May 1 – Boycott and Demonstrate for Immigrant Rights

This Monday, May 1, pro-immigrant rights leaders and organizations are asking undocumented and documented residents (and others in solidarity) to boycott their jobs, shops, employers, and schools. “The Great American Boycott” is part of a long and rich tradition of civil disobedience in our continual struggle to improve the lives and rights of all people living on this land.

There have also been demonstrations, vigils, and marches planned that day throughout the country for the same issues: full and complete amnesty for some 12 million undocumented people, and a fair and fast immigration policy for those still needing to come here.

Already some well-known people have gone against the boycott, apparently concerned this will disrupt the economic and social life of the country for a day, resulting in an unwanted backlash. Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahoney is one of the most vocal opponents of the boycott.

And, interesting enough, so is President Bush.

“I think it's very important for people, when they do express themselves, they continue to do so in a peaceful way, in a respectful way—respectful of how highly charged this debate can become,” the President said Friday. “One of the things that's very important is when we debate this issue that we not lose our national soul.”

The fact is the millions of people who have demonstrated, marches, and walked out of schools or their jobs since late March have been peaceful. This has been one of the most peaceful massive human mobilizations in recent history.

The work boycotts are meant to escalate the power of the message that apparently have yet to be heeded by Congress enacting new immigration laws—the people will not accept anything less than the full rights accorded any human being, be they documented or not.

Bush and some of those who have gone against the Boycott appear to be “scolding” their children. That's how much disdain they have for the people.

For the most part, immigrants have worked extremely hard (against great odds), have paid taxes, lived lawful lives, and continue to enrich this country. They have full capacity to think, to organize, to plan, and to implement. They should not be told what will work for them or be scared from what they need to do to win these rights.

A backlash has always existed—it did so against Gandhi's movement, against Martin Luther King Jr., against Cesar Chavez, against revolutionaries in Mexico like Emiliano Zapata, against the US revolutionaries of 1776. Since when did strategies and tactics get determined by a backlash?

I agree—the peaceful way is the best. But this has been a long-gone conclusion. Every tactic and planned action so far has peace built into them. When it can become violent is when the powers that be decide to carry out their plans to criminalize undocumented people as felons, to build 700-foot walls on the border to the tune of $8 billion, or to isolate and attack the most vulnerable workers in the workplace and our communities.

Since the marches and demonstrations in late March and early April, Homeland Security's immigration authorities have carried out highly publicized raids of hundreds of undocumented workers. There was at least one instance of a Mexican restaurant burned (with anti-immigrant messages scrawled on the walls). There have been a few violent confrontations against peaceful students walking out of schools (including wanton attacks by police and anti-immigrant students), death threats to Latino politicians, and even a terrible instance in which a Latino youth, 15, was beaten and sodomized during a party by two teenagers as they spit out anti-Mexican statements.

Bush should address that violence—the real violence occurring in this struggle.

I ask Bush, “What about the national soul that erodes when radio stations put out anti-Mexican slogans, Minutemen pit groups (African Americans and other US workers) against immigrants, and people create video games in which Mexicans, including women with children, can be “killed” for points?"

The “Great Boycott” is on. People who feel strongly about this issue will not work, shop, or carry on any normal business interactions that day. Others who may lose their jobs, their livelihoods, or their homes can choose to take part in the many demonstrations. Many will do both.

The point is we must be heard. We must not let up the amazing national efforts that have rocked this country and the world.

Nobody wants violence. But we must demand justice, rights, and dignity. We are not anyone's children. People will choose what to do—the message, however, must be loud, clear, and united.

Los Angeles Recognizes One of its Own

It was a surprise to me.

Today, April 26, I met with LA City Councilman Ed Reyes (District 1) to thank him for his use of my poem, “The Concrete River,” as part of an exhibit of poems, photos, and paintings commemorating the Los Angeles River (on the Third Floor Bridge area of City Hall). I thought it was to be quick hello and good bye.

However, Councilman Reyes arranged a small reception for me and my wife Trini. Then he took me to visit the council chambers where I was presented with a signed, beautifully designed, certificate of recognition by the City, and allowed to say a few words.

