2 Mexico and the U.S.: Discord Among Neighbors

Worldview ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-10
Author(s):  
Denis Goulet

Mexico's two thousand-mile border with the United States is unarmed, but it remains the locus of sharp conflicts. Last October, House Speaker "Tip" O'Neill, bowing to pressure from the Hispanic Caucus, withdrew the Simpson- Mazzoli bill on immigration reform over White House objections that "it is in the best interests of all Americans to have the nation regain control of its borders." Jorge Bustamante, director of Mexico's Center for Border Studies, argues, however, that such a bill would "leave all migrant workers, whether documented or not, in a state of virtual slavery, since they will have no access to the courts to plead for justice."

2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-191
Author(s):  
Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja

Abstract:While Africans are generally satisfied that a person of African descent was reelected to the White House following a campaign in which vicious and racist attacks were made against him, the U.S. Africa policy under President Barack Obama will continue to be guided by the strategic interests of the United States, which are not necessarily compatible with the popular aspirations for democracy, peace, and prosperity in Africa. Obama’s policy in the Great Lakes region provides an excellent illustration of this point. Since Rwanda and Uganda are Washington’s allies in the “war against terror” in Darfur and Somalia, respectively, the Obama administration has done little to stop Kigali and Kampala from destabilizing the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and looting its natural resources, either directly or through proxies. Rwanda and Uganda have even been included in an international oversight mechanism that is supposed to guide governance and security sector reforms in the DRC, but whose real objective is to facilitate Western access to the enormous natural wealth of the Congo and the Great Lakes region.


Author(s):  
Alfred W. McCoy

The current war on drugs being waged by the United States and United Nations rests upon a fundamental misunderstanding of the global nar­cotics traffic. In 1998, for example, the White House issued a National Drug Con­trol Strategy, proclaiming a 10-year program “to reduce illegal drug use and avail­ability 50 percent by the year 2007,” thereby achieving “the lowest recorded drug-use rate in American history.” To this end, the U.S. program plans to reduce foreign drug cultivation, shipments from source countries like Colombia, and smuggling in key transit zones. Although this strategy promises a balanced attack on both supply and demand, its ultimate success hinges upon the complete eradi­cation of the international supply of illicit drugs. “Eliminating the cultivation of il­licit coca and opium,” the document says in a revealing passage, “is the best ap­proach to combating cocaine and heroin availability in the U.S.” (U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy 1998: 1, 23, 28). Similarly, in 1997 the new head of the United Nations Drug Control Program, Dr. Pino Arlacchi, announced a 10-year program to eradicate all illicit opium and coca cultivation, starting in Afghanistan. Three years later, in the United Nation’s World Drug Report 2000, he defended prohibition’s feasibility by citing China as a case where “comprehensive narcotics control strategies . . . succeeded in eradicat­ing opium between 1949 and 1954”— ignoring the communist coercion that al­lowed such success. Arlacchi also called for an “end to the psychology of despair” that questions drug prohibition, and insisted that this policy can indeed produce “the eradication of coca and opium poppy production.” Turning the page, however, the reader will find a chart showing a sharp rise in world opium production from 500 tons in 1981 to 6,000 tons in 2000— a juxtaposition that seems to challenge Ar-lacchi’s faith in prohibition (Bonner 1997; Wren 1998a, 1998b; United Nations 2000d, 1–2, 24). Examined closely, the United States and United Nations are pur­suing a drug control strategy whose success requires not just the reduction but also the total eradication of illicit narcotics cultivation from the face of the globe. Like the White House, the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) re­mains deeply, almost theologically committed to the untested proposition that the prohibition of cultivation is an effective response to the problem of illicit drugs.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 736-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik P. Duhaime ◽  
Evan P. Apfelbaum

Scholars, politicians, and laypeople alike bemoan the high level of political polarization in the United States, but little is known about how to bring the views of liberals and conservatives closer together. Previous research finds that providing people with information regarding a contentious issue is ineffective for reducing polarization because people process such information in a biased manner. Here, we show that information can reduce political polarization below baseline levels and also that its capacity to do so is sensitive to contextual factors that make one’s relevant preferences salient. Specifically, in a nationally representative sample (Study 1) and a preregistered replication (Study 2), we find that providing a taxpayer receipt—an impartial, objective breakdown of how one’s taxes are spent that is published annually by the White House—reduces polarization regarding taxes, but not when participants are also asked to indicate how they would prefer their taxes be spent.


Unwanted ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 71-97
Author(s):  
Maddalena Marinari

Chapter 3 examines how Italian and Jewish immigration reform advocates adjusted to the new restrictive immigration regime that followed the passage of the 1924 act and how they worked to build political clout to push for reform under the aegis of Roosevelt’s New Deal. During this period, family reunification remained the only argument that helped them gain some traction with legislators as both groups gained more political visibility with representation at every level of government. Despite the pervasive isolationism, push for assimilation, and the strain from the Great Depression, Italian and Jewish immigration reform advocates successfully used family reunification to help more migrants enter the United States as the 1930s came to an end. Those who could not enter often resorted to illegal immigration. The Anti-Semitism that animated many officers in the U.S. State Department, however, made sure that the very generous annual quota for Germany went mostly unfilled for the entire decade even as thousands of German Jews continued to apply for visas for the United States to flee Nazi Germany.


