*
*
About a month ago a new person moved into the neighborhood. The old man, Don Jose who is one of the original people in this area, he has rentals now that he is older, well past retirement, but still likes to work. So this new young man rented one from him. It was to be $800 pesos a month, but when he saw the visiting mothers car, which was almost new, he made the rent $1000 pesos. Don Jose always charges according to the ability to pay. Which is wise. Being very many young men in this neighborhood he was near unnoticed by my husband or I until just yesterday. As he, Tommy, walked by the fence that runs along the street on my property, he paused to ask for work. There are workers here, so there was no work, but a conversation started. It switched to Egnlish very soon, which is unusual for here, not to many speak it where I live. I was quick to notice his English was better than his Spanish and asked why. And then he started on his story, his past. Born in Mexico and brought to Long Beach California at three months of age. That was the last time he was in Mexico, unil now. His mother is a waitress and had several more children on the north side of the border and a new husband. He was brought up American style, enough money, enough luxuries, enough plenty. The first summer after his high school graduation he made a mistake, like youths can often make. At the wrong place, wrong time. On the way to go play ball, three friends decided to break into a house they saw the neighbor leave. He had no nerve for it and debated out front waiting, but to late. A squad car pulled up, the boys inside ran out back with what they stole and escaped. He being out front, like a target was easily picked up and taken away. Being a true Mexican, he would not tell on his friends, so instead of being given a light sentence he received two years in the state penitentiary at Lompoc. This is something his mother would remind him of on her visits. That she was the one who came, put money on the books, and would be there for him when he got out, not his long gone friends. He wasn’t ready for prison, he had been a good boy, not to experimental, stayed away from drugs, just a little marijuana, quite sensible. The stay there hardened him, one could tell. At the end of his jail stay, upon release he was suddenly taken to Mexicali, Mexico and dropped there late at night from a bus. He was told just before leaving his papers were not straight and his Mexican birth made him not a citizen. They told him next time he was caught across the border it would be five years in jail, for any reason, even just living and working. So he got a job picking asparagus and learned what hard work was. He has kicked around a lot since then. Just recently on Saturday night on the way walking home from a job, he had bought marijuna and some groceries. The police here stopped him, took both and all his money and told him to run. He said he never ran faster, he did not want to experience Mexican jail and the cops were smart enough to know he did not need to either. He has been here three years now and is almost twenty two years old. He has improved his spanish and definitely learned quite a lot of the ways of the land, necessity taught that. He misses his family and his college plans, but his safety here is more to him and his family then his being with them up there in such a dangerous for the innocent country.
35 comments:
Nice story but the last line's far from clear. He misses his family and his college plans, but his safety here is more to him and his family then his being with them up there in such a dangerous for the innocent country.
Atanu, it is a well known fact that American jails are full of the innocent. They jail people for many reasons that are not true crimes. Like with marijuana, they jail the users of this substance while allowing their doctors to pump out all kinds of mind altering drugs into the public with no penality. Like with this boy, jail was not the answer for him, especially a prison of that sort with hardened crimminals with long stays. This young man should have received some sort of punishment for being with friends who were doing wrong, but the reason why he got the sentence he did, instead of a fitting one, is because he is dark skinned and Mexican. That would not have happened to a rich white kid. If he were to cross the border into America to be with his family and continue his future he could be picked up at any time and put away for many more years. Americas prisons are a business and it is the inmate that makes them their money so they are not fussy who they incarcerate.
He and his family realize the necessity for his very freedom that he live in Mexico for the rest of his life, never to visit them again. It is quite sad to see a young mans life ripped apart because of the unfair ways of this evil country America.
Zatikia, I remember reading a report of yours before where it mentions how the business class in the USA uses prisoners to get them to do work for free. Keeping that in mind, it is easy to see that they would lock people up for the barest of excuses. A crime in itself, but legal enough in a nation whose origins, and indeed whose very existance are a crimes.
And that is where we disagree. Any action that puts an end to the crimes that americans do all over the world is, by the very meaning of justice, just. Verbal, diplomatic or otherwise. You will agree that it is not a crime to silence an abusive man. Same when you rob a thief. Or murder a murderer. Fighting back, all the time.
These people who they abuse feed the source. Unfair is unfair and never a good thing to promote. This helps no one but corporate America gain power. Jailing the innocent benefits no one. Oppression only breeds more oppression
"Same when you rob a thief. Or murder a murderer. Fighting back, all the time."
