First, I want to thank Professor Mary Odem, Provost
Earl Lewis, and the Latin American and Caribbean Studies Program for
this
invitation to speak to you here at Emory University. I hope that this
visit starts a larger dialogue between our two campuses regarding the
future of Latino-African American relationships in the U.S. South. At
this past January's conference of the American Historical Association
in Atlanta, I had the pleasure of reconnecting with Mary Odem on a panel
on Latinos in the U.S. South, and my former Michigan colleague Earl Lewis
joined in our conversation to examine the changing demographics of Atlanta
and the South more generally. At USC, our new department of American
Studies
and Ethnicity, and specifically our new research institute, the Center
for Diversity and Democracy, has decided to take up the issue of African
American-Latino conflict and cooperation as our first collective multiyear
research project. We have decided to spend at least one year looking
specifically
at the U.S. South, and put this region's history, politics, culture,
and contemporary situation in dialogue with that from around the country.
In addition, I have recently been working on an edited book on community
engagement in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, so my own
scholarly work is beginning to move out of Los Angeles to this region
beginning in Louisiana. I look forward to your comments and questions
regarding this work and this presentation—because I am just beginning
to branch out from a California focus!
A year ago, on Wednesday March 29th, 2006, two thousand Latinos marched
to the state capitol in Nashville, Tennessee to protest the role of Senator
Bill Frist, the then-U.S. Senate majority leader, in trying to criminalize
the undocumented in the United States in pending legislation before Congress,
as well as protesting the abolition of a driving certificate program for
undocumented workers sponsored by that state. For most of these Southern
protestors, this was the first time they had organized or participated
in a protest march. Other more modest protests occurred throughout the
South, with 5,000 marching in Charlotte, North Carolina and 150 marching
in Birmingham, Alabama. The larger community in Atlanta initially decided
not to march last year but instead to call for a boycott from work and
shopping to show their economic impact, but were unable to stop the Georgia
legislature
from passing a bill to curtail government benefits to illegal immigrants.
Organizers in Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina held rallies in
April
2006 to back this growing immigrant rights movement. In South Carolina,
this effort was led by a two-year-old immigrant rights group named the
Coalition
for New South Carolinians. While the size of these protests was dwarfed
by the half million that marched in Los Angeles on March 25th or the 200,000
that marched in Chicago, the very public act of protest itself was critical
in these new southern communities without a long history and with many
in
undocumented status.
1
Indeed, as the movement to protect immigrant rights began to grow throughout
the South, more activists who had long worked in African American civil
rights campaigns began to participate and lead efforts. One such person
was Jim Embry from the Sustainable Communities Network in Lexington, Kentucky,
who has been an activist in that community for over 40 years, beginning
as a CORE civil rights activist in 1960. On April 10, 2006, he spoke in
front of the Lexington County courthouse before a crowd of 7,000 people,
and the connections he saw to past struggles:
This Immigrants' Rights Rally here in Lexington is also in a historic
place because directly behind this stage is the old courthouse... the
building with the clock, where only 150 years ago this area around the
courthouse was an auction block where African people, said by whites to
be less than human and denied rights, were bought and sold into slavery.
During the years of slavery African people would try to escape slavery
by crossing the Ohio River to the North. The Ohio River was the border
between the free states of the north and slavery states of the south.
Even after crossing the Ohio River many of these African people could
not produce their freedom papers--or let's say that they were
undocumented--and thus, they were rounded up as illegals in the North,
were chained and brought back to this very spot in Lexington--whipped
and beaten--and often were then sold back into slavery and deported
to the deeper South where the conditions of slavery were much more harsh
and cruel.
