The case for a strong and vibrant Pro Migrant blogosphere.

Two years ago, after the failure to pass meaningful immigration reform, there was much introspection and examination within the immigrants-rights community about exactly what went wrong. Many lessons needed to be learned and much restructuring done.

I had this to say at that time:

I believe the last round of negotiations on Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR), the so-called "Grand Compromise", provided a huge wake-up call for the immigrant-rights community. We found out just how badly the right-wing had out flanked us both in Washington and in the media and that any hope for meaningful CIR was now in the distant future.

Crafted in hopes to find a "sweet spot" that would calm the far-right, give business interests what they wanted, and appease those concerned with immigrant rights, the Compromise ended up to be nothing more than a gumbo of concessions to business and the restrictionst wing of the Republican party.

Despite the fact that a majority of Americans believe that the immigration system is severely broken and that those who have come here improperly deserve to be given the opportunity to stay and continue leading productive lives, a vocal and influential minority within the Republican Party managed to hold CIR hostage. They garnered concession after concession until the bill presented was an unworkable mess of restrictions, punishments and business concessions. All these concessions made in a vane attempt to appease this minority so that they would allow the "amnesty" that the vast majority of the American people want anyway.

As has happened time and again, when the closed doors were finally opened, and the super-secret compromise legislation revealed, many in the immigrant-rights community decided to play it safe with a "wait and see" strategy before endorsing or opposing the bill. This, in the hope that they might "work to make it better" through the amendment process.

And just as in the past, the amendment process was not meant for them, but rather those demanding greater and greater restrictions, and in the end, the bill received tepid support from a few organizations and outright opposition from others, and was killed.

Yet, this didn't stop the far-right for taking sole credit for its demise.

Lou Dobbs crowed about how "we the people have stopped the illegal alien amnesty bill", restrictionist Republicans gloated over the bill's failure, and Rush thanked his listeners for killing "shamnesty".

Yet, even though the bill was a train wreck from the start and probably never had any real chance of passing despite all the bravado from the Whitehouse, the grassroots campaign launched by the restrictionist movement was impressive to say the least. Over 700K e-mails and faxes flooded the Capitol in opposition to the legislation.

An effort like this is only possible because the ant-immigrant movement has a firm grip on much of the traditional and emerging new media.

Along with their legion of talk radio propagandists, they have Lou Dobbs' daily hour long cavalcade of hate on CNN, Pat Buchanan posturing as NBC's resident immigration expert, and a full roster of immigrant bashers occupying the seats over at FOX News to dominate the traditional media.

On the Web the ant-immigration movement is broad and far-reaching also.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and its affiliate organizations, The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and Numbers USA dominate. CIS, through its "studies and research", and Numbers USA, through their legislative "analysis," provide talking points and misinformation spread throughout the web and the main stream media. Numbers USA alone has a membership of 447,000 and played a large roll in orchestrating the restrictionist grassroots effort last spring. This web presence is magnified by the hundreds of blogs and other web sites that take their cues from FAIR and the other more traditional lobbying efforts.

So where does that leave the immigrant-rights movement?

... We have no true counter to this restrictionist effort.

In the traditional media, print journalism does manage to get to the truth sometimes, and there is the occasional positive piece on TV. On the web there is a disjointed community of web sites and blogs trying to reach an audience, but in general nothing comes close to the coordinated effort put on by the right.

In my last post I discussed the lack of a coordinated message and unified goals as one chief stumbling block for the movement. But there are others.

Even if a set of goals and messages were formulated, we have no effective means to disseminate them. Sending a lone representative from the NCLR off to face Lou Dobbs on his home turf, or writing op-eds in hopes that they sway public opinion don't constitute an effective media strategy.

Along with a unified message we need a strategy.

We need infrastructure.

We need tools.

We need coordination.

We need to reach the point where not only is our message getting heard, but the opposition's message is being debunked or vilified. We need to be able to ensure that every time a CIS "study" is quoted as fact, it can be countered. We need to make it possible that when a restrictionist pundit or expert quotes the same old Borjas study on the adverse effects of immigration on those at the bottom of the economic ladder, it can be countered with the newer Peri study that debunked it. But that kind of information needs to be not only readily available, but but people need to know it's out there. But most of all, we need to be willing to confront some of the uglier aspects of this debate and not let the underlying racism and xenophobia that motivates some, receive a free pass out of fear WE will look too confrontational.

