Sunday, July 13, 2025

So What Can We Do?


 So, let us suppose that I am right, that the current ICE reign of terror will lead to labor shortages that are unsustainable and therefore won't be sustained.  Sooner or later it will have to end, the question being when and how.  

My guess was that it will end in about 3-4 months, with some sort of system of allowing employers being allowed to vouch for employees, creating an extremely exploitive system that allows employers to keep their work force in line with the threat of deportation.  ICE would have to respect such a certification and therefore be forced to relent somewhat in its lawlessness, but would still have open season on anyone with out such a certification, including immigrants with various other kinds of legal protection.  On the plus side, the arrest quota -- and with it, Stephen Miller -- would have to go.

But that is purely guesswork on my part.  Even assuming the current reign of terror comes to an end well short of the mass deportations Trump has promised, it might end sooner or it might end later.  It might end on better terms, or it might end on worse.  Political pressure will be a major factor.  So far, Trump is facing a lot of political pressure, both from the hardcore MAGA who will accept nothing short of complete ethnic cleansing, and from financial interests who want it to end.  

What can we do?  My own view, from 30,000 feet up, is that we should think of this as a replay of the Civil Rights Movement -- a fight for public opinion and moral authority.  Whatever builds our moral authority helps to sway public opinion.  And we need to focus, not just on the overall public, but on those specific parts of the public that might have Trump's ear.

What do I suggest?  Here are my ignorant suggestions, from someone who has not idea how to achieve any of this.

Flood social  media with images of ICE outrages.  I realize the difficulty here is that we cannot tell in advance when and where ICE will strike.  On the other hand, I understand there are networks that watch ICE and tracking apps.  There should be ways to move rapid response teams.  Also, reach out to social media influencers and hubs.  If Joe Rogan can turn against Trump on this, maybe others can, too.

Send Congress to investigate detention centers.  ICE is demanding 72 hours notice to allow them to manage appearances.  But if inspections are frequent enough, it will have to be constantly managing appearances and maybe have to do more than appear.  Obviously, regular folks can't do this, but we can urge our Democrats in Congress to do it.

Deploy white people.  There are two advantages here.  White people are much less likely to be ICE targets and therefore are safer.  White people are also at an emotional remove from the issue and therefore less likely to get violent or abusive or do something else that hurts our moral authority.  When Black Lives Matter protests were breaking into riots, it occurred to me the danger might be reduced if you had a Black Woman's March, carrying signs saying "Marching for our men" or a Black Senior's March, carrying signs saying, "Marching for our sons and grandsons."  Downtown LA is a flashpoint, dangerous for Latinos and the scene of riots.  Why not send white people from suburbs with signs saying "Marching for our neighbors."

The Virgin of Guadalupe
Have a song and a symbol.  What song?  Well, not being an immigrant myself, it is not for me to say, but I can give some characteristics.  Make it something catchy and easily learned that becomes the signature tune of the movement.  (The Civil Rights Movement had "We Shall Overcome.")  Make it something that conveys moral authority.  In the case of immigration, that means assuring people of your allegiance.  For that reason, songs in Spanish, with a Mexican beat, are dangerous, just as the Mexican flag is dangerous.  Make it something that comes from the heart.  I get that these two things may be in tension -- a song vowing allegiance to the US may come across as insincere, especially given how the US is behaving now.  I am inclined to think the best bet is some sort of song celebrating the dignity of labor, to stress the point that immigrants are hard workers who contribute to society, and not the moocher their enemies say.  As for symbols, protestors in 2006 wore white to show their peaceful intent.  That sounds good.  I also heard the suggestion of using the Virgin of Guadalupe instead of the Mexican flag as a symbol of ethnic pride.  That sounds good, too.

For white supporters -- carry the US flag and pictures of the Statue of Liberty.  An upside down flag and Lady Liberty covering her face in shame work, too.  Carry posters with the slogan, "No PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law," Fifth Amendment. And "But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself, for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt," Leviticus 19:34.  Since patriotic songs that a liberal can sing from the heart, "This land is your land," or Neil Diamond "Coming to America," or Disney, "It's a Small World."

