Open thread Aug. 14, 2018 Dan Crawford | August 14, 2018 7:30 am Tags: open thread Comments (9) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
Hard to think of a worse group of human beings than what squats in the White House.
“Stephen Miller, the senior policy adviser to the president and one of the ideologues pushing the administration’s hardline immigration policies, is a product of the so-called “chain migration” he and President Donald Trump often deride. That’s according to his uncle, who penned an essay in Politico outlining Miller’s family’s immigration story on Monday.
David Glosser, a retired neuropsychologist and Miller’s uncle on his mother’s side, detailed the story of how the family came to live in the United States. Miller’s great-great-grandfather Wolf-Leib Glosser left the village of Antopol in what is now Belarus amid “violent anti-Jewish pogroms” there and came to the US. He landed on Ellis Island in 1903 and, over time, was able to bring over the rest of his family.
Through that generation and the next, the family built a chain of supermarkets and discount department stores run by Miller’s great-grandfather and his grandfather Izzy. The family eventually became American citizens. It’s the type of “chain migration” — or family-based migration — that immigration hardliners, including Miller, say they hate.
“I have watched with dismay and increasing horror as my nephew, who is an educated man and well aware of his heritage, has become the architect of immigration policies that repudiate the very foundation of our family’s life in this country,” Glosser wrote.
The essay is in part a rejection of the immigration policies his nephew supports and at the same time a plea for him to reconsider:
I shudder at the thought of what would have become of the Glossers had the same policies Stephen so coolly espouses — the travel ban, the radical decrease in refugees, the separation of