Local Groups Collect Donations for Asylum Seekers at the U.S.-Mexico Border

3 minute read

From the Editors: In July, a member of our collective reported from a detention center on the border between Mexico and the United States in San Ysidro, California. As of late, the American public’s attention has been focused just a bit down the road at the San Ysidro Land Point of Entry, which is the largest land border crossing between San Diego, CA and Tijuana, Mexico. What follows is a personal perspective piece and a call-to-action from the same author.


For weeks the American public has heard stories about a “caravan of migrants” made up of approximately 5,000 people heading our way to seek asylum. From the “left,” it was repeated that they were mainly fleeing gang violence and political unrest in Honduras, a country that the U.S. government has played a hand in for many, many years. Scholars like Noam Chomsky (in an interview with Democracy Now!) detailed just how involved our government has been historically in the unrest in Central America. Others highlighted the legal right of the migrant people to come here for safety and the international illegality of firing pepper spray into Mexico. From white nationalist publications like Breitbart, rumors that the caravan was made up of strong, young men funded by billionaire George Soros gained traction on social media.

With only 40 – 100 asylum seekers out of thousands able to be processed per day by the San Ysidro facility, the situation at the border came to a head on Sunday when the Port of Entry was shut down for a few hours. After a handful of caravaners reportedly tried to pull down part of a fence in frustration with the slow process, witnesses reported that tear gas was deployed by the U.S. without warning. The gas quickly traveled, reportedly affecting people up to half a mile away.

In a report titled, “Fact Check: What’s Happening on the U.S.-Mexico Border?”, published by NPR, photos of the events were referred to metaphorically as a kind of “Rorschach test” for the American public, “For supporters of President Trump who advocate a crackdown on immigration, the events of Sunday showed migrants storming a protected border, confirming fears of an “invasion” of migrants defying U.S. laws. For Trump’s critics and pro-immigration activists, the scene showed American patrol agents firing tear gas at an unarmed crowd including children, reinforcing horror over the way the U.S. is treating immigrants.”

Tomisin Oluwole
Ode to Pink II, 2020
Acrylic and marker on paper
14 x 22 inches

Click here to check out our interview with Tomisin Oluwole, a a literary and visual artist based in Long Beach.

Instead of gunking up our site with ads, we use this space to display and promote the work of local artists.

A flyer from the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition.

The Long Beach Immigrants Rights Coalition (LBIRC), Long Beach Forward (formerly known as Building Healthy Communities Long Beach), and Sanctuary LB made their opinions on the matter very clear yesterday with an announcement of support for the caravan and their right to legally seek asylum in the United States. The three local community groups have now also joined forces to organize a rally and receive donations at Harvey Milk Park in Downtown Long Beach, Thursday, November 29.

“Long Beach is against the human rights violations happening at the border today,” reads a statement from the LBIRC. “We stand in solidarity with refugees because seeking asylum is their human right. As Long Beach, we want to come together and show our support by speaking out on these injustices and by collecting essential donations needed by our refugee community.”

The “Long Beach Stands With Refugees” rally will be held rain or shine at Harvey Milk Park (185 E. 3rd St., Long Beach, CA 90802) from 6 to 7 pm. Donated items will be personally delivered by a volunteer to the migrants within the shelters in Tijuana, who will head out immediately after the event. Free two-hour parking is available at the adjacent city parking structure.


If you enjoy reading independent perspectives on issues affecting Long Beach, please consider supporting local grassroots media by subscribing to FORTHE.

Contact The Author

[1] Militarily demobilized. Since WWII—which was both the death knell of European colonial empires as well as the starting shot of the American neocolonial era—Europe has had notoriously scant standing armies, and has been able to consistently slash government military spending domestically and as a percentage of their contributions to international diplomatic bodies such as the UN. This is because nowadays European nations very rarely find themselves in situations where they need to independently send their militaries abroad in order to secure trade routes, foreign resources, or privileges within markets overseas; the U.S. has been fulfilling that hard-power obligation for them for over half a century. The social results of Western Europe’s decreased militarization are striking, especially when contrasted with the U.S.: there is not a single country in Western Europe without universal healthcare, labor rights and welfare systems are strong, value is placed on corporate and financial regulation, environmental policy is lightyears ahead, and, not least of all, there is a robust governmental approach to curbing digital surveillance and reining in tech monopolies. Japan enjoys a similar arrangement with the U.S. in which it, too, is militarily demobilized yet is given full access to, and prominence in, the global economy. In the last decade there has been a reversing trend of remilitarization in some of these nations. That trend was hastened during the last four years as a result of Trump’s ultranationalist politics, but is likely to continue even after his departure in large part due to the growing bipolar geopolitical climate of competition between superpowers.

The “owner” bit of home-“owner” appears in scare quotes throughout the text for reasons that will shortly become apparent.

Nothing signals trouble quite like consensus.

More on them later.

And, anyways, what exactly remains “obvious” in an era “post-truth”?

I take as my starting position that even the “obvious” must be won.

It’s like Lenin said, you know…

Whether directly, or through a chain of investments, or through the wider speculative market in real estate.

I use “banks” in this piece as a stand-in for several sources of income that derive partly through the mortgaging of property and/or investment in institutions that have the power to mortgage property.

That is just its “ideology.”

The Ricardian “law of rent” explains that any location with an advantage over another location, can accrue an economic value, called “rent,” to the owner.

This happens without the owner needing to pitch in to create the advantage.

If the owner does pitch in, then the value accrued from that advantage cannot be called “rent.”

“Rent,” in economic terms, is only, precisely, the value accrued from that portion of the advantage for which the owner is not responsible. That is what we mean when we say, “Rent is theft.”

This does not mean places with lower property taxes ipso facto have higher property prices—and that is because the property tax is only one of the contributing factors. You could have zero taxes on land in Antarctica, for instance, and it would still sell for $0. This is why the introduction to the analogy controls for such variables.

This is the logical conclusion of believing two premises:

(1) All humans have an equal right to the Earth.
(2) Vaginal birth is a lottery system

Prop 13 is rent control for home-“owners.” You can learn more about its history and impact here.

“Hamlet” by William Shakespeare. Act 4, Scene 5

This is why the lobbyists who spend the most money to support the mortgage interest deduction are bankers, mortgagers, and realtors.

Term

Definition