Thought I'd share this sharp essay on the elections and the immigration debate, by Rich Stolz at the Center for Community Change.  We've posted the original on our blog, the Movement Vision Lab.

On Thursday, February 21, in a key Democratic debate, Senator Hillary Clinton unequivocally called for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and that she would introduce such legislation in the first 100 days of her presidency.  But that's not what she said in early December at another presidential forum, when she dodged the question and was booed by the audience.  Unfortunately, this is a pattern.  On the issue of immigration, many of this year's presidential candidates are leading with their finger in the wind of public opinion rather than moral conscience.

Americans care about the economy, the war and health care, but important constituencies also want fair and just immigration reform.  But the test for any candidate on immigration is less about their position on policy.  It's really about character.  Voters want to know two things: can this candidate solve the complicated issue of what to do with the millions of hard-working and vulnerable immigrants in this country, and can they do it in a manner that reflects our values as a nation?  Clarity of vision and consistency matter most for voters concerned about the character of a candidate.

So days before a pivotal primary election in Texas, where immigrant and Latino voters are expected to be a major force at the polls, the candidates are striking a more positive tone on immigration, dropping the harsh law-and-order border security emphasis they adopted for whiter states.  But where does this leave voters -- not only those of us who desire consistent support for justice and human rights, but those of us who want a president who stands up for what's right, not just what's popular?

At the February 21 debate, Senator Clinton pledged to stop the raids against immigrants until a comprehensive policy solution is passed:  "When we see what's been happening, with literally babies being left with no one to take care of them, children coming home from school, no responsible adult left, that is not the America that I know.  That is against American values. And it is a stark admission of failure by the federal government. We need comprehensive immigration reform."

At the same debate, Barack Obama said, "It is absolutely critical that we tone down the rhetoric when it comes to the immigration debate, because there has been an undertone that has been ugly."

And in 2004, in a debate in the Arizona Senate race, John McCain said, "Things are terrible, and we've got to fix it. But we're not going to fix it until we have comprehensive immigration reform. When there's a demand, there's going to be a supply. There are jobs that Americans will not do, so we have to make it possible for someone to come to this country to do a job that an American won't do and then go back to the country from where they came."

For the moment, immigrants and Americans that care about the fundamental American value of inclusiveness and the unique American experience of immigration can take solace in the candidates' remarks.  They can also find hope in a new conventional political wisdom emerging from this primary season -- scapegoating immigrants is a losing strategy.  Real solutions that build America for all of us are what voters -- immigrants and citizens alike -- are clamoring for.  But the question remains, will the presidential candidates demonstrate the strength of conviction and the character to follow-through on their words?

Rich Stolz leads the Immigration work of national nonprofit Center for Community Change which coordinates the Fair Immigration Reform Movement. FIRM is a coalition of hundreds of community based immigrant rights groups across the country advocating for comprehensive immigration reform legislation and the civil rights of immigrants.

When I was a kid, my dad used to make a quarter appear behind my ear.   He'd wave both his hands to distract me while, all along, the coin was hidden up his sleeve.  That was the trick.

So the current attacks against immigrants in politics and the media feel very familiar -- arms flapping to scapegoat immigrants while ignoring the real, hidden issue.  All Americans --- immigrants and citizens alike --- are suffering under a lop-sided economy that is designed to favor the super-rich at everyone else's expense, no matter which side of the border you're on.  We're busy scapegoating immigrants, pointing fingers wildly in the wind, while the greedy corporate titans are hiding up America's sleeve.

Policies like NAFTA not only ruin local economies in the United States by shipping jobs oversees, they also ruin local economies in Mexico and elsewhere by driving down wages and flooding local markets with cheap, mass-produced products.  Small family farmers in Mexico can no more compete with corporate corn from the U.S. than small factories in South Carolina can compete with clothing made in China.  Workers on both sides of the border lose.  The only winners are big business.  That's the way the trick is designed.

The economy is now fully in recession.  There aren't enough good jobs to go around for anyone.  And most of the jobs we have aren't keeping up with inflation.  Over 46 million Americans lack healthcare.  Millions more face rising premiums and can't afford the healthcare they have.  Three-quarters of a million Americans are homeless.  Millions more face foreclosure because of sub-prime mortgages.

Attacking immigrants is just waving our hands.  Citizens and immigrants are in the same sinking ship.  We have to fix the broken economy to work for everyone.