He went on to connect this history to that he saw in the contemporary
period:
Those conditions during enslavement of African people--people
risking their lives by escaping slavery in the South on the underground
railroad and crossing the Ohio River--are quite similar to Mexican
people and others today risking their lives by crossing the Rio Grande
and the desert on a similar underground railroad seeking a better life
for their families. Still today without your "freedom papers"
or being undocumented, immigrants can be rounded up and sent back across
a similar border and river separating North from South. The denial of
freedom, respect and full citizenship rights to African people years ago
was immoral and unjust and today the denial of respect and citizenship
rights to immigrants from Mexico and around the world is also immoral
and unjust. Because of our unique and continuous struggle for freedom,
rights and equality, African-Americans should be very supportive and in
the forefront of the struggles by other people in this country and around
the world who are denied full equality, respect and rights as citizens
of this earth.
2
While Embry looked for ways of connecting the two histories and time
periods, others, of course, looked for differences between the two experiences
and histories.
Meanwhile in New Orleans, workers from Mexico were more likely to be
busy working difficult jobs rather than organizing protests last year.
The
impact of Mexican immigration has been most keenly felt after Hurricane
Katrina in the demolition and reconstruction efforts underway since the
disaster struck in August 2005. According to the 2004 update to the U.S.
Census, the city of New Orleans had only 1,900 Mexicans, with an overall
Hispanic population of just three percent, mostly made up of Hondurans
with many having middle class status. John Logan, a Brown University
demographer,
estimated in April 2006 that "there must be 10,000 to 20,000 immigrant
workers in the region by now, and the number is going to grow."
3
Latino workers have gutted, roofed and painted houses, installed drywalls,
and hauled away garbage, debris, and downed trees. They have spent their
days putting blue tarps on roofs and installed trailers to house returning
evacuees. Their pay for much of this work has been coming from FEMA
subcontractors,
and most of these say that they could use thousands more to move along
the efforts at rebuilding. In a city desperate to move forward and prepare
quickly for the coming hurricane season, the availability of workers
willing to put up with strained working and living conditions have allowed
for
much reconstruction to actually take place.
With 140,000 homes destroyed or damaged by Hurricane Katrina, 60 percent
of its residents relocated to other cities and towns, and the remaining
residents determined to rebuild, Latinos, specifically Mexican workers,
both legal and illegal, and both already residing in other part of the
U.S. and residing in Mexico, began coming in droves to New Orleans by
mid-September 2005 and have continued ever since. Given the lack of adequate
housing in the city, some of these workers reported sleeping in a park
for over a month and showering with hoses each day. Others have slept
in hotel rooms or friend's apartments, often six or seven in a sleeping
quarter planned for one or two. A few churches in the region have reported
opening their doors to these newcomers, sleeping in curtained-off alcoves.
Some of these churches and other organizations have begun to sponsor
Mexican
films on Friday nights, medical clinics on the weekends, even setting
up soccer nets nearby. Tulane University in New Orleans began publishing
their bulletin of available jobs for the first time in both English and
Spanish.
Yet, many of these workers, along with other Latinos that had already
made their home New Orleans before Katrina, have reported increased tension
and anti-immigrant sentiment growing. Azucena Diaz, disc jockey for Radio
Tropical Caliente, one of the two Spanish language stations in town, and
a Mexican-born U.S. citizen who moved here from Pomona, California five
years ago, reports that she has seen Latinos, including her own husband,
insulted on the streets of New Orleans recently. Police in Metairie, Louisiana
have reportedly run off immigrants looking for day labor, while Immigration
and Customs Enforcement officers (ICE has replaced INS under the Department
of Homeland Security) have arrested hundreds of men gathered at popular
gathering spots for day laborers. Some African Americans see recent Latino
immigrants as usurpers of jobs now that wages have risen, while black
workers have been displaced. And in a widely reported incident at an October
2005 forum with business leaders, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin asked those
gathered, "How do I make sure New Orleans is not overrun with Mexican
workers?" With anti-immigrant sentiment rising across the nation,
and the U.S. Congress and radio talk show hosts continually debating what
is perceived as an illegal alien crisis, the past two years has proven
to be ripe for interracial tensions amidst pressure to protect national
borders while rebuilding critical internal infrastructure.