Surely if you rob a thief then you are a thief and if you murder a murderer then you are a murderer?
This eye-for-an-eye mentality is the basis of blind faith. So no Atanu, I would not agree.
Yes Pisces, one who robs a thief is one. So is a man a murderer if he murders another man. The question is : "Is it wrong to do these"?
Robin Hood stole from the rich. Would you have asked him not to? Or in the event you got late and the robbery was already done, would you try your best to prevent him from being the world hero that he is?
Take Hitler. Would murdering him be blind faith?
Or take a simpler example. If you were attacked tomorrow on the road and the man who attacked you meant to shoot you with the gun he held, would shooting him instead be blind faith on your part?
Zatikia,
I am sure you will agree that the people of the United States have blood on their hands, not to mention other types of crimes as well. Now the question is : Are we wrong to fight america back?
If we are, then why speak about those crimes at all? Let us instead talk of the weather or the sunset on our blogs. The thing is, you are fighting the United States too, verbally. As indeed are many, not necessarily in blogs, but in several others ways also, in varying degrees of effectiveness. Why should words be the only legitimate source of response? If the enemy can resort to the use of the gun, why is our own use of the gun illegitimate?
Let our pen and our swords, as indeed any other means one finds, be tools of our struggle. Given the ruthless nature of the enemy, nothing we do to it can be too much.
Atanu: I understand where you are coming from but I would argue that Robin Hood was returning stolen property (semantics I know) and no, I do not believe that it is necessary to kill a killer - merely to remove him from the position that allows him to kill.
My point is that the eye-for-an-eye mentality so loved by many religions is one of the reasons we are where we are now - on the brink of extinction.
Pisces, this has nothing to do with where I am coming from. I am all for death penalty for a man like Hitler, which is more than just removing him for the position of doing more killings.
Yes, Robin Hood was returning stolen property. Meaning it is ok to rob those who have robbed already. Precisely what I said earlier.
I disagree with you that we are here on the brink of extinction because of an eye-for-an-eye mentality. We are rather on the brink of extinction because there has only been the "first eye", without a second follow-up response. There has only been imperialism from the Western World, exported to the eastern and southern. That is why we are on the brink of extinction. We will only have an eye-for-an-eye when the african and asian nations, not to mention those in Central and South America, take their own revenge against the people of the Western nations. That will not mean extinction, but salvation. Either humanity or the white people will dominate mother earth. For now it has only been the latter. High time the former took over.
Revenge solves nothing - blood begets blood. I'm with you on who is the most to blame but I stand by my condemnation of religious armageddon mongering.
"There has only been imperialism from the Western World, exported to the eastern and southern." - the Ottoman Empire was Western import? Or the tsarist empire?
You call it religious armageddon mongering. I call it humanity fighting back.
The dark man will not take nonsense from the white man anymore. He has already done it for well over 300 years. If the white man has the means to keep him enslaved, so should he have the means to fight him back. There's no alternative. If you are truly against violence, something I am beginning to suspect, then condemn those who made the first violent move. To the best of my knowledge, India did not attack the UK, neither did Ghana attack France. Let us put our conversation on hold till you have done that. Thereafter, we can see what means do the people of Ghana and India have of making good their loss.
It's ironic isn't it, with crimes having being and are being committed by the Western World, we are here discussing whether one should admit if they are, and if indeed admitted, whether the victims need to fight back?! To a man far removed from our ways of life, why, the answer is an obvious "yes". The very fact that we feel the need to debate over this, debate that is as to whether crimes need to be condemned and fought back or not, is a victory in itself for the West. Everytime we play safe, hesitate between a yes and a no, behave neutral or balanced, it is the white man who lets out a little chuckle. He has indeed won, after all. For he has convinced us, that crimes are fine as long as the White does it to the Black. I am aware, given his victory, nothing we say will ever convince you otherwise. All we can do is to pay you back in the same coin, if we can.
Atanu: I think if you read what I have written here and elsewhere you will find that I condemn violence wherever it comes from. Of course the white man is responsible for much of what is wrong with the world but you seem too busy shouting to hear when somebody has common ground with you.
Just because I am a white South African does not mean that I advocate white supremecy or slavery, or blow the horn for western imperialism for that matter.
We are not arguing cause, we are arguing method.
You propose violence, I oppose it. The rest we agree on, like it or not.
