The Mexican Perspective: Understanding Their Culture
The Immigration Issue
Patrick Osio, Jr
(From Patrick Osio, Jr.’s The Mexican Perspective)
Every time there is a downward economic period in the U.S. the issue of immigration, more precisely, illegal immigration, or as Mexican would rather it be called – undocumented immigration – rises to the surface as an issue, sometimes as a major issue, as it did during the first half of the 1990’s and again at the turn of the century, both periods coinciding with a U.S. economic recession.
It is, however, not new, the situation has been taking place since the turn of the last century. During the 1910-1930 period due to the Mexican revolution, followed by the War of the Cristeros (an armed conflict between the government and Catholics). These times sent several hundred thousand Mexican across the border to escape the constant death threatening civil wars that seemed to go on without end.
Immigrants from that period mostly settled in Texas and California where they joined those who had arrived in lesser numbers before, and those who had been part of the U.S. since the take over of those former Mexican territories. The multi generation and new arrivals were treated in both those states (and elsewhere) as second class people. Discrimination, bigotry and racism were rampant. In both of those states discrimination gave rise to the ‘barrios’ as for instance in East Los Angeles, were slowly Mexican immigrants displaced the until then occupants, the Jews. In such barrios they could live in harmony among each other, though it delayed their integration into the American mainstream.
Though socially and civilly Mexican immigrants were mistreated, they were sought after for their work ethic, dependability and non-complaining about working conditions. They seemed grateful for the work, and when treated fairly in the work place, were pronouncedly very loyal. These folks made a life in the U.S. until the Great Depression wherein many were simply deported along with their U.S. born children. However, not all were thus treated, and thousands of them were protected by their bosses, and others of good will.
The children and grandchildren of those generations are today the leaders in their community. Many highly educated, many enjoying positions of importance, many owners of small, medium and large businesses, many doctors, dentists, attorneys, accountants, engineers, architects, writers, journalists – no different than those in the upward mobile American mainstream.
Why is their story important to the topic of immigration? Because their example - their success is known in Mexico. How ever small the success, for the poor in Mexico, it was utopia. These immigrants overcame the worst from those who didn’t care for them, and lived in homes, with running water, electricity, bathrooms, kitchens; they had jobs, had food, and clothes for their family; their children went to school – it didn’t matter that the schools by U.S. standards were inferior to those found in the ‘white’ barrios – they were getting an education. And their families were safe (relatively) – there were no soldiers running amok in the streets where men, women and children were not safe.
Jobs, security and opportunity, though all of low quality, were heavenly sounds to the economically desperate Mexicans. And though, there were always those who insulted, there were many who were kind, and always for those who wanted to work there were jobs. Previous immigrants from Mexico showed the way, and that success in attaining basic needs was possible, even absent full acceptance by the majority in power. (Obviously, ill treatment and non-acceptance produces long term scars, which in time surface sometimes with explosive results – the Mexican-American (Chicano) civil rights movement in the U.S. particularly in California) experienced such results.)
In 1979, Paul R. Ehrlich (author of the best seller, The Population Bomb, among others), a Bing Professor of population studies at Stanford University, wrote The Golden Door –International Migration: Mexico and the United States. Ehrlich noted that there were two factors necessary for immigration to take place – the “push” and the “pull” factors.
The push was/is the need – be it economic, political, religious, natural catastrophe, war or whatever at the place of origin. And the pull was/is the destination wherein individuals believe their need can be satisfied.
So the poor of Mexico had the push in spades, and the God sent utopia within easy access as the pull – jobs were plentiful and relative peace and safety was present. All they had to do was work harder than the local natives, don’t complain and be (or at least act) subservient. It was a marriage made in heaven – for a time for both, but large migrations also bring friction – and bad economic times exacerbate the friction – and there is where we are today. But today is really no different than it was in the early 1990’s, or in the mid 1970’s, or in the 1950’s or in the 1930’s. Reading Ehrlich’s 1979 book and his account of events then and before, one could say the book was written not around 25 years ago, but in 2003. Nothing’s changed.
The Mexican impoverished are willing to risk their lives to cross into the U.S. because they feel theirs and their families’ lives are already at risk where they live. To be sure, maybe not death from starvation, but malnutrition can kill, particularly the young and old, it can incapacitate working men and women making it more difficult to eke out a living. And worse, they see no light at the end of the tunnel – they lost hope in their own country and its government to be of help and doubt those in power even care.
Their feeling is that they are coming to a country that needs them. They will do work that natives don’t want to do. To them, their labor has value and adds value to the U.S.
What they don’t observe in their desperation is the sheer numbers of them with the same need are overwhelming and displacing native workers in some industries. They believe that obtaining a job is proof that their labor is needed; not understanding that in some U.S. industries they are given the job because of the greed of some of the job-givers. They prefer giving jobs to hard working, low pay; non-complaining laborers who are not treated or given their rights accorded them under labor laws.
Had Mexicans crossing the border sough work in agricultural fields or related jobs, and entered in just the right numbers for that work, U.S. citizens, as a majority, wouldn’t mind. It was their entry into almost every conceivable industry – the construction as one example and in such great numbers that seemingly never stops that has created the present friction.
What is difficult for the Mexican poor to understand is why Americans take it out on them, the victims of their economic situation brought about through no fault of theirs? And that is a fair question.