What has happened in New Orleans is, in many ways, no different than
what has happened across the nation, particularly in the last twenty
years
across the American South. The big difference has been the rapidity of
change brought about by the suddenness of the Katrina disaster and the
huge void left in the labor market due to the loss of sixty percent of
the
pre-Katrina residents of New Orleans. That demographic shift is also
what
makes the "browning" of New Orleans so visible, after decades
of rather unnoticed migrant streams and largely invisible immigrant
communities.
What is key, I believe, in the current moment is to realize that despite
the rapidity of change and transformation, the larger pattern of Mexican
in-migration has occurred throughout the American South, and has finally
arrived in New Orleans post-Katrina.
The 2000 census reported that seventy-five percent of the Mexican-descent
people of the United States lived in the five states of the American
Southwest,
Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. But the most rapid
recent growth of the Mexican population, however, has taken place outside
this traditional area of Mexican settlement. The Mexican population grew
most rapidly in the American South during the 1990s, where the number
of Mexicans tripled, the Northeast, where it almost tripled, the Mountain
West, where it more than doubled, and the Midwest, where it nearly doubled.
A greater percentage of Mexicans in the nation now live in the southern
states of the U.S. (excluding Texas), slightly more than seven percent,
than in the Western region of Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, where no more than 6 percent live.
The Mexican population of North Carolina grew by close to 400% during
the 1990s, while the increase of Latinos in Georgia was so rapid that
their share of the state's total population went from one percent
to five percent in one decade. Of course, the largest national-level
news from the updates of the census in the past few years has been that
the
total Latino population, over sixty percent of which is Mexican-origin,
now totals more than the African American population in the United States.
Part of the reason for this shift in the Latino population is the dramatic
shift in points of destination among newcomers from Mexico throughout
the 1990s and in the first years of this decade. Ironically, one reason
for this shift was greater enforcement of immigration laws on the Mexican/California
border and in interior sections of California. The percentage of new
legal
and illegal Mexicans arriving in California dropped ten percentage points
during the 1990s, from an all-time high of fifty-seven percent in the
year 1990. Many of those newcomers ventured instead to points in the
American
South. Moreover, California's deep recession in the early 1990s
and its anti-immigrant legislation and ballot initiatives also played
a role in redirecting the migrant stream towards the American South.
Another
way of looking at this shift is that California schools are now dominated
by the children of the earlier immigrant stream from the 1980s, including
both U.S. citizens by birth and those who arrived as children in the
U.S.
Evidence of this phenomena are the huge numbers of young people who boycotted
middle school and high school classes last year to speak out for the
dangers
to their immigrant parents. In the South, however, the migrant stream
is newer, therefore young working adults dominate most communities, with
children, if present at all, usually of much younger ages. This relative
mobility without fully planted families made Mexican immigrants in the
South more likely to move quickly when economic opportunities in New
Orleans
beckoned.
Indeed, the U.S. South has now benefited for decades through patterns
of labor recruitment from Latin America that have created networks of
the ablest workers of this hemisphere willing to move far to take advantage
of economic opportunity wherever it exists. What was displayed in the
wake of Katrina is the strength and adaptability of these labor networks,
stretching across regions of the United States, and deep into Mexican
and Central American villages and towns to the south. Just a few pre-Katrina
Latino neighborhoods in Louisiana and neighboring states, made up of pioneer
migrants who had ventured to the area to take advantage of work in construction,
forestry, and oil production, started this shift in the wake of the destruction
by the hurricane.
Mexico only first appeared among the top-five sending nations to Louisiana,
Mississippi and Alabama in the census year 2000. While eight percent of
the foreign born population of Louisiana came from Mexico in the year
2000, almost twenty-eight percent of the foreign born in those two neighboring
states came from Mexico in that same year. So rather than think that this
migration from Mexico to New Orleans is only a result of the post-Katrina
period, migration of Mexicans had already important roots in the region.