I'm not an "old media" guy so I can't really make too many suggestions as to how to crack that nut.

I do know that as much as I give credit to anyone willing to face down Dobbs or Buchanan, our official spokespeople have not done too effective a job when dealing with them. We need spokespeople willing to be as confrontational as our opponents, who won't be bullied or badgered, and are willing to call our opponents out when they mislead or misrepresent the truth or rely on jingoistic rhetoric or fear mongering. And most of all; They can't be afraid to call a minuteman a racist …because he is one.

But that said, much of the work to be done is in the new media and the web.

The web is where much of the misinformation used by our opponents emanates. Google up "immigrant taxes", "immigrant crime" "immigrant disease" or any of a myriad of other hot-button topics and I guarantee the CIS or some other restrictionist think tank or web site will come up to supply an endless stream of bogus studies and talking points. Those "facts" then swirl around the right-wing echo chamber from the blogs to talk radio to the MSM…. Eventually becoming accepted fact by the public.

The web is also where restrictionist advocacy and organizing takes place. Number USA being the most prominent site. Between its legislative analysis, candidate rankings, and on-line lobbying efforts, it’s a one stop shop for restrictionist action. But there are hundreds, if not thousands, of other websites and blogs raising money, influencing elections, lobbying legislation.

We need to do much better in this respect if we are to ever move our cause forward.

There's more

So, two years later, how much has really changed since I first wrote those words.

Once again resrtrictionists, racists, and wingnuts are gearing up for the next fight. Testing their strategies and abilities at town halls, teabag revolts, and a media barrage opposing healthcare reform, they are honing their skills for a battle that will be far more contentious.

Groups mobilize for the next immigration battle

Former schoolteacher Evelyn Miller doesn't plan to retire from the anti-illegal immigration movement any time soon.

She's too busy organizing petitions, blasting e-mails, faxes and letters, and threatening politicians who are up for re-election.

The 76-year-old member of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform says she is driven by her belief that those in the country illegally are taking jobs and taxpayer services from Americans.

"We're soldiers in the foxhole," Miller said from her dining room in Irvine, which doubles as a home office.

Groups like Miller's have proven so effective in mobilizing and delivering their message that they have halted two attempts at comprehensive immigration reform. In 2007 the groups literally shut down the Senate's phone system at the height of discussion on changes that would have given millions without legal status a pathway to citizenship.

OC Register

And while I agree that great strides have been made on the pro-reform side ...there is still much to be done, ...and much that has been done incorrectly in my opinion.

It is true that pro-immigrant groups all scrambled after the last failure to gain web presence. Websites that had been afterthoughts at best, were revitalized and invested in by national organizations. Nearly every organization under the sun set up some sort of blog or webpage, promoting interns or in some cases hiring known bloggers to run them.

Daily e-mails, Facebook messages, and tweets now fly from the advocacy groups in rapid-fire succession pimping this or that blogpost, highlighting events or news, or asking for various actions. Listbuilding of perspective activist has become a universal obsession for advocacy groups..

It's a far cry from the days when most of the organizations barely acknowledge the web's existence.

But with all this, the a real organic growth of a pro-migrant movement online has not taken root and grown.

Sure. there are hundreds, if not thousands of new pro migrant websites that weren't around a few short years ago. But the great majority of them or not the organic, grassroots efforts of individuals or communities needed for true movement building, but rather top-down enterprises formulated by national organizations, PR hacks, and professional think-tank types in DC, NYC, or LA.

In fact, in some ways, in their haste to enter the new medium of web base activism, these organizations sucked all the oxygen out of the room and stifled any organic growth that was taking place.

Back in the spring of 2006, when the large scale rallies were taking place, most of the organizing for them was done via myspace, hastily thrown up websites, texting, local advocacy groups, Spanish language radio, and on the ground efforts like posters, flyers and old fashioned organizing.

The national organizations were late to the game and in some cases ambivalent to the whole endeavor.