Stephen Miller
Make Stephen Miller our hate sink.  Making Elon Musk the target of anger worked for DOGE.  Immigration offers three possible targets -- Kristi Noem, Tom Homan, and Stephen Miller.  But it is best to focus everything on just one, and to me the choice is obvious.  ICE Barbie is just a (purportedly) pretty face with nothing behind it.  Tom Homan talks out of both sides of his mouth -- saying in one breath that we are only going after criminals, the worst of the worst, and when confronted with someone completely harmless, says that unauthorized border crossing is a crime, after all.  In other words, he is a PR flack.  He knows how to tack with the wind.  Stephen Miller is the evil genius behind all of this, the one who set the impossible quotas in the first place and, rumor has it, the one running the entire Administration.  And he has none of Trump's or even Musk's charm.  If it is possible for charisma to be negative, he has negative charisma. The mere sight of Steven Miller is enough to make most people want to wash very thoroughly.  

Avoid causing violence or disruption.  Yes, I know people's anger is justified, but it plays badly with public opinion.  My advice -- protest about a block away from federal facilities -- close enough to be seen and heard, but not close enough to start a fight.   Have peace keepers present and isolate any trouble makers.  I have no objection to civil disobedience -- seeking to physically block ICE and so forth, but this should be limited to people who are trained in civil disobedience and not responding to provocations.  If you are not trained, leave the civil disobedience to people who are.

Create a pipeline for ICE officers who want to quit.  At least some ICE officers are reported to be unhappy.  To my mind, ICE breaking apart is the best case scenario, though not a very likely one.  Still, it can't be easy to leave.  Half the people will hate you for having belonged to ICE and the other half will hate you for leaving.  Anyone who wants to be a hero and come forward should be welcome.  But presumably most will want to stay anonymous and get on with their lives with as little fuss as possible.  We should facilitate that.

Above all, seek out allies and minimize enemies.  The broader the coalition, the better the chance for success.  I realize also, the broader the coalition, the greater the chance of it breaking  up once it achieves its narrow goal, ending the current reign of terror, as people disagree on what is to follow.  But that is a different problem for a different day.  Ending the reign of terror comes first.  Who are our allies?

Immigrants and immigration activists.  Obviously.

Anti-Trump activists.  Ditto.

The Catholic Church.  Latinos are no longer as uniformly Catholic as was once the case, but the transnational nature of the Catholic Church makes this type of nationalism anathema to it.  Many  Catholic clergy have come out against the mass deportation regime.

Evangelical megachurches.  Yes, really.  Many of these have large numbers of immigrants in their membership who they will want to protect.  They might want a carveout to allow churches, as well as employers, to vouch for immigrants.  If we can make an alliance here, it is one that Trump will listen to.

Veterans.  Veterans have two roles here.  One is that many are troubled the Trump mobilizing the National Guard in Los Angeles.  Active duty personnel are strictly limited in what they can say.*  Veteran voices can speak up instead.  The other important role is specifically Afghan War veterans arguing for Afghans who put their lives on the line for us and now face being turned over to the Taliban to be tortured and killed.  Vietnam veterans as well -- we admitted Vietnamese who put their lives on the line for us, and they assimilated well.  Come to think of it, Vietnamese Americans may have something to say here also.

Animal lovers.  And now it appears that pets are being abandoned as their owners are arrest.  If nothing else reaches the heartstrings, this should.

Texas and Florida Republicans.  Both states have large Hispanic/Latino populations who vote Republican, but for how much longer?  At least some polls have shown in under water in both states.  And, in fact, a Florida Republican has introduced the Dignity Act, that would give unauthorized immigrants a pathway to legal status.  Nine other Republicans have endorsed the bill as well.

Police.  Maybe not a comfortable alliance, but a useful one.  Most police prefer to focus on street crime and not waste resources on people whose sole offense is unauthorized border crossing, and who pose no threat to public safety.  Besides, when ordinary police start asking immigration questions, non-citizen crime victims are afraid to come forward.  And -- lest certain MAGA types see this as a good thing -- non-citizen witnesses who may help solve a crime may also fear to come forward.  So yes, let us make this alliance even if it is not always comfortable.

Unions.  Many laborers being deported are union members.  If the Republicans want to make themselves into a working class party, unions should carry some weight with them.  And unions will have a strong interest in fighting for a non-exploitive arrangement, on behalf of working people of all ethnicities.

Employers.  This is the most controversial of all.  It means aligning ourselves with big money interests who we traditionally see as the enemy.  And big money interests are apt to seek a very exploitive arrangement.  But they are also the ones most likely to carry sway with Team Trump.  The stakes being what they are now, I don't believe we can afford to alienate any potential allies.

So those are my thoughts.  And I have no idea how to translate any of them into reality.

___________________________________________
*Tom Nichols has written about refusing an unlawful order and says that -- thus far -- what Trump has done falls well short of that.

No comments:

Post a Comment