In the early 1990s, Mexican migrants came to Louisiana to work in shipbuilding
and fabrication yards in southern coastal parts of the state, and in neighboring
states were working in casino construction and in forestry. In several
nearby parishes in Louisiana, migrants from Mexico had established important
roles in the oil production industries. Already pre-Katrina, two local
radio stations in New Orleans broadcast in Spanish only, and almost all
Catholic churches conducted at least some of their services in Spanish.
Several cultural associations had already formed to promote the celebration
of Cinco de Mayo and other events in the decade before Katrina.
The presence of these communities, however, in the long run created the
beginnings of networks that would draw other Latinos from the rest of
the South, the nation, and eventually from Mexico itself to aid in reconstruction
of the region after the initial shock of Katrina dissipated. The hotels
were among the first to hire, just days after Katrina hit, as they prepared
for housing aid workers coming in. Most of their regular employees had
fled the disaster zone, and many temporary workers could be found gutting
rooms at the local Marriott and Holiday Inn hotels. Some of these workers
would then move on to employment helping small businesses or homeowners
do preliminary work to repair their places of residence or livelihood,
especially for those not willing to wait for FEMA's now notorious
slow process of assistance. Some found work "house leveling"--
lifting houses sunk in marshy post-Katrina soil using hydraulic jacks
and propping them on stilts, bricks, or concrete supports. These methods
of building support and repair, while seemingly primitive and experimental
in the U.S., are familiar and used widely in areas of Mexico and Latin
American with similar climates and prone to be in the path of summer
hurricanes.
In other words, they brought often unacknowledged skills and experience
in construction to the tasks needed in New Orleans.
As work opportunities became more routinized, demand expanded, and wages
rose to $15 to $17 dollars an hour, labor agencies and contractors began
to fully exploit the networks in these immigrant communities to draw
more
newcomers to New Orleans to do this labor. In many cases, labor networks
that had previously been utilized to draw hotel workers or oil workers
to Louisiana were now utilized for recruitment of demolition and construction
crews. New day labor pickup sites developed in a city that had virtually
no experience with this form of labor recruitment sites before. These
sorts of informal hiring sites, of course, exist all over southern California,
and now are national phenomena which often raise the anger of local residents
while others take advantage of workers willing to put in a hard day's
work for decent pay from contractors and individual homeowners alike.
Many of the workers who came to New Orleans in October and November 2005
came from other sites in the metropolitan South like Nashville, Atlanta,
and Charlotte to take advantage of the higher wages and more critical
demand for laborers in New Orleans. Individual building contractors in
New Orleans, who lost most of their workers in the wake of the hurricane,
hired workers quickly, and called on these first workers to contact other
family members or acquaintances to come from other places to join them.
Some, like Perry Custer, who owns a small construction firm in New Orleans
trying to rebuild six apartment buildings and office complexes, sent
foremen
to recruit extra labor as far away as Atlanta and Houston. Former Latino
workers that had been firmly rooted and well-known in New Orleans construction
circles have left their regular jobs to become labor brokers, supplying
newcomers to contractors while providing housing and meals to workers
for a cut of their wages.
This expansion of transnational labor networks throughout a region is
nothing new for Mexican workers, of course. Indeed, many of these networks
spread deep into the villages of central Mexico and throughout Central
America, and have been critical in drawing workers and families north
across the border since the early twentieth century. I documented much
of that networking in my first book concerning Mexican immigration to
Los Angeles in the first four decades of the twentieth century. During
the Bracero Program from 1942 to 1964, these networks were institutionalized
by government contracts sponsored by the United States which regularly
drew workers from the interior of Mexico to the north, particularly to
California, the Pacific Northwest, and the Midwest. When the Bracero Program
was discontinued in 1964, many of these networks continued to produce
transnational movement, now drawing those with and without documents to
the north as Mexico was put under a national quota for the very first
time in 1965. More recently, other networks of employment, such as those
drawing indigeneous workers from Puebla to work the restaurants, cleaning
crews and construction jobs in New York City, developed up and down the
East Coast. Usually unacknowledged by political discussions that focus
on individuals crossing the border to seek economic opportunity, intricate
and highly developed networks exist from all the major population centers
throughout Mexico and specific locations in the United States.