Back in the spring of 2006, when the large scale rallies were taking place, most of the organizing for them was done via myspace, hastily thrown up websites, texting, local advocacy groups, Spanish language radio, and on the ground efforts like posters, flyers and old fashioned organizing.

The national organizations were late to the game and in some cases ambivalent to the whole endeavor.

On-line, there were but a handful of us posting information about march locations, times etc. There was so little discussion of immigration on the web that my small blog, with less than 100 hits a day at the time, remained the number-one google search for "hr4437" and "Sensenbrenner bill" from the time the bill passed in Dec of 2005 until after the marches of April 2006.

But this lack of web presence did not hamper the effort ... it instead made organizing easier. People knew where to get accurate and up to date information. A simple google search or myspace link put them on one of the few sites that listed every march in every city or town. Organizers also knew who to contact to update their info or add new events. As far as the web aspect of the campaign went...it was extremely effective.

But this could never be replicated today.

Small, hastily thrown together websites like those of nohr4437.org and other groups like the March25Coalition and the Immigrant Solidarity Network would be overshadowed today by the large national advocacy groups and their now well-oiled web machines. And the decisions and direction of any grassroots effort would be hampered by the usual DC political machinations.

And this is a great loss to the movement.

As we move forward to what we all expect to be the battle of our lifetimes, it becomes evident that the need for a vibrant, independent, and strong pro-migrant blogosphere is greater than ever.

Perhaps, there has been no greater demonstration of this then the recent growth and success of the Dreamer movement.

No other on-line organizing effort from the pro-migrant community has come close to the effectiveness, reach, and scope of their organizing efforts. Over a relatively short period of time, a small group of on-line activists has grown a truly formidable on-line campaign of thousands of people to move DREAM legislation forward and highlight the plight of Dreamers. They've saved many from deportation, and forced the issue to the front of the immigration debate. All this done from the grassroots up.

Now of course, the national advocacy groups all clamber to "cash in" on the DREAMER magic. All want to be able replicate the effectiveness of their on-line efforts.

But of course this too can never happen.

Just as the rallies grew organically from the ground up, so too did the DREAMERS. It is through their commitment, heart, and drive that these true grassroots efforts grow.

While all the work done thus far by pro-reform forces has been well-meaning, and in some cases useful, one of the most important things they must do is make sure that a true grassroots pro-migrant blogosphere thrives and grows. That it is never overshadowed or usurped by money or politics.

- Give us the tools we need
- Support us financially when possible, but without restrictions or preconditions
- Spend the time to know our work... then let us go about doing it

We are an unruly, often impetuous group, that might seem at first glance to be too headstrong or emotional, prone to infighting and argument ... but that is because we are REAL. We are the grassroots, we are the on-line activist committed to the cause...for ourselves, our families, community or friends.

And if this movement is to ever match the fervor and emotion we see in our opponents as they scream and yell at town halls, or stand outside home improvement stores, or spend their weekends intimidating others at the border .... we will need to tap into the headstrong emotions that only come from the true grassroots

Read More...

Summary only...

2009 Call Out To All Pro-Migrant Bloggers

It's a time of great change.

After eight miserable years of The Decider, and Republican reign in Washington, a breath of fresh air is on it's way.

For the first time in years, those who fight for human-rights, civil-rights, and the oppressed can finally see some light at the end of the tunnel.

The struggle will not be easy. But years in the political and social wilderness have only strengthened and hardened us for the battle ahead.

In the last few years our numbers have grown exponentially and we have organized on a scale not seen in decades.

But things have moved quickly and many new allies and friends have sprung up in the last year.

So, if you have, or know of a pro-migrant blog or website, write about migrant and/or immigration issues, human rights, or other issues of concern to the broader immigrant community - leave a link in the comments, or e-mail me and give me some info on your site so I can add you to the blogroll

I'd eventually like to have as complete a listing as possible of the pro-migrant blogsphere.

Thanks
Duke

Read More...

Summary only...

Movement Meta and the Overton Window

If our current Presidential candidates are to be believed, comprehensive immigration reform will once again be on the table sometime early this coming year. But exactly what that reform will look like will be determined more by the ebb and flow of public opinion than any campaign promises made during the heat of the campaign.

