"Latinos as the 'Living Dead'

On Wednesday February 23rd, I attended a talk sponsored by the MSA were Professor John Marquez read an excerpt from his soon to be published book "Latinos as the 'Living Dead': The 'Necropolitics of U.S. Immigration Policy." Although not heavily discussed in class Professor Marquez talked in depth about border militarization and the fact that the US government implemented this plan as a deterrent for immigration. Basically, by militarizing the border, the government expected to use force and stop immigration; death, fear and violence as effective measures. This is a human rights issue as much as it is an immigration one. In attempts to protect borders, the government has enacted plans veneered an environmental issues (various human rights groups have placed water bottle in desert areas, which are also national parks to help those crossing) to stop and demonize immigrants.

In the realm of performance, Marquez's excerpt alluded to images of death, musical performance and identity transformation. First, images of death. In addition to deterring immigration by militarizing the border, the border patrol, if I remember correctly, would go into border cities and post pictures of dead immigrants, roting corpses and the such, to stop immigration. As an activist, Marquez and others would tear down these horrific images. While the images did portray a truth, the fact that it is a truth perpetuated by those posting the pictures is ironic. On the border, the humanity of border patrol officers and the immigrants they needlessly kill are lost. In order to protect and enforce sovereignty, that is being "threatened' by this mass influx of low wage workers, the border patrol working in the name of the government and US citizens, kills many innocent and unarmed people. (Additionally Marquez discussed that border patrol officers feel threatened when people on the other side of the border through rocks at them. These may not even be Mexicans immigrating, but that is not the point. The point is that they feel threatened by a rock and retaliate by shooting bullets. This is a "disproportionate use of force" and result in unnecessary deaths.)

Musical performance as a reaction to death in the border region is inherently linked to the reading for this week. Marquez mentioned a corrido written for a young man killed by La Migra. Sergio Hernandez Guereca was on the other side of the Rio Grande and apparently threw rocks at the border patrol and was shot in the face. His senseless death caused a friend of his to write a song about him stating that the "border patrol assassinated a child" and "without power I have nothing. " Having a corrido be the song of choice implies an antagonist nature to the song, protesting hardships, power struggle and an use vs them mentality. Corridos as explained in this week's reading are considered a lower class art form. Although I know nothing about Sergio, I can assume that he was lower class and without the power that comes with being upper class, he died because of a rock.

Lastly, Marquez discussed afterwards, the mothers that take action and become voices for their dead children, almost exclusively sons. This public display of grief and putting oneself in the spotlight to shine a light on the depravity of the border region, allows these women to become more than that. They become victims in a way, losing a child way before his time. They enhance the tragedy. They ask to know who killed their children and are met with silence.

Marquez's book and subsequent Q&A session were informative and disheartening. Informative because it sheds light on the little known , to me anyway, history of border militarization and Chicago's mayor elect involvement with it, along with the rocks vs. gun situation.

Disheartening because the border patrol seems to kill people indiscriminately, even shooting American citizen on this side of the border (not that this fact makes it any worse. People are people, regardless of nationality). It is obvious after listening to Marquez that to effectively curb immigration, humanitarian and non-militarized methods need to taken, while also giving border crosses the humanity and respect they deserve.

*Also, video of Sergio being shot is all over the web. I don't plan on watching it.

Chicano Identity

Reading this week's works was enjoyable while also bringing to ideas of identity: cultural, ethnic, sexuality. These readings while varied and interesting, also connected to one reading from the past. Chapter one of Gloria Anzaldua's Borderlands explores the ideas of Chicano identity by referencing their indigenous ancestors and their forgotten history. She also writes in both Spanish and English to create a connection between the readers and their heritage, something that they may have regressed for whatever reason.

Anzaldua's writing directly correlates to the main characters in each of this week's reading; The Zoot Suit wearing youth, the inhabitants of a fictional Phoenix, the young Chicanos of the US. Their entity is an inherent part of the narratives and it is their identity that is cause of their problems with the external world.

Anzaldua's writing from week one makes a point to mention that the former boundaries of

Mexico included that areas that have high number of Mexican ancestry now. With this idea in

tact, Zoot suiters of LA became targets, Medea's well being was jeopardized and Anzaldua

herself was threatened with losing her mother culture.

Referring specifically to Zoot Suits, do you think this writing is in any way related to the

border or is it simply an examination of Chicano identity and not ones relationship to Mexico?

Reenacting a passage

As I was reading the Magelssen article, a thought hit me, illegal immigrants can be likened to fugitive slaves of the Antebellum south. The similarities are numerous. Both were targeted and by conservative forces. The prefixes "illegal" and "fugitive" highlighting the illegality of their journey from one place to another. Both are (or were) racial minorities, specifically regarding Latin American immigrants. With that stated, the issue of racism behind immigration cannot be ignored.

Made most explicitly in the article was the fact that people take part in reenactment of slaves and immigrants arduous journey to freedom, whether physical or economic. Attending a reenactment first seemed to me to be an appropriation of someone's plight, taking a harrowing journey and making it enjoyable. After reading about the Caminata Noctura and how it attempts to keep true to the journey to "El Norte" I understand the intention of its creators, to deter immigration and filter finances back into the struggling economy.

For those that do decide to leave, the livelihoods for themselves and their families are first and foremost on their minds. But as they cross, the ultimately compromise the borders of their home countries and the emigrating country. Yet most boundaries are a social constructions, manmade structures, a wall to separate you from me, native from foreigner, good vs bad and so on and so forth. This only adds to my newfound ambiguity on the subject of illegal immigration.

While I understand the need to protect the borders of the USA from the forces of violence and things that threaten "American Integrity" (an issue that I will discuss at a later date), these borders were once nonexistent and strengthening them will not stop immigration and the real problems that face many Latin American countries. Herein lies my question: The US is no stranger to the creation of borders, real or imagined. Could strengthening the border strengthen a sense of "American identity/citizenship" or could we see a mass movement of liberal thought arising, fighting for the civil liberties of illegal immigrants?

Additionally, is it possible to view illegal immigration without resorting to xenophobic and inflammatory language?