This week, grassroots, immigrant-led organizations are convening in Washington with groups working on healthcare reform and economic justice to strategize around their shared vision of community values.  At a summit on Community Values, leaders from the Fair Immigration Reform Movement and the Health Rights Organizing Project are meeting with representatives in Congress, the Bush Administration and the media to demand an end to hateful rhetoric against immigrants and.  They want a productive focus on our collective way forward. We need solutions that work for everyone, and not just some.  And we can only get there together, not divided.

The Community Values summit launched a pledge campaign to end anti-immigrant rhetoric that is not only un-American but equally unintelligent. Instead, the pledge asks all of us to recognize the contributions of all communities and demand just, workable and humane immigration reform.  I encourage you to add your name to the pledge at http://www.buildingamericatogether.org/

No matter where we were born, we all long for an America that works for everyone --- that ensures guaranteed, universal healthcare; affordable, accessible education from pre-K to college; real jobs with real wages and collective bargaining power; a foreign policy that makes friends not enemies; an immigration policy that respects and values us all.  At the Community Values summit, I saw immigrants, African Americans, white folks, rich and poor folks, urban and rural dwellers all standing together for the same, shared agenda.  The American people are clearly fed up with blame games and scapegoating and sky-is-falling hand waving that distracts us from the real issues.   And it's showing in the presidential election, where messages of unity are defeating the fear mongering of the past.  

No more tricks.  That coin my dad produced?  It says, "E pluribus unum."  Out of many, one.  Together, we can build a better America for all of us.      

Sally Kohn is the Director of the Movement Vision Lab at the Center for Community Change.

This Christmas season, I'm excited to offer a few thoughts on capitalism, consumption, Christmas and crookedness -- while also summing up this week's posts at the Movement Vision Lab.  Here goes.

THE TWELVE DAYS OF CAPITALISM

On the first day of Christmas, Amaad Rivera says we have: 

an economy that favors rich whites.

On the second day of Christmas, even Adam Smith would add:

two separate classes
and an economy that favors rich whites

On the third day of Christmas, Minsun Ji points out:

(way more than) three exploited workers
two separate classes
and an economy that favors rich whites

On the fourth day of Christmas, Tiny talks about:

(at least) four presents instead of presence
(way more than) three exploited workers
two separate classes
and an economy that favors rich whites

On the fifth day of Christmas, Amy Wolf made a great film:

(cue organ music)
five problems with big box stores!
(at least) four presents instead of presence
(way more than) three exploited workers
two separate classes
and an economy that favors rich whites

On the sixth day of Christmas, Kathy LeMay taught:

six taboos about wealth
(cue organ music)
five problems with big box stores!
(at least) four presents instead of presence
(way more than) three exploited workers
two separate classes
and an economy that favors rich whites

On the seventh day of Christmas, I still somehow bought:

seven overpriced trinkets
six taboos about wealth
(cue organ music)
five problems with big box stores!
(at least) four presents instead of presence
(way more than) three exploited workers
two separate classes
and an economy that favors rich whites

Okay.  This is getting tedious.  Let's cut to the end....

Eventually by some day of Christmas, we all wised up:

we started shopping local
gave more time then stuff
valued more than money
tackled structural racism
spread the wealth and love
because we're...

(cue organ music)
ALL IN IT TOGETHER!

no more shallow culture
no more credit debt
no more rich and poor
an economy that favors us all!

Happy holidays from the Movement Vision Lab!

And you know you get major props if you record yourself singing this, upload to You Tube and post the link at the Movement Vision Lab!  

Wanted to share this provocative post from the Movement Vision Lab blog by Dan Horowitz Garcia entitled, "Get Whitey!  A 21st Century Racial Justice Agenda".

Horowitz Garcia argues that whiteness is the main glue that holds the United States together, allowing the perpetuation of economic inequality not only for people of color but poor and working class white folks, too.  

How do we achieve equality and justice in the United States?

The key is to abolish whiteness, to end a political category that gives privilege to one group at the expense of others.

But rather than abolishing the politically-laden category of whiteness and transforming the many, many institutions that perpetuate hierarchy based on race -- from police to public schools -- Horowitz Garcia argues that in many cases, we actually reinforce white supremacy in institutions.  For instance, he uses the example of calling for new hate crimes laws in the wake of Jena, LA -- in the attempt to vindicate a racially profiled young man of color, demanding to expand the criminal justice system that spends most of its energy racially profiling young men of color.

As a white girl, I found this piece provocative.  What is whiteness, beyond skin color?  What does it mean in society?  And how do we move toward a vision where whiteness doesn't have exclusive power and privilege over others?  What do you think?

