The hate from the Lone Star state? What of the hate from the Mexican state?

T

Theo

Guest
I see the president of Mexico feels it his right to put down African-Americans in his speeches these days.

The San Jose Mercury News tells us this isn't a big deal in Mexico:

"Blackface comedy is still considered funny in Mexico."

And:
"Comments that would generally be considered openly racist in the United States generate little attention in Mexico."

And:
"One afternoon television program regularly features a comedian in blackface chasing actresses in skimpy outfits, while an advertisement for a small, chocolate pastry called the ``negrito'' -- the little black man -- shows a white boy sprouting an afro as he eats the sweet."

In Mexico I went for a walk to inhale the tranquil, cool, lover's air
Then I sensed the hate in the name of a chocolate cake
And a small voice said, "Can we send Jesse Jackson?"

In Mexico they lay on their couches and laugh their racist guts out
At black faces and afros...Oh take me back to the USA, Oh take me back.....

It seems if the topic's anyplace but America no one dare criticize, just idealize
I just don't see why this should be so
It seems everyone loves to attack America but don't dare give them a mirror too
I just don't see why this should be so
 
> Two wrongs don't make a right.

I agree.

But what exactly is the hate sensed from the Lone Star state by Morrissey?

I'm all for Mexican immigrants, personally. I welcome people who wanna be Americans with open arms.

But it's odd that Morrissey, who's apparently even against LEGAL immigration in the UK, comes to America and says we're so hateful towards Mexico when we place water in the desert to help people cross our border ILLEGALLY.
 
> I agree.

> But what exactly is the hate sensed from the Lone Star state by Morrissey?

> I'm all for Mexican immigrants, personally. I welcome people who wanna be
> Americans with open arms.

> But it's odd that Morrissey, who's apparently even against LEGAL
> immigration in the UK, comes to America and says we're so hateful towards
> Mexico when we place water in the desert to help people cross our border
> ILLEGALLY.

That's because he doesn't know his arse from his elbow.

Just reel out loads of crap....they hang on to every word anyway....sensical or not.

Boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
All I was trying to say is that America's always under the whole world's magnifying glass but in my experience no one else welcomes the magnifying glass turned towards them.

For example, people like to idealize the socialist government of Canada, and it turns out that they're completely corrupt and escaped a no-confidence vote by one tie-breaking vote.
 
> I agree.

> But what exactly is the hate sensed from the Lone Star state by Morrissey?

> I'm all for Mexican immigrants, personally. I welcome people who wanna be
> Americans with open arms.

> But it's odd that Morrissey, who's apparently even against LEGAL
> immigration in the UK, comes to America and says we're so hateful towards
> Mexico when we place water in the desert to help people cross our border
> ILLEGALLY.

I think the song is singing about American factorie that have been set up on the boarder in order to avoid expensive labour, and it makes logistical sense for american companies. However the fumes and social consequences mean that an unequal form of environmental justice seems to be occuring between Americans and Mexicans.
 
> All I was trying to say is that America's always under the whole world's
> magnifying glass but in my experience no one else welcomes the magnifying
> glass turned towards them.

> For example, people like to idealize the socialist government of Canada,
> and it turns out that they're completely corrupt and escaped a
> no-confidence vote by one tie-breaking vote.

Thats what happens when you are the biggest country in the world. Some policies fuel inequality, and America, in a way, sets the trend for how other countries are prepared to behave towards so called less developed Nations.
 
> I think the song is singing about American factorie that have been set up
> on the boarder in order to avoid expensive labour, and it makes logistical
> sense for american companies. However the fumes and social consequences
> mean that an unequal form of environmental justice seems to be occuring
> between Americans and Mexicans.

I can understand the point on the evinormnetal side.

I'm confused about the social consequences. Mexico wants us to continue allowing illegal immigrants to pour over our border because their lives are so hopeless in Mexico and they can find a better economic situtation in America starting out in low paying jobs by American standards. Some AMERICANS may be upset about this because they believe they ca't compete with cheap labor. But how can the social consequences for MEXICANS be bad if they're improving their standard of living and running across the border illegally in record numbers to do so? To people tend to flock by the tens of thousands to that which makes their lives WORSE??

"In a poor country like ours, the alternative to low-paid jobs isn't well-paid ones, it's no jobs at all." -- Mexico's Ambassador to the USA, Jesús Reyes-Heroles
 
> Thats what happens when you are the biggest country in the world. Some
> policies fuel inequality, and America, in a way, sets the trend for how
> other countries are prepared to behave towards so called less developed
> Nations.

Since America became a super power, more people have been lifted out of extreme poverty, and more people live in democracies, than ever before in human history. Seems we're fueling a lot of good, too.

If you oppose Western corporations setting up shop in developing countries you can't possibly be for developing countries lifting themselves up. You'd be for rich countries using protectionism AGAINST poor countries.
 
But as far as i know alot of these companies have been set up in Mexico so this limits immigration from Mexico to the US. Nice quote at the end, but would'nt it be nice if the jobs became high paid or at least at/above basic living standards just because the American companies had some corporate social responsibility?

> I can understand the point on the evinormnetal side.

> I'm confused about the social consequences. Mexico wants us to continue
> allowing illegal immigrants to pour over our border because their lives
> are so hopeless in Mexico and they can find a better economic situtation
> in America starting out in low paying jobs by American standards. Some
> AMERICANS may be upset about this because they believe they ca't compete
> with cheap labor. But how can the social consequences for MEXICANS be bad
> if they're improving their standard of living and running across the
> border illegally in record numbers to do so? To people tend to flock by
> the tens of thousands to that which makes their lives WORSE??

> "In a poor country like ours, the alternative to low-paid jobs isn't
> well-paid ones, it's no jobs at all." -- Mexico's Ambassador to the
> USA, Jesús Reyes-Heroles
 
> Since America became a super power, more people have been lifted out of
> extreme poverty, and more people live in democracies, than ever before in
> human history. Seems we're fueling a lot of good, too.

> If you oppose Western corporations setting up shop in developing countries
> you can't possibly be for developing countries lifting themselves up.
> You'd be for rich countries using protectionism AGAINST poor countries.

No countries in the South tend to not be able to help themselves up, but that does not mean they need to be exploited and then made to be happy about it.

The western democratic model of capiutalism is not a good thing for equality. I mean we only have to look within America for evidence of that. Also the ECE, and Former SU have not exactly benefitted from a neo-liberal economy
 
> But as far as i know alot of these companies have been set up in Mexico so
> this limits immigration from Mexico to the US. Nice quote at the end, but
> would'nt it be nice if the jobs became high paid or at least at/above
> basic living standards just because the American companies had some
> corporate social responsibility?

The quote tells the truth. You can't judge jobs in Mexico by the standards of jobs in a rich country, and the alternative is a worse job, not a better job.

It seems to me foreign corporations raise wages and standards in poor countries.
That's why people line up for those jobs. I don't know how someone works out that this is bad for the poor country.
 
> The quote tells the truth. You can't judge jobs in Mexico by the standards
> of jobs in a rich country, and the alternative is a worse job, not a
> better job.

> It seems to me foreign corporations raise wages and standards in poor
> countries.
> That's why people line up for those jobs. I don't know how someone works
> out that this is bad for the poor country.
The conditions are not equal to the richer countries thats one of teh reasons they do it.

Less regulations in mexico than america therefore explotation is easier.
People are forced to work longer hours, and even then they just about have enough to live on. That is why American companies set up there they don't do it as charity they do it to save money. I'm not saying wage rates should be equal, but the money paid should allow the workers to achieve the same ends and a standard of living.
 
Back
Top Bottom