One of the most striking aspects of recent migration to the U.S. South
has been the extraordinary high rate of Latino migration to areas outside
of metropolitan districts. While you have clearly seen the increase in
Mexicans living in Atlanta, as I have observed in the city of New Orleans,
over the past fifteen years the greatest increases have taken place in
rural areas of the South, reinvigorating deteriorating populations and
being drawn there by extensive structural economic change. In the 1990s,
Latino nonmetropolitan growth was over seventy percent, which exceeded
their metropolitan growth rate of 60 percent during the decade, and accounted
for over twenty-five percent of the total growth of rural areas in the
United States during the 1990s. But this migration was also highly concentrated,
as over a third of the 3.2 million rural Latinos lived in just 109 of
all 2,300 nonmetropolitan counties.
According to William Kandel and Emilio Parrado, the development of the
poultry industry across the region was a key economic factor in the enormous
impact Latino migration had on rural Southern communities. In an important
article, they chronicle the growing tension in two such communities, Accomack
County, Virginia and Duplin County, North Carolina.
4 With heavy recruitment
by Tyson, Perdue, and other meat processing plants, both these counties
rapidly moved from a biracial white-black population to an increasingly
multiethnic population with a significant Latino population. Mexicans
represented over 65 percent of this Latino population in both counties,
with Guatemalans and Hondurans making up most of the rest. The part of
the Latino population that the census did not capture was the substantial
seasonal agricultural migrant workers who passed through both counties.
Kandel and Parrado conclude that the rapid influx of Latino workers did
not necessarily reflect displacement of native white or black workers,
since unemployment actually was halved in both counties during their period
of study, and were much lower than the nationwide nonmetropolitan average.
They also found, however, that the patterns of new migration strained
local social services, especially educational services and housing, since
these newcomers overwhelming rented and had young children that did not
speak English attending primary grades. Similar to what I saw unfolding
in New Orleans, gender ratios for Latinos were significantly different
than for the general population. In Duplin County, for example, the gender
ratio for whites was ninety-five men per one-hundred women, eighty-four
for blacks, but 156 for Latinos. This stark difference, especially between
Latinos and African Americans, affects the very nature of their interaction
in all sorts of ways in both rural and urban spaces.
For many in these southern communities accustomed to longstanding neighborhoods
with rich histories and deep organizational ties to this space, it may
appear as if these Mexican and other Latino newcomers are unlikely to
remain for long and should not be considered real "residents"
of the city until it is clear that they are here for more than a temporary
sojourn. The long term viability of these neighborhoods is necessarily
tentative, but there are signs that I would use, based on longstanding
patterns in Latino migration throughout the twentieth century, that
we
might use to assess whether we are witnessing long term settlement patterns
that will reshape the basic contours of southern society.
A more equal sex-ratio within the migrant community is a strong sign of
permanent settlement among newcomers, as men bring wives and families
north from Mexico or from elsewhere in the U.S., or Latino men begin to
intermarry with local women. Eventually more single women migrate to the
region to be involved in various economic opportunities, and family life
begins to be centered in more permanent settlements throughout the region.
Starting a family in any location, be it 1920s Los Angeles or twenty-first
century New Orleans, is a clear indication that those individuals intend
to reside permanently in that location. Moreover, rooting a family strengthens
the power of the local community as a whole, with more organizations dedicated
to community improvement, raising children, advancing education, and becoming
integrated into the local cultural scene. It creates new opportunities
for entrepreneurial activity, as small shopkeepers begin to meet the needs
of a growing community and a range of family desires. While the initial
male migration may immediately lead to a plethora of new restaurants to
serve clientele, more established settlement usually involves grocery
stores, entertainment venues for the whole family, and eventually enrollment
in all levels of the local public schools.