Activists on both sides of the debate are ratcheting up their respective PR machines in anticipation of the grand legislative dance that will take place.

Right-wing groups like FAIR and its astroturf surrogates have taken out splashy adds in big time "liberal media" publications trying to reframe the issue as an environmental one. NumbersUSA will spend probably close to a million dollars to train 500 new "volunteer activist experts" to flood the press with fake, 'non-partisan' viewpoints on everything from health care to education…all of course with an anti-immigrant bend.

On the other side, pro-immigrant groups are actively courting newly-minted "pro-migrant bloggers" from the previously uninterested progressive blogosphere in hopes of effecting positive electoral change. Business centered think tanks and "grassroots" advocacy groups made up of the likes of the American Meat Institute and the American Hotel & Lodging Association are beginning lobbying efforts to make sure they get the kind of immigration reform that will be best for their economic interests.

Of course lost in all this politics as usual are the people at the heart of the issue. Those who have been effected by increased raids that have destroyed families all in the name of some cynical political theater to sway public opinion. Those who have died in detention camps for lack of basic medical care in order to prove that some "get tough" policy is an effective replacement for meaningful reform. Those who have been denied basic constitution protections in order that Micheal Chertoff can claim victory in his personal war on the undocumented.

But this is a nightmare for migrants that need not exist.

If we had been vigilant from the start, and more importantly, shrewd enough not to allow this entire issue to be framed from the start by the far-right, a different dynamic might exist today and reform might have been accomplished.

I am still not jaded enough to believe that the current paradigm was inevitable.

I don't want to believe that pro-immigrant avdocacy groups compromise the very people they are supposed to represent out of nefarious political intent. I don't want to believe that corporate and business interests are welcomed into the pro-migrant world for any other reason than the current constraints of political realities.

But at the same time I must question why those political realities exist, and why supposed immigrant advocates work so half-heartedly to change them.

I recently started to examine this situation through the lens of the concept of the Overton Window. ..and doing so it has revealed not only the mistakes of the past but a clear path for action moving forward.

Originally conceived by a right wing think tank, the political concept of the Overton Window has become popular in the blogosphere over the last few years as a way to analyze policy and political action.

The Overton window is a concept in political theory, named after the former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Joe Overton, who developed the model. It describes a "window" in the range of public reactions to ideas in public discourse, in a spectrum of all possible options on an issue. Overton described a method for moving that window, thereby including previously excluded ideas, while excluding previously acceptable ideas. The technique relies on people promoting ideas even less acceptable than the previous "outer fringe" ideas. That makes those old fringe ideas look less extreme, and thereby acceptable. Delivering rhetoric to define the window provides a plan of action to make more acceptable to the public some ideas by priming them with other ideas allowed to remain unacceptable, but which make the real target ideas seem more acceptable by comparison.

Wikipedia

Imagine, if you will, a yardstick standing on end. On either end are the extreme policy actions for any political issue. Between the ends lie all gradations of policy from one extreme to the other. The yardstick represents the full political spectrum for a particular issue. The essence of the Overton window is that only a portion of this policy spectrum is within the realm of the politically possible at any time. Regardless of how vigorously a think tank or other group may campaign, only policy initiatives within this window of the politically possible will meet with success. Why is this?

Politicians are constrained by ideas, even if they have no interest in them personally. What they can accomplish, the legislation they can sponsor and support while still achieving political success (i.e. winning reelection or leaving the party strong for their successor), is framed by the set of ideas held by their constituents — the way people think. … A politician’s success or failure stems from how well they understand and amplify the ideas and ideals held by those who elected them.

… Therefore, they will almost always constrain themselves to taking actions within the "window" of ideas approved of by the electorate. Actions outside of this window, while theoretically possible, and maybe more optimal in terms of sound policy, are politically unsuccessful.
Mackinac Center

Since politicians, advocacy groups, and lobbyists generally work within the confines of the Overton Window as determined by public opinion, the only way to move an issue away from the middle is to shift public opinion towards the ends of the spectrum. But as the right-wing has so successfully found out, public opinion can be shifted drastically over time so that ideas and concepts that were once confined to the fringe can be moved to the center by introducing ideas far more extreme into the debate. The rants of Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or FOX play heavily into this concept as far as general politics go. But perhaps nowhere has this strategy been more effective than in the immigration debate.