Prior to the defeat of the PRI in 2000, whose authoritarian rule for seven decades created the situation the poor suffer in Mexico, the government did not acknowledge the illegal immigration phenomenon taking place. To have acknowledged it, would have been an admission that there was a failure to provide Mexican citizens with economic opportunity, and this the PRI could not admit – failure was not theirs.
Having their disenfranchised citizens travel north, was a favorable consequence to the PRI government. Having a ‘pull’ place was a relief valve that in its absence could otherwise manifest into civil disobedience and potential dangerous conflicts that would shine the light of day on the terrible mismanagement and abuse of Mexico’s many assets. It also reduced the need by the number of otherwise eligible workers traveling north to invest in the industrial and educational infrastructure needed to create economic opportunity. And their remittances provided the capture of dollars taken and/or sent to their families. So the PRI attitude was one of scorn towards those citizens, as though they were somehow unpatriotic for leaving the ‘paradise’ they, the PRI, had created for Mexicans.
But since Vicente Fox, of the PAN party, took office in 2000, what has changed? Much in admitting the situation and attempts at creating a better climate for an orderly ‘export’ of labor; but little to show for it – other than a growing friction in both Mexico and the U.S.
One of Fox’s first acts was to acknowledge the sacrifice of those who left their home to trek to the U.S. in search of work – he referred to them as patriots. This point was misunderstood in the U.S. It was not meant as promotion to travel north, it was a simple acknowledgement that unlike how they had been made to feel under the PRI regime, his administration understood their need to sacrifice so much, and instead of causing further damage to their country they had gone in search of jobs. Fox also admitted it was Mexico’s failure to create economic and job opportunities that was the root of their exodus.
Fox then attempted, at the recommendation of his Minister of Foreign Relations, Jorge Castañeda, to press the U.S. for an agreement that would provide amnesty to those already in the U.S. and to create a guest worker program for others in Mexico needing work – he went as far as saying – we want the “whole enchilada.”
The Washington political body was to some degree looking at some of the idea in favorable terms, as was the newly elected U.S. President Bush. Washington was delighted that finally the PRI had been toppled, as they were a cumbersome lot, and corrupt as all hell – difficult to deal and reason with, plus after the ‘betrayal’ of President Salinas de Gortari (1988-1994), who had really hoodwinked Washington, and indeed, the Mexican people into believing that Mexico was getting rid of corruption and fast moving into a truly democratic form of government, only to find after he left office that his administration’s penchant for taking public monies and making side deals had been no different than previous administrations and playing with illusions as to the true economic state of affairs in Mexico.
These reasons, and many others, gave hope to the new government from an opposition party. Washington was eager to help, and various U.S. industries had become dependent in varying degrees to the labor Mexicans were willing to do – so why not, make a deal.
But then September 11, 2001, came to be, and National Security was not only the number one issue, but in fact the only issue. Mexico was brushed aside. There would be no deal then or in the foreseeable future. Try as he might Fox was unable to get Washington’s attention – to Mexico this was a critical issue, and a presidential campaign promise he had made – he was been made to look foolish in Mexico. And of course, the ousted PRI that still wielded considerable power in the Congress and Senate was and continues to be delighted in making things harder for Fox. But here again, the poor in need are still the political football in both countries.
Another significant part of the U.S.-Mexico immigration issue is not the poor, but the better and highly educated who are also leaving Mexico in search of opportunity. There is a serious brain-drain taking place in this sector of the Mexican population. Though less in number than the poor counterpart, it is nonetheless significant.
Many are also in the U.S. illegally, not necessarily that they entered through the scorching desert, most come legally with some form of visa, then like their European counterparts simply stay. Because they are educated, and mostly already speak some or fluent English, they quickly disappear into the American mainstream.
A further form of legal entry and legal permanent residency is not a problem for the affluent and educated Mexican national. A rich Mexican can easily obtain a visa that will allow for multiple entries and residency in the U.S. This can be accomplished by the creation of a U.S. corporation that will invest in the U.S. and requires the services of the owner, in this case a Mexican national. Other types of visas are allowed under the North American Trade Agreement that makes allowance of company interchanges of specialized personnel.
So that in the end, it is only the poor and little educated Mexican people who are the ones willing to work under scorching sun to put vegetables and fruits on our plates that Americans argue about keeping out.
Obviously, in the U.S. we do have a serious problem on the issue of immigration, and it does need to be resolved – but instead of working for a solution, it seems to the poor Mexicans that we are more interested in further punishing them.
(Read the entire chapter in the: The Mexican Perspective is available for electronic download purchase – read more about the book at: http://www.hispanicvista.com/sales/book_sale.htm)
- Table of Contents
- Excerpts from the manual
- What Readers Say
- (The E-book costs $9.95. PayPal is an E-Bay company able to accept any credit or debit card - payments are very secure. Once purchased, PayPal notifies Mr. Osio's agent who in turn sends the E-book by E-mail as an attachment. Usually the book is E-mailed within 24 hours or less.)
- About the Author
- Patrick Osio, Jr.
Editor of HispanicVista.com
- Contact information:
- E-mail: Posiojr@HispanicVista.com,
|
- HispanicVista.com – http://www.hispanicvista.com
- If you wish to read some of his articles visit HispanicVista.com or key-word Patrick Osio, Jr on any search engine. Contact at: PosioJr@hispanic.sdcoxmail.com
- HispanicVista.com – http://www.hispanicvista.com