It also appears that we have been witnessing a long-term structural transformation
of local economies in both rural and urban regions of the South, and this
indicates that this migration is clearly a permanent feature of the labor
market scene and will usually translate into permanent settlement. In
New Orleans, the huge size of the task of reconstruction was a strong
indicator of the likelihood of long term settlement. Most contractors
seem to have work that they predict will last at least two to five years
from this date, and many desired rebuilding projects are still in the
planning stages. In other words, the demands for these workers is likely
to last for quite some time to come, as it becomes clear that reconstruction
will take an enormously lengthy period of time. As has happened elsewhere,
then, what is likely to occur is that the longer individual workers find
themselves in New Orleans the more likely they are to decide to remain
here. These workers, in turn, will broaden the labor networks that bring
more of their countrymen here, as long as rebuilding jobs continue to
exist. Moreover, as other New Orleanians return to the city, growing demands
for cleaning crews, fastfood employees, etc., will begin to be prioritized,
as slowly a wider economic marketplace reemerges.
It will be critical, in this environment, to insure that labor cooperation,
rather than competition, dominates the landscape, since this transition
is likely to fray nerves based on expectations of progress, identity,
nationality, race, and heritage. And enforcement of anti-discrimination
laws is critical in the new environment, be it residential discrimination
that might be aimed at immigrants by nativist landlords or employment
discrimination against native African Americans by racist employers who
prefer immigrant labor. Historically, of course, there are many successful
examples of transition to draw from, such as the peaceful return of Japanese
American internees to Little Tokyo in Los Angeles after their former businesses
and residences had been occupied by migrating African Americans from the
South to meet the labor needs of World War II. What has been key in the
past is the establishment of grassroots organizations dedicated to proactively
working towards racial cooperation and reconciliation, willing to expose
examples of persistent discrimination and prosecute offenders across all
racial lines.
Compared to other regions in the country, the U.S. South seems to be
one of the strongest places for these sorts of grassroots organizations,
largely
due to the continued legacy of civil rights organizations from the movement
for African American liberation. Compared to Los Angeles or New York,
two cities that I know well, the civil rights legacy continues to be
strong
and is more adaptable to the needs and interests of recent immigrant
communities. I have been particularly impressed with the role of the
Southern Poverty
Law Center, based in Montgomery, Alabama, in their advocacy for immigrant
rights and their willingness to translate their considerable expertise
to improve the fate of these Latino newcomers. Other national organizations,
like the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF),
has opened up branches in the South and often coordinate with traditional
African American civil rights organizations to come together in coalition-building.
In many ways, these coalitions pick up where the Poor People's Movement,
started by Martin Luther King Jr. just before his death, left off; organizing
across racial groups to combat poverty and discrimination.
The demographic and social transformations we are witnessing have the
potential for shifting major discussion of U.S. society and culture. In
my recent talks at conferences on the U.S. West, for example, I am consistently
talking about the bifurcation of that region into two Wests, one made
up of the traditional areas of Mexican settlement now reinvigorated by
recent migration—including California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico,
Colorado and increasingly Nevada—and the interior, mountain West,
along with the Pacific Northwest, where Anglo Americans are migrating
to in order to avoid huge urban growth and often Latino migration. The
Southwest increasingly is more compatible to the U.S. South than the rest
of the West, with racial diversity, Sunbelt economics, and widespread
migration, now couched largely in the language of globalization.
