Er, what do you mean when you say The Media have been ignoring immigrant rights protests in favor of snarking about anarchists?
A skim of Google News tells me that the media has been covering immigrant rights protests rather well, and largely ignoring anarchist non-events.
But The Stranger has certainly given over most of its coverage to all things anarchismist. Perhaps your fellow Stranger staffers are who you had in mind when you typed The Media up there?
@3: Not really. I'm referring more to the non-stop fear-mongering of the local networks, which I wrote about on Monday, plus the Seattle Times. Read this week's paper. Kiley's cover story is the opposite - a smart, nuanced take on these issues.
As I look around, I really have to question the definition of "immigrants". No, I'm not opening up the settled-usage of illegal or legal.
But I really don't see many of the people who moved here from other countries as immigrants. To me they appear more as colonists.
Native tongue and dress is retained and religions which are cloistered. Social and school activities. Many live in nearby residences, tightening the circle.
Yes, these groups from Mexico, the Ukraine, Punjab. They've not so much come to be part of America as to establish settlements...a link between two worlds.
I think the Tsarnaevs and their close relatives illustrate it. Some get deeply integrated. Others reject US and go home. In the middle are people who float back and forth between the motherland and the settlement.
It's like the early days of North America for them. Setting up colonies. Flying their old flags, maybe transforming into the new. Or not.
Is it good or bad? America is a global nexus. These could be good when it works. Or go very wrong, when someone like a young man, doesn't understand the game.
Great article! Except writing on the Slog tarnishes your reputation. Remember when Dan Savage wrote a front page editorial in favor the invasion of Iraq? Weird, I know.
@8: Is your argument that I should write for an obscure partisan publication that meets your standard of ideological purity? Or that all writers at a given media outlet should have the same opinions? Both ideas are incredibly stupid, I'm afraid.
Thank you for spreading the word about Who You Callin' Illegal!
The link to the website is broken on the post.
Please link to www.facebook.com/WhoYouCallinIllegal
Thanks!
A skim of Google News tells me that the media has been covering immigrant rights protests rather well, and largely ignoring anarchist non-events.
But The Stranger has certainly given over most of its coverage to all things anarchismist. Perhaps your fellow Stranger staffers are who you had in mind when you typed The Media up there?
But I really don't see many of the people who moved here from other countries as immigrants. To me they appear more as colonists.
Native tongue and dress is retained and religions which are cloistered. Social and school activities. Many live in nearby residences, tightening the circle.
Yes, these groups from Mexico, the Ukraine, Punjab. They've not so much come to be part of America as to establish settlements...a link between two worlds.
I think the Tsarnaevs and their close relatives illustrate it. Some get deeply integrated. Others reject US and go home. In the middle are people who float back and forth between the motherland and the settlement.
It's like the early days of North America for them. Setting up colonies. Flying their old flags, maybe transforming into the new. Or not.
Is it good or bad? America is a global nexus. These could be good when it works. Or go very wrong, when someone like a young man, doesn't understand the game.
Things as quintessentially American as "cheese-heads" have their roots in the German colonies in Wisconsin.
If you're not nodding along and thinking of the Irish of Boston, or some such, you're hopeless.
It is here:
www.whoyoucallinillegal.org
Thanks!
The link to the website is broken on the post.
Please link to
www.facebook.com/WhoYouCallinIllegal
Thanks!