 |
|
|
 Editorials | May 2006 
Gringos No Longer
 Michael Ackley - WorldNetDaily.com
Editor's note: Michael Ackley's columns may include satire and parody based on current events, and thus mix fact with fiction. He assumes informed readers will be able to tell which is which.
While (illegal) immigrants in the United States were demonstrating in their "Day Without (llegal) Immigrants," the few Mexicans remaining south of the border were observing a "Day Without Gringos."
Yes, they really used the term "gringos." It's a word Americans view as a light-hearted jibe while Mexicans apply it with the same malignity that invests such pejorative Americanisms as "greaser," "wetback" and "beaner."
We telephoned one of the event's organizers, Doroteo Arango, to ask how the protesters could justify the use of such an invidious epithet.
"Look," he said, "isn't it an article of faith in your country – excuse me, in the USA – that the weak can't be bigoted against the strong?
"For example, blacks can't be bigoted against whites, while whites can be bigoted against blacks, Latinos, Asians and ..."
Arango paused for a moment, then added, "Well, forget the Asians ... and the Portuguese. They're successful. But you know what I mean."
We allowed that we did know, and while we had him on the line we asked, "How do you think the reconquista of our Southwest is going?"
"It's fantastic!" he exclaimed. "Why, we already have California."
Asked what he meant, Arango noted that the state Legislature shut down in sympathy with the May Day demonstrations.
"They even passed a resolution comparing 'Day Without Immigrants' to 1955's Montomery bus boycott," he snickered. "Of course, they never used the term 'illegal immigrants' and they referred to the demonstrations as the 'Great American Boycott,' but we know who they were talking about.
"And look at the names of the co-authors: Gloria Romero, Gil Cedillo, Nell Soto, Joe Coto, Rudy Bermudez, Ron Calderon, Jenny Oropeza, Lori Saldana, Alberto Torrico. Viva la raza!
"They were backed up by the Democrats in the Legislature, which means the majority of California's Assembly members and state senators felt it was more important to represent non-citizens than it was to represent the gringos."
He chuckled and said, "So much for their oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States, eh?
"As far as we're concerned, they're can all be honorary Latinos. None of them is an American to us."
Nor to us.
What the beer brewers – Mexican and American – won't tell you: If you celebrated Cinco de Mayo by getting drunk, be advised that the anniversary of the Battle of Puebla is a sober day in Mexico.
As a merchant in Puerto Vallarta told me sternly, "Many died. This is not something to celebrate."
The preponderance of letters to our local newspapers were critical of "Day Without Immigrants." These included one writer who suggested the illegals protest "every day."
"If they really want to teach us a lesson, why don't they do this?" he wrote. "Boycott the hospitals, the urgent cares, the welfare system, food stamps, subsidized housing, etc. This would show us exactly how much of an economic impact they are to society, and what their contributions really are."
Sounds reasonable.
Now, about the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo: We're really not many generations removed from the signing of that document, which formally ended the Mexican war in 1848. Mexicans still smart under the humiliation it represents.
Let us agree that acquiring the lands that now constitute Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California for $15 million was a steal. But we stole the Southwest fair and square, and we're going to keep it. Besides, there were hardly any Mexicans in the territory at the time – perhaps 5,000 in California, for example.
History is a great teacher, but the problem with the stream of events is that we all must go forward from the point at which we enter it. We stole the lands from Mexico; the Mexicans deposed Spain; Spain stole the lands from the Aztecs and other occupants; the Aztecs stole them from peoples who preceded them in history's march.
The fact that must be faced in such matters is that every claim must be superceded by a prior claim. Regarding Israel, for example: Should Arab claims prevail? Then how about the Turkish claim (remember the Ottoman Empire), or Italy's (assuming Italy represents imperial Rome), or Iraq's (assuming Iraq represents Assyria and Babylon)?
If you believe an ultimate redress is possible, give your home to an American Indian. Make sure, however, that the Indian is a descendant of those homo sapiens who first occupied the ground where your house stands.
Michael P. Ackley has worked more than three decades as a journalist, the majority of that time at the Sacramento Union. His experience includes reporting, editing and writing commentary. Recently, he retired from teaching journalism for California State University at Hayward. |
| |
|
Vallarta Weddings
Tell a Friend
Site Map
Print this Page
Email Us