enough for some reactionaries, though, who accept legalization of more undocumented migrants only if there is more enforcement of immigration restrictions. Farsighted reactionaries realize that legalizing some migrants may get them what they want in the long term: a stop to high levels of migration. Bush reached out to these groups by talking tough on border security

Bush offers no way out of the repression of migrants and the exploitation of proletarians in migrants' home countries. At the same time, Bush caters to the labor aristocracy, which threatens to continue building relationships with Bush's competitors. The reactionary so-called working class, which the Minutemen represent, exercises considerable influence in this democracy of parasites, oppressors and dominators. Bush will get his temporary-worker program only by pleasing those who want to increase border repression. His Oval Office address and other statements and actions reflect this. Part of the labor aristocracy even agrees with the temporary-worker program proposal. They are forward-looking and know that having some controllable supply of temporary migrant workers, who wouldn't be permitted to stay in the United $tates permanently, would be in the economic and political interests of the settler nation labor aristocrat "workers." Migrants are suspicious of the proponents as well as the opponents of temporary-worker programs who oppose open borders and try to stop migrants from taking a path independent of "Americanization" and assimilation into a second-class position in the United $tates. Neither supporters nor opponents of temporary-worker programs necessarily want to end the repression of migrants. Bush certainly did not support open borders. He only wanted borders to be "open to trade and lawful immigration," a desire consistent with repression against migrants, particularly repression against temporary migrants.

Notes:

1. "Text of Bush's speech on immigration," 15 May 2006
2. " Viewpoints: US illegal immigration," http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4989248.stm
3. http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/minorities/index.html

2006/05/15/text_of_bushs_speech_on_immigration/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News>.