Let's be honest.  The entire history of the United States is built on racial hierarchy and discrimination.  In fact, as Michael Guerrero, the House of Representatives just decided on an exhibition to honor the African American slaves who built the Capitol building, brick by brick.  Racism is our national legacy -- and increasingly our main export.

Witness the War in Iraq.

In this great post on the Movement Vision Lab, Scott Douglas -- a veteran community organizer and leader from Birmingham, Alabama -- writes:

... our government would rather dominate and destroy people of color in Iraq than help people of color here at home.  

Douglas continues:

It is amazing to me that while 72% of people oppose the war in Iraq, the war continues. It's a war that is only hurting people, not helping, whose only point was control of oil.  Presiding over the escalating violence there is costing the United States $3 billion per day!  And yet Democrats and a few Republicans in Congress are only just now beginning to question the war's continuance, let alone it's original rationale.

Compare this to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma and the abysmal response of government.  After two years, there remains the stagnation of commitment led, first and foremost, by the federal government.  In Louisiana, issues revolve around building level five levees (levees that can take the shock of a Hurricane Katrina) and life-sustaining infrastructure such as water, power, gas and sewer services.  We must also restore the wetlands that offers nature's protection against storm surges.

But the unpopular AND expensive war is still prioritized over the needs of Black communities in our own Gulf region:

Across entire Gulf Coast, stretching from Texas to Alabama, affordable housing and living wage job opportunities are scarce. Thousands of families are still housed in FEMA trailers that contain deadly levels of formaldehyde.

Yet the federal government manages to scrounge up $3 billion per day to "rescue" Iraq.  Those of us in the Gulf Coast need to be rescued, too!

The fact of the matter is we're all in it together.  Iraqi lives are as important as the lives of the displaced residents along Katrina's path.  So why are we spending so much money destroying communities in Iraq while failing to re-build communities in America?  

Perhaps more pointedly, why do those of us who agree with the above prognosis fail to see this pattern as a symptom of broader, systemic racism?  

Why don't we see that the reason we could get away with attacking Iraq was race -- most notably, the stereotypes spread by government and media that continues to cast a pale of suspicion over all Muslim and Arab people in the US and abroad?  And why don't we see that the reason we have failed to help New Orleans and the rest of the Gulf Coast is because of racism, plain and simple.  Do you really think our government would have let thounsands of wealthy white folks drown?

We need to talk about race, instead of ignoring.  We need to appreciate difference, instead of demanding assimilation.  We need to address racism, rather than denying it.

Sally Kohn is the Director of the Movement Vision Lab.

In this great post on the Movement Vision Lab blog, grassroots activist Dan Horowitz Garcia argues that if there is a peace movement (and he doubts it...) it needs to change its tactics.  According to Dan, marches don't end wars --- and never have.

Dan Horowitz Garcia says that history repeats itself, and so do movements.

Contrary to many beliefs, the peace movement didn't end the war in Vietnam. Three things ended the war in Vietnam. They were, in order of importance, the Vietnamese, the tanking economy, and the resistance of U.S. soldiers. If I extended this list by 100 more items, I still wouldn't include marches on the U.S. capitol or attempts to raise the Pentagon. It is beyond doubt that popular resistance in the U.S. had success in restricting the scope of the war, but it didn't end it. If public opinion alone could stop a war, then the Iraq occupation would have ended back in November 2004 when public support dropped under 50%. Majority opinion may hold sway in a democracy, but not in the U.S.

Dan also details how marches against WWII in the United States didn't really stop that war, either.  So what makes us think they'll stop this one?

Instead, Dan says the anti-war movement has to stop being merely anti-war --- and offer a clear alternative instead.  Here, Dan argues for a peace movement that is challenging hegemony and violence much more broadly:

I believe we also have to expand the conversation from Iraq to the so-called war on terror. This is the elites' latest framework for empire, and we have to challenge it. The "peace movement" (it still doesn't feel right to say that) can learn a lot from organizers fighting the criminal justice system. The parallels between the rhetoric justifying the war on terror and the war on crime are plain to see, if you look at them. In the war on crime, bad people are coming into your neighborhood or even your house to do you harm. (These people just happen to have dark skin.) To keep you safe, we need to be tough on these criminals. We need more cops with more equipment (i.e. guns), and we need places where we can put the bad people far away from the good people. In the war on terror, bad people are coming to your country to do you harm. (These people also happen to have dark skin. Coincidence?) To keep you safe, we need to be tough on these terrorists. We need more troops with more equipment (i.e. big guns), and we need to kill the bad people in places far away from the good people.