I was surprised, and terribly pleased.

When a writer and activist like me writes and organizes, it is hardly for any official recognition. In my case, “official” recognition may smell of compromise and capitulation. I have been one who has fought “City Hall” on issues of justice, urban peace, and the arts since I was a teenager. But as one observer today said, “Could you ever imagine a time in the past when someone like you would ever be honored in the council chambers?”

Los Angeles, like many other cities, has undergone a major complexion, and I hope character, change—more people representing communities of color and the poor are now sitting in this parlor of municipal power, including a few Chicanos—Ed Reyes, Alex Padilla, Tony Cardenas, and Jose Huizar. And we also have a Chicano mayor, Antonio Villaragoisa.

This, I believe, has helped make the difference.

Of course, I also thank the other council members who supported this recognition, including African American Bernard Parks as well as Eric Garcetti (President of the Council), Tom LaBonge, and Bill Ronsedahl, all who shook my hand that day.

For poets and most writers, our only currency is acknowledgment. For political, class conscious, and socially engaged poets, even this is not forthcoming. So, yes, I’m honored and moved by this effort on the part of Councilman Reyes. I also hope to continue to struggle and fight for the rights of all people, including the millions of undocumented immigrants currently under attack in Congress, on the border, and in the workplace (with carefully calculated Migra raids around the country).

On May 1, cities will explode with work stoppages, demonstrations, vigils and marches. Thank you, City of Los Angeles, for honoring me. Now let’s realize the best ideals of this country and provide full and complete amnesty for undocumented immigrants, and the rights accorded any human being to live free of hunger, exploitation, oppression, and fear.

The Paterson Poetry Prize

I want to express my humble thanks to the Paterson Poetry Prize administrators, authors, and committee for awarding my 2005 poetry collection, My Nature is Hunger: New & Selected Poems 1989-2004 (Curbstone Press/Rattle Edition) with the 2006 Paterson Poetry Prize.

I received a phone call from Sandy Taylor, publisher of Curbstone Press, and a letter from Maria Gillan , the long-time Director of the Poetry Center at Passaic County Community College, Paterson, New Jersey. The prize includes $1,000 and a trip to Paterson to receive the award and to read.

It’s hard to get such recognition, due largely to the vast number of worthy poetry books being published around the country today. Most of these are with small and mid-size presses, the heart of poetry publishing in this country. I’m deeply honored.

I also edit a poetry press, Tia Chucha Press, which I founded in Chicago in 1989. Since then, we have published around 40 major poetry collections and anthologies, three chapbooks, and a CD. Tia Chucha Press, which became part of the Guild Complex in 1991, is now connected with the not-for-profit workshop space and publishing center, Tia Chucha’s Centro Cultural (that I also helped create in the San Fernando Valley section of Los Angeles).

To commemorate our 16 years of publication, in December Tia Chucha Press came out with Dream of a Word: The Tia Chucha Press Poetry Anthology, edited by Quraysh Ali Lansana and Toni Asante Lightfoot.

We hope to spread the word about this great collection that features all our authors, including Elizabeth Alexander, Terrance Hayes, A. Van Jordan, Patricia Smith, Rohan B Preston, Sterling D. Plumpp, Michael Warr, Angela Shannon, Marvin Tate, Cin Salach, Carlos Cumpian, Mary Kathleen Hawley, Lisa Buscani, Jean Howard, Dwight Okita, Tony Fitzpatrick, Nick Carbo, Kyoko Mori, and many more.

There is also a study guide in the back of the book for each of the poems—something we did to help poetry, literatures, and English classrooms in high schools, colleges, universities, and writing workshops.

I also want to mention that in 2005 we did the first poetry book of ariel robello called My Sweet Unconditional. This year, we're publishing Patricia Spears Jones' Femme du Monde (out this month) and Alfred Arteaga's Frozen Accident (due in the fall). All our books are distributed by Northwestern University Press .

April is National Poetry Month. Please support your local poets. Buy poetry books. Help make poetry central to our culture, our spiritual life, and our communities.