By continually introducing fringe elements and concepts, like the white supremacist rants of Pat Buchanan, into the debate, things like the elimination of birthright citizenship, English Only, and deportation through starvation, seem more reasonable and eventually have become acceptable aspects of the greater debate.

At the same time legalization of the undocumented, which actually has the support of the majority of the public, begins to move out of the Overton Window and becomes a more far-left concept.

When viewed in this light, everything done by the right makes total sense.

From the insane rants of William Gheen, to the embrace of the minutemen and neo-nazis like Save Our States' Joe Turner…to the bile of "mainstream" hatemongers like Lou Dobbs, Pat Buchanan, Limbaugh, Malkin, O'rielly and the rest…it's all been done to move the Overton Window of acceptable debate.

As lunatics have increasingly mainstreamed extremist ideas to make previously unacceptable positions acceptable, even rational, practical and accepted positions of the left have been re-positioned as far-left ideology.

In the warped worldview of right-wing framing even relatively conservative and mainstream advocacy groups like NCLR become the provocateurs of radical ideologies…anyone familiar with far-right framing is familiar with "the 'National Council of Race' and its advocating of the reconquista" meme.

But what of the left?

Why have immigrant and migrant-rights activist organizations been so impotent in the wake of this attack from the right?

How has the debate shifted so far from the center that previous attempts at Comprehensive Reform yielded legislation that was immigrant unfriendly at best and in most cases extremely anti-immigrant? Both McCain –Kennedy and the Grand Compromise were at their core restrictionist, punitive, and fostered the relegation of both current and future immigrants to permanent underclass status.

This situation has occurred because the mainstream pro-immigrant movement has spent the entire time chasing an ever-shifting middle ground only to find that once they get there it has again moved further to the right.

And this is because they have not worked to shift the Overton Window back to a more acceptable place.

In fact, they have not only limited their own responses to reflect this quest for the middle, they have worked to distance themselves from, and marginalize, the left-of-center voices of the broader movement that could move the window for them.

While the right embraces it's fringe(the base)...the left tries its hardest to deny their's even exists.

Their response to the Marches of 2006 and 2007 is a prime example of this fact.

After lending only tepid and late support to the 2006 marches, they found the heat put on them from the right was more than they were willing to handle. When Dobbs and the rest of the RW noise machine painted the marches as extremist, framing them as "Mexican flag waving" "illegal aliens" "demanding rights they weren't entitled to"… did the mainstream orgs stand their ground, or at the very least allow the left to spek up to move the window of public opinion for them? ..No, they backed down, lending less support the following year, and outright opposition this year for fear that marches might upset the sensibilities of "middle America"….and one again the window moved further to the right.

The wiser move for course would have been to allow the original march organizers, and the left in general, to present a strong case for the marches and their reason for being. Letting left-of-center surrogates do the heavy lifting of shifting the Overton Window would have been a preferred course of action.

This is certainly what the right would have done. They don't silence Ann Coulter or Pat Buchanan, no matter how far out their claims or positions. This is because they realize that even extreme ideas put forth into the public square only lend credibility everything more moderate.

The same has been true on the web where the right-wing has achieved numerous victories in shaping the debate. FAIR, NumbersUSA, ALIPAC …they have all made great strides in moving the debate towards the far right.

But the pro-migrant movement on the web has been plagued by lack of true voices from the left. The mainstream advocacy groups have relied upon a "top-down" hierarchical model that has limited any strong presence of meaningful left-of-center voices, preferring instead to try to control the message and the medium from the middle.

And the results have been predictable.

The window continues to shift rightward.

If the migrant right movement is to ever achieve meaningful, humane, and practical reform it MUST learn to not only accept the voices of the left…but embrace them. They must come to the logical and practical conclusion that you can't move a debate from the middle. And if they are unwilling or unable move the debate back towards the left themselves, they must at the very least get out of the way and allow those who can accomplish this task do it…

It would of course be nice if they could help…but if they can't …least they can do is make sure that the doors are not shut and that they are not blocking the way.

Read More...

Summary only...