In a comment on the blog, another community organizer Gabe Gonzalez talks about how his daughter is convinced there are monsters under the bed.  So he has to spend his energy convincing her otherwise.  In other words, even if progressives were to take up the agenda  that the "war on terror" and its ever-present threats are false, why should we have to convince the public?  Shoudn't we be forcing the Right wing hawk fear mongerers to prove their point?  

Otherwise, we're in the position of proving that the invisible threat doesn't exist.  Which is sort of like disproving monsters under the bed.  

We should be fighting the "war on terror" by making THEM defend it!

What do you think?

Sally Kohn is the Director of the Movement Vision Lab.

Could our "liberal" political leaders finally STAND FOR SOMETHING?  With Democrats like these, who needs Republicans???  

When the country is desperate for change, isn't it time for leaders who will... er... LEAD US there?  From the War in Iraq to universal health care to SCHIP to immigrant rights --- why can't we have leaders who believe in something and help persuade the nation, rather than pandering.  

Check out this great cartoon about the spineless pessimists and pragmatists standing in the way of a better future.  

Brought to you from the folks at the Movement Vision Lab

Someone once told me, "We have to meet people where they're at --- but we don't have to leave them there."  Same with the country.

Someone recently told me that powerful ideas make us uncomfortable enough to re-think what we thought.  In the political sphere, an idea isn't the same as a critique.  Pointing out the income gap is not an idea.  Arguing that the income gap is due to structural racism and the solution is affirmative action -- that's an idea.  Caps on carbon emissions, Social Security, a path to legalization, civil unions, universal health care -- these are all ideas that at one point or another have rubbed up against the status quo, made our nation uncomfortable and provoked change.  

It makes me think of new clothes.  The world has changed and the old threads of the New Deal or the Civil Rights Movement just don't fit the same anymore.  Or in many cases, cozy though they might be, our old ideas are worn and tattered in the face of new economic and social realities.  On the other hand, we can't keep accepting the straight jacket of Right-wing, savage-market ideology.  It's time for change.  

Unfortunately, in the wardrobe of new ideas, progressive advocates are pretty much naked. That's not to say we have no ideas whatsoever or that we can't come up with more -- but very plainly that we don't have a comprehensive and coherent, shared vision for the future to offer a nation desperate for change.

Too often as progressives, we're clear about what we're against but not what we're for.  And when we do focus on positive change, it's often in small, incremental steps.  Where do we talk about our long-term, ultimate vision for the future we want?  HERE!

The Movement Vision Lab aims to shake us out of our lazy comfort with the unchallenged orthodoxy of existing ideas and help us struggle together in search of bold and dynamic new ideas.  There are plenty of websites and blogs focused on what's wrong with politics and society today.  The Movement Vision Lab is where we all come to talk about solutions -- to trade and try on different ideas and develop our shared, alternative vision for the future.

Do you remember the story of the emperor who had no clothes?  It wasn't other elite members of the royal court who pointed it out, was it?  Political chatter today is dominated by the same elites who got us into this situation by following polls rather than leading with ideas.  And blogs and online media are often dangerously divorced from the real communities who are clamoring for change.   There's a sense that, if we just get some really smart people in the room, they can figure this vision thing out -- even if they've never experienced any of the problems their trying to solve or implemented a single idea in their lifetimes.  Maybe if we're looking for new ideas, we should start looking in new places.

The Movement Vision Lab amplifies the voices of grassroots leaders and organizers working in real communities across the United States.  These leaders not only have first-hand experience with the problems facing our society but also practical and innovative solutions that are grounded in the everyday realities of the communities where they live and work.  While these leaders -- and in particular leaders of color -- are often the most excluded from political discourse, their ideas and vision are what we need most.  

Each week on the Movement Vision Lab blog, we will ask community organizers and leaders to reflect on provocative questions about the future and offer their visionary ideas in response. This week, we're asking:  What is our vision for corporations, unions and the future of business?  We have four essays from Saru Jayaraman (Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York), Donald Cohen (Center on Policy Initiatives), Sarita Gupta (Jobs with Justice) and Omar Freilla (Green Worker Cooperatives).  We also have podcasts with Denise Perry (Power U Center for Social Change), Andy Stern (SEIU) and Burt Lauderdale (Kentuckians for the Commonwealth).  We urge you to comment and join in the discussion.  

Also check out the Idea Lab where you can search hundreds of concrete solutions for the future -- and add your ideas and resources, too.  Each week, we'll be adding new ideas and new features to the site so check back often.

Through the Movement Vision Lab Blog, Idea Lab and more, we promise to make you uncomfortable -- and to inspire, engage and energize you as well!