We Belong Because We Belong

Again, on April 10, the human rights struggle for immigrants in this country made history—with concerted nation-wide marches, vigils, work stoppages, and other events that involved tens of thousands of people, including more than 500,000 in Washington DC.

Overall, these past few weeks have seen millions of people demand the basic rights and decent life that should be the lot of any person living and working in the United States, regardless of their immigrant status.

They have taken a stand against the second-class status that has been bestowed on close to 12 million people just because they don’t have proper documentation. With the passage of anti-immigrant HR 4437 last December in the House of Representatives, and an intense debate in the Senate with their own worse-and-worser versions of immigration bills, people are saying they must be heard.

Somehow the voices and interests of these leaders, activists and participants don’t seem to be on any of the congressional agendas. What do they want? They want a fair, adequate, and quick legalization process for any undocumented person (including full and unconditional amnesty for the 12 million undocumented among us). They want a fair and humane way for future migrants from Mexico, Central America, and other poor countries to contribute and become active in the economic, social, and cultural life of this country. And they want a livable and fair wage for their hard work—instead of the slave-wages they presently get.

What else? How about speaking their languages and honoring their traditions—and still become Americans. Everyone agrees that learning English, and understanding and abiding by federal and state laws, are important. Nobody is contesting that. But this doesn’t have to mean they should forget their original tongues, value systems, or spiritual practices (whatever they may be, since they are extremely diverse).

These demonstrators are saying they want to be “American” without having to homogenize into an Anglo/racist version of what a so-called American is supposed to be.

When people say assimilate (which is a natural process that nobody has to dictate), they also get the idea this means becoming “Anglo.” Who needs that? This isn’t even better than the cultures most people come from.

Sure if anyone want to be “Anglicized” (by the way, this is a misnomer—most Europeans in this country aren’t even from England) all power to them. But Latinos, Asians, other Europeans, Arabs, Africans, Indians, and more bring with them rich tongues, intelligences, traditions, and flavors. This is America—not the corny “white” people ideal that some people seem to think it is.

The fact is much of what makes “America” has roots in all cultures and traditions.

For example, we take cowboys for granted—some even call them the “American” archetype. Yet it was the Mexican vaqueros who served as model and teachers of the cowboy style and culture.

We say Rock and Roll is the quintessential US export, although it has roots in Africa (which is the main thread running through Jazz, Blues, Soul, and Hip Hop—all-American music if you ask me).

People here go crazy for martial arts (including the mixed-martial arts battles in the Ultimate Fighter), yet its roots are Asian.

And we use American English that includes thousands of words from Jewish/Hebrew, Irish (not Anglo), German, Russian, Asia, African, and other traditions.

I even read that there are around 300 words from the Nahuatl language (from the so-called Aztec people of Mexico), including avocado, tomato, jaguar, maize, taco, and chocolate.

Place names like Chicago, Minnesota, Miami, Wisconsin, Utah, Texas—I can go on and on—have origins in our Native peoples. Other names like Los Angeles, Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Colorado, California, Florida, San Francisco (again there are too many to name here) have Spanish origins. Such great American cultures like Cajuns have roots in French, Spanish, Native, and African people.

Most South talk and accents are Scottish-Irish and African. Most of our original laws comes from Native (mostly from the Iroquis Confederacy), Greek, and British sources.

We can’t go by a day without saying or hearing okay, amigo, oy vey, putz, Toyota, geshundeit—all words from outside what’s considered “Anglo.”

From Mexicans/Chicanos, we can say that cholos, lowriders, and burritos are as American as Apple Pie.

As the demonstrators have been saying—We are America.

Yes, we can have a common language, common laws, common interests, and aims. But why do we have to give up our long-standing roots and traditions (they will change naturally anyway, has they have for hundreds of years)?

Already, we have a multi-tiered economy that brings more conflicts and suffering than any cultural differences we may have. Concentrating on changing that would be more important and meaningful than arguing about whether anyone is for hot dogs, enchiladas, or mofongo.