Incidently, my use of the phrase 'Armageddon, mongering' was aimed primarily at the US religious right and more recently our dear friend The Pope.
Why become the enemy for your method of ridding the enemy? You will end up being the enemy that still must be gotten rid of. I oppose America because of its violence and greed, its evil. That is what we want to get rid of. You can´t just destroy the outcome, you have to go for the cause. And the cause of evil is evil and you cannot get rid of it by adding to it. It is so very very simple
Atanu.
Black/white, Bushite/terrorist, good/bad, theft/generosity … if things were as cut and dried as all that we would all have an appropriate square to stand on, never to know each other. Just as I am not the American you hate or the white guy you want revenge against, you are not going to kill every white western guy you see just to satisfy your sense of justice, unless of course, you don't mind becoming the monstrosity that has made you so bitter.
"There's no alternative." - none, if the only thing you have in mind is massacre in the name of justice. So, in the name of justice, now I am going to kill: Italians as there are no Romans (after all they occupied us for more than 400 years) Italians, after them I will kill some Turks as we had them for more than 150 years, (not a benevolent occuptaion, either of them), after that some Hungarians, after that some Turks and Azeris again, (we do have an Armenian minority here, and they should do their own killings, after all they came here as refugees once upon a time), after that of course all Russians I meet, they did occupy us abnd were really nasty, after that I go to the first fast food and kill the Romanian/Chinese owners in the name of my anti-globalist fight. Meanwhile I go and shoot all Germans I know, they are the descendants of the Nazis, with this logic even the anti-fascist resistance was). Long may live historical justice! I am waiting for suggestions re my modest and fully justified proposal. Meanwhile I'll be hiding online and cowardly, and when no living person is left on this globe, I'll play a game of chess with the Arasan. Of course, being a Hungarian of French-Armenian-Romanian descent I won't be alive, as my brethren will also seek justice
There is an old cowboy song those passing by may hear sung today:
Oh, my name it is Sam Hall,
It is Sam Hall,
My name it is Sam Hall,
It is Sam Hall,
Yes, my name it is Sam Hall,
And I hate you one and all,
God damn your eyes.
The verses go on through how he kills a guy, the sherrif comes, his trial, each concluding with someone's eyes being goddamned. The last tells of his hanging:
Oh, it's up the rope I go,
Up I go.
It's up the rope I go,
Up I go.
Yes, it's up the rope I go,
And these bastards down below,
They'll say Sam we told you so,
God damn their eyes.
I always liked it.
Why harm your people Redwine? Wouldn't it be more to the generational habit going after the darker ones?
Atanu, Your continual use of absolutes in your pained, personal hatred of the entire country and inhabitants of America (United States of America {the white people [the white people in the whole western world]}) would seem to indicate that you believe yourself to be free of the evil against which you rail. It bothered me for a while until I came across your comments to Redwine’s post about Oriana Fallachi’s hatred of all things muslim and then I finally perceived where you are coming from. I will make no judgments. I will just quote you from different comments you left with Zatikia and Redwine.
”The problem is, we will not be able to do that as long as people of that nation remain, alive on mother earth. … To those who are good, meaning those are not americans, of course we ought to be peaceful and respectful.”
“Given the ruthless nature of the enemy, nothing we do to it can be too much.”
“Change your ways, before we come for you again.”
And this one to top it all off
I just can't be happy to see all people of a certain religion branded as a problem.”
Just one question, exactly what shade of white qualifies as the enemy, and should albinos of every race and light children of mixed marriages beware?
Just last night I was thinking of the color issue in this. Is it the white skin that makes the attitude, or is it the position the white skin is in. Why presume the dark skin would do that much better in that position if he is to use the same methods as the white. I shuddered at the thought of a dark skinned man with the heart of a white. Of what use? To want to rule the world by oppression cannot be anything but defeating. If white man is so wrong, why not find other paths to justice and victory. What it comes down to really, is people, not colors anyway, and how they treat each other. If we make this a thing of color we loose what is really the problem. Humans acting inhumanly.
beautiful blog! i will definitely stop by again
Hello Isabel,
Thank you for reading my blog and I do hope you come back often. I do not know your language, so I am limited to not reading your blog.
I think America is one huge contradiction. Very deep and excellent post.
My mistake, the above comment relates to the below post on ignorance.