Despite all these obvious changes and the new levels of interaction existing
in these regions, my department of American Studies and Ethnicity at
USC
has chosen to systematically explore the changing nature of African American-Latino
interaction across various regions and interdisciplinary topics over
the
next five years. We were initially prompted to do this because of increasing
tensions between the two groups in prisons and schools in southern California,
as well as by a series of violent incidents in various neighborhoods
in the region. In December 2006, in the neglected Harbor Gateway area
of
the city of Los Angeles, a fourteen-year-old African American girl was
brutally murdered by what authorities called a racially motivated hate
crime carried out by Latino teenagers who were members of a local Latino
gang. In response, members of both racial groups marched singing "We
Shall Overcome," while a Latina law professor writes an editorial
blaming the violence on the historic racism against African peoples
from
the cultures of Latin America that in the U.S. translates into "Latino
ethnic cleansing of African Americans from multiracial neighborhoods."
Coupled with the reality that these two groups now form over one-quarter
of the entire U.S. population, we believe it is time for concerted intellectual
effort to move along dialogue about the interaction of these two groups
which seems critical for the future of American society.
Through our new Center for Diversity and Democracy at USC, we have launched
a "Black-Brown" Initiative that takes advantage of our own
intellectual and racial diversity, our new faculty and graduate student
interests, and our commitment to racial equity. From historians like
myself, Maria Elena Martinez, Lon Kurashige, William Deverell, and Robin
D.G.
Kelley, to social scientists like Ruthie Gilmore, Pierrette Hondagneu-Sotelo,
Leland Saito, Manuel Pastor, Laura Pulido and Herman Gray, to humanists
like Fred Moten, Teresa McKenna, Tara McPherson, Judith Jackson Fossett,
and Josh Kun, we are all interested in working collaboratively to advance
a national conversation regarding African American and Latino conflict
and cooperation. While we encourage other campuses must find their own
particular strengths and challenges and move forward, unafraid to take
on difficult issues facing our communities, I would like to find university
partners to join us in this particular quest for new answers, new theories
to understand and interpret these challenges.
Our plan right now is to begin with a year that focuses on Los Angeles,
then follow that with a year concentrating on the U.S. South. This is
when I hope we might collaborate with a group of interdisciplinary scholars
from Emory University that would be interested in exchanging ideas, collaborating
on research, and promoting advanced education for Ph.D. students and undergraduates
to explore interethnic issues. At USC, we plan to continue our multiyear
effort with a year focused on race in Latin America, then a year on the
New York metropolitan area. Finally we will end with a year dedicated
to theory and practice in interracial issues, focused on advanced scholarly
approaches to the study of relations between African Americans and Latinos.
Certain themes, such as music and culture, politics and community organization,
will stretch across all five years of the project. We are finalizing plans
for a book series that will produce an edited volume each year, and attempt
to draw leading scholars focused on each geographic and topical area to
contribute to advancing this discussion.
In this working and still developing plan, I am reminded of one of the
first studies of a community of Latinos in the American South, Leon
Fink's
wonderful ethnography of "The Maya of Morganton" which traced
the sense of solidarity that developed among a group of Guatamalan chicken
plant workers who found themselves employed and residing at the base
of the Blue Ridge Mountains in North Carolina. Fink's study traces
the evolution of this important community, particularly their eventual
willingness to fight for better working conditions through union activity,
even though most of them were in this country illegally. In his very
last
paragraph, he puts out a similar hope of reaching across national and
racial lines by all in the community to achieve common goals:
There are many ways . . . whereby the nation's institutions
might better accommodate their hardest-working "hands." Workers
themselves, to be sure, are at the heart of this struggle, but to succeed
they will need to join with members of an aroused, and established, citizenry.
It is common to talk about immigrants and the American Dream as if
the
latter were something that U.S. citizens already possess and others have
to strive for. Yet, when it comes to the prospect for American democracy
at the dawn of a new century, the welfare of new immigrant labor forces
will likely tell us as much about our own dreams as about theirs.
5
Nowhere is that analysis more accurate, I believe, than here in the future
of the American South, that we all hold in our hands. Thank you, once
again, for your invitation, and I welcome all questions and comments.