What impact on immigrants?

Teresa Gutierrez WW photo: John Catalinotto

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico endorsed the candidacy of Barack Obama for president on March 21.

In his endorsement speech, which was broadcast live on CNN and widely distributed in the news, Richardson referred to Barack Obama’s earlier speech on race.

Richardson stated: “Earlier this week, Sen. Barack Obama gave an historic speech that addressed the issue of race. ... He inspired us by reminding us of the awesome potential residing in our own responsibility. He asked us to rise above our racially divided past. ...

“As a Hispanic, I was particularly touched by his words. I have been troubled by the demonization of immigrants—specifically Hispanics—by too many in this country. Hate crimes against Hispanics are rising as a direct result and now, in tough economic times, people look for scapegoats and I fear that people will continue to exploit our racial differences—and place blame on others not like them. We all know the real culprit—the disastrous economic policies of the Bush administration!”

This statement was made within the confines of the bourgeois elections and by a pro-capitalist politician from the frame of reference of an apologist for the capitalist system and all its byproducts.

Nonetheless, it is to some extent refreshing and important to hear some of this on national television.

Immigrants indeed have been the victims of a racist and hostile demonization campaign. Every day, every minute, Latin@s and other immigrants of color are being attacked in countless ways. It is not surprising therefore that even an establishment Latino figure such as Richardson, who is Mexican American, told the truth.

The Southern Poverty Law Center just released its annual “Year in Hate” report, which documents that the number of hate groups operating in this country has grown by a whopping 48 percent to “a staggering 888” groups.

The SPLC writes, “This increase in hate activity is being fueled by the ugly rhetoric of demagogues who are using Latino immigrants as scapegoats for our country’s problems.”

Hate crimes against Latin@s rose by 35 percent, according to the FBI, writes the SPLC. “Experts believe that such crimes are typically carried out by people who think they are attacking immigrants,” they report.

In the past three years, some 300 anti-immigrant groups have become active.

What does Bill Richardson’s—and by extention Barack Obama’s—progressive statement on immigration mean? Does it mean that the Democratic Party has made a fundamental turn to now speak the truth about the situation for immigrants? Does it mean that the right-wing campaign led by the likes of Rep. Tom Tancredo, Lou Dobbs, the Minutemen and others has been pushed back?

Does it mean that if the Democratic Party wins in November the attacks against immigrants and all working people will end?

Unfortunately, while Bill Richardson did speak the truth and it is a step forward for progressive views about immigrants to be aired on national television, it nonetheless has serious and profound limitations.

The Democratic Party as a party has not and cannot make any turn that will result in fundamental change for immigrants or for working people in general for that matter. Gains can be won, of course, victories can be wrested. But those outcomes come principally from struggle and not from Washington.

One need only observe how the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, which up to now has been the dominant wing, is handling the issue of racism in the presidential campaign. Unquestionably, behind the scenes the Clintons are fostering and using racism as a tool to fulfill their presidential aspirations.

“When all else fails, race bait,” they must say at home to each other.

In a Counterpunch article March 24, Jeffrey St. Clair reminds us that the Bill Clinton administration carried out some of the heaviest attacks against people of color in recent times.

St. Clair writes, “Bill Clinton launched his 1992 campaign by personally overseeing the execution of Ricky Ray Rector, a brain-damaged young Black man. He wagged his finger at the rapper Sister Souljah, denouncing her music and political opinions as a danger to young minds. The Clintons pilloried their one-time friend Lani Guinier ... and booted Dr. Jocelyn Elders from her position as surgeon general.”

“And that’s how they treated people they knew,” he emphasizes.

Plus let us not forget that under the Clinton administration one of the heaviest attacks against the poor and people of color took place: the dismantling of welfare, a social safety net that had been won by the militant struggle of the oppressed and the poor.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is not President Bill Clinton, of course, and sexism and misogyny must be condemned whenever they rear their ugly heads, even against a capitalist politician. But Rodham Clinton never condemned these attacks and is on record for backing Bill Clinton’s administration, including the now very unpopular NAFTA.

The Democratic Party has not changed. Nor will it change because it is a party that acts for the bosses and for the capitalist class and that serves to put a break on independent struggle and to co-opt any progressive ideas or struggles into the confines of defending the capitalist system.

But it is also a party whose base is more representative of the working class than the Republican Party. It has more people of color, more unions, more anti-war activists and so on.

Bill Richardson’s statements on immigration reflect not a left turn of the Democratic Party; they reflect what is happening among that base.

The people of the U.S. for the most part are not buying into the anti-immigrant hysteria.

On more than one occasion during the presidential debates, whenever a candidate, whether it was Kucinich, Obama or Edwards, made a progressive statement about immigrants it was surprisingly greatly applauded by those in the audience. Poll after poll shows that immigration is not a major concern, especially today.

This is important.

What is needed to take this sentiment among the masses and elsewhere and channel it into the correct direction.

Bill Richardson said, “We all know the real culprit (of the scapegoating of immigrants)— the disastrous economic policies of the Bush Administration!”

This is not the whole truth. The real culprit is not just the Bush administration. Look at the Clinton administration’s record. Look at how the Democratic Party has handled every major issue of concern to the masses: the housing and employment attacks, the debate on immigration, the war in Iraq and so on. No real solution for fundamental change has been presented.

The real culprit is not the Bush administration but the capitalist system itself, which historically has taken advantage of immigrant labor as needed. One day it embraces migrants when the economy is booming, the next day they are scapegoats when the economy is in a decline.

When Bill Richardson, a Latino, stood on the stage with Barack Obama and spoke against racism, it was a step forward for the struggle against racism despite the fact that both are proponents of capitalism. It was a gain for Black and Brown unity, even though a limited gain.

A national debate on racism occurred. Bourgeois pundits said Obama spoke to people like “adults.”

Many people of color in this country must have felt a glimmer of hope when representatives of two peoples who have been so historically under attack in this country came together in unity on a national stage even if for just a tiny moment and spoke out against the big “R”—racism.

This sense of hope will quickly vanish however if one thing does not occur.

And that is the struggle of the masses in the streets. Only a mass struggle can truly advance the goals of ending racism, winning immigrant rights, stopping housing foreclosures as well as ending the war.

Obama and Richardson, even in their prestigious positions, have felt the hand of racism. Every person of color in this country has.

With Obama and Richardson openly airing the issue of racism and pro-immigrant positions, is this an opportunity to advance the struggle?

Can class conscious communists, can revolutionaries, can independent progressives fuel the fire for change in this country from below? Can they seize the moment away from the pro-capitalist liberals and build a struggle among the masses so potent, so multinational, so big and broad, so class conscious that the center of gravity will shift from the podium of the elections to the streets of this country?

We believe so.