Ignorance has no citizenship and ethnicity, FM. As for the rest... empires have worse press than the rest, small countries which are not empires because they can't can't loot and pillage, simply, simply, and by no means out of the goodness of the hearts of their citizens, or because they would refuse to become one...Hungary is in the news: 10 million people with evilness for 300,000. I am one, so I know,l believe me.
Redwine, are you saying that only the big countries can be perceived as imperialy motivated because they are the only ones capable of being bullies? Astute observation.
I often wonder if any country's government truly represents its citizens beyond being slightly limited in what they can get away with.
Yes, Greg, that is exactly what I am saying. And the history of the nation states in Europe for example proves me right. Don't forget that Italy or Germany were small states even in our recent history: when united, the rest is called war. Russia was just one country, when it grabbed others, you can read the sad rest in the history books. And when, after WWI, smalle nation states came into being, then they immediately began with persecuting their own minorities denying them the rights they were fighting for. Foir a recent one, see Serbia' Albania for example. I strongly believe that international political solutions are needed which can stop the escalation of violence: while they didn't work too much, neither did they cause as much harm as the rest. But everybody seems to forget that political solutions do exist. When there is a will..., and I'm afraid that is lacking... The result of this we can admire every day in the news.
How much should one state be concerned with its neighbor's affairs? Especially if there's no danger of contagion. And how can they do something about their concerns without being the invaders perceived as imperially motivated? The United Nations is supposed to be the referee and peace keeper, but nations only depend on it when they are oppressed and ignore it when being the aggressive oppressor. South Aftica's aparthide is the only intervention in a nation's internal evils I have noticed being successful, even though all the money is still in the banks of the former oppressors.
"How much should one state be concerned with its neighbor's affairs? Especially if there's no danger of contagion." - the eternal question Greg, isn't it? That of interventionism. While I am not an interventionist, I am not against it completely. Rwanda would have been one. Darfur another. The way it is done: it is often fucked up. (Yaba\, apologies for the graphic language). The problem is that while no party is right (to interven or not), both claim to own the truth. I would stress the "how" instead.
It seems that all over the world governments are either fighting against the evangelistically intrusive war of the imperialist activity (no matter what religion, nation, race or form of policy claimed to justify righteousness) or emulating them in hopes of getting a slice of the pie or getting eaten last. Not only has this international communication I have found through blogging opened my eyes to the effect of the Unscrupulous Stetsons in America on the rest of the world, but it has also revealed a pattern of the same creeping reliance on fascism throughout the world. Despite his insistance on reptile shape shifters, David Icke's idea of an illuminati pulling puppet strings from the remote apex of command down to the ground level of vthe world to accomplish a larger plan invisible to people concerned with their own problems at home from their government to the babies nappies. Always question authority!
Bush took the US fear bred by 9/11 to war in the middle east with admittedly, unapologetically, false pretenses and remains there today breeding more justification for terrorists every day that the liberation (occupation) goes on. He has the nation's citizens reporting "al kaeda type" activities of their neighbors and is growing real ones in the middle east. Qui bono. Just what people to these actions represent, the many or the elite few behind the curtains in the penthouse on top of the world?
It is very obvious that Bush is the idiot they put out front to carry on the show. He will do what he is told to do, that is his value. There must be many more truths to yet expose about who is behind what and where the real power comes from. All we can try to do is sort it out and see what is real and what is not.
Fear is such an effective method to round up minds and get them to follow.
Of course Yab, it was not Bush but those behind him calling the shots who declared the war in Iraq, as indeed scores of other wars not officially declared in the world press. But tell you what, in a very twisted way, I rather support the war. Everytime I hear of 2656 dead, and know that number is growing to grow with time, I feel nothing other than a quite sense of pleasure. An attack in Iran would make that number much higher, as I am sure you would agree. Wars do america good, but they also help keep their numbers in check. 300 million africans are all right, but 300 million americans ought to be a shuddering thought for Mother Earth. Let's hope with each passing war that number gets pulled down. And mother earth gets closer to seeing herself living only with those humans at peace with her.
Atanu,
Yes, how nice it would be that mother earth see peace at last. But I don´t think that will happen until mankind is gone. The amount of people lost by Americas wars is very small and such a long hard process to get them that way. Think of every brown man that must be lost himself for that. It is not the dead who win the battles. You are to quick to sacrifice your own people. War and killing are not the way to stop war and killing.
Post a Comment