2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 371-398
Author(s):  
Berta Esperanza Hernández-Truyol

In the spring of 2018, the White House and executive agencies issued a series of orders aimed at more aggressive enforcement against irregular entry of migrants at the southwest border. In analyzing the legal validity of the new U.S. immigration policy decisions, the Inter-American System questioned and strongly condemned the U.S. policy and practice of separating migrant families. On June 29, 2018, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) issued a resolution that rejected any migration policy that resulted in the separation of families. Specifically, it urged the U.S. government to implement measures to avoid the separation of families, to seek unification of children and parents already separated, and to promote the identification of migrants and refugee seekers in accordance with international law. After the issuance of the resolution, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) granted Precautionary Measure No. 731–18, Regarding Migrant Children Affected by the “Zero Tolerance” Policy Regarding the United States of America (the children's measure), and Precautionary Measure No. 505–18, Concerning Vilma Aracely López Juc de Coc and Others Regarding the United States of America (the parents’ measure), both of which recognized that the rights to family life and personal integrity were at risk.


2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-241
Author(s):  
ADAM LIFSHEY

How does the music of Bruce Springsteen interrogate prevailing constructs of the U.S.-Mexico border region? In his folk masterpiece The Ghost of Tom Joad (1995) and other works that feature Spanish-speaking protagonists, Springsteen implicitly reconceptualizes the Americas as an unbordered and fluid space. His performances enact Mexico and the United States as transamerican ideations rather than discrete nations. Although the booming academic field of border studies reframes static images of both Latin America and the United States in favor of malleable transnational paradigms, it still tends to privilege cultural production emanating from the borders themselves. This propensity does not leave much space for an engagement with canonical figures of U.S. culture such as Springsteen, a singer/songwriter who theorizes the borderlands in ways that at first may seem at odds with his career-long, conscious associations with red, white, and blue semiotics. This article examines the Hispanic presences in Springsteen's oeuvre from his debut 1973 albums onward and contrasts them with the relatively fixed representations of the borderlands in the lifework of Bob Dylan.


Author(s):  
Douglas S. Massey ◽  
Jorge Durand ◽  
Karen A. Pren

A majority of Mexican and Central Americans living in the United States today are undocumented or living in a marginal, temporary legal status. This article is a comparative analysis of how Mexican and non-Mexican Latino immigrants fare in the U.S. labor market. We show that despite higher levels of human capital and a higher class background among non-Mexican migrants, neither they nor Mexican migrants have fared very well in the United States. Over the past four decades, the real value of their wages has fallen across the board, and both Mexican and non-Mexican migrant workers experience wage penalties because they are in liminal legal categories. With Latinos now composing 17 percent of the U.S. population and 25 percent of births, the precariousness of their labor market position should be a great concern among those attending to the nation’s future.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Micheal D. Warren

<p>Presidents come into office wanting to make America a better place, and Stephen Skowronek’s recurring model of presidential authority is perfectly suited when comparing one president to another, across political time. President Ronald Reagan was categorised as a reconstructive president alongside Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D Roosevelt, according to Skowronek’s model; at the end of his first term, President Obama’s has the potential to be remembered as the sixth president of reconstruction. While the nature of reconstruction has changed and has become more superficial with the ageing of the United States political system, Obama’s reconstructive potential is no less potent than that of Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln.  The passing of Health Care reform is Obama’s biggest achievement of his presidency to date and is one of the biggest domestic reforms undertaken since the 1960s. Looking ahead to Obama’s second term, further progress looks possible to enhance his reconstructive potential. If Obama can secure immigration reform, then he will give 12 million illegal immigrants the chance to come out from the shadows and work toward residency and legally live the American dream.  With the election and re-election of Obama by an emerging majority made up of women, African Americans, Hispanic Americans and young Americans, the Age of Reagan that existed, has now been replaced by a more diverse coalition. If a democrat can win the White House in 2016, it will truly mean that the Age of Obama has begun.  Obama’s most potent legacy will become more evident in the years to come as many Americans will not remember what the unemployment rate was when he assumed office or what it was when he left office. The partisan bickering that dominated for much of Obama’s first term will have faded into distant memory, but what will shine through from the Obama presidency is opportunity. Americans will never forget how Obama changed the limits of possibility for generations to come. Today there are ten year old African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American children all over the United States who believe that, because of the Obama presidency, they too can one day become president. That in itself is hugely reconstructive and by being elected President, Obama has achieved something more potent than any other reconstructive presidents could have ever achieved.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Micheal D. Warren

<p>Presidents come into office wanting to make America a better place, and Stephen Skowronek’s recurring model of presidential authority is perfectly suited when comparing one president to another, across political time. President Ronald Reagan was categorised as a reconstructive president alongside Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D Roosevelt, according to Skowronek’s model; at the end of his first term, President Obama’s has the potential to be remembered as the sixth president of reconstruction. While the nature of reconstruction has changed and has become more superficial with the ageing of the United States political system, Obama’s reconstructive potential is no less potent than that of Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln.  The passing of Health Care reform is Obama’s biggest achievement of his presidency to date and is one of the biggest domestic reforms undertaken since the 1960s. Looking ahead to Obama’s second term, further progress looks possible to enhance his reconstructive potential. If Obama can secure immigration reform, then he will give 12 million illegal immigrants the chance to come out from the shadows and work toward residency and legally live the American dream.  With the election and re-election of Obama by an emerging majority made up of women, African Americans, Hispanic Americans and young Americans, the Age of Reagan that existed, has now been replaced by a more diverse coalition. If a democrat can win the White House in 2016, it will truly mean that the Age of Obama has begun.  Obama’s most potent legacy will become more evident in the years to come as many Americans will not remember what the unemployment rate was when he assumed office or what it was when he left office. The partisan bickering that dominated for much of Obama’s first term will have faded into distant memory, but what will shine through from the Obama presidency is opportunity. Americans will never forget how Obama changed the limits of possibility for generations to come. Today there are ten year old African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American children all over the United States who believe that, because of the Obama presidency, they too can one day become president. That in itself is hugely reconstructive and by being elected President, Obama has achieved something more potent than any other reconstructive presidents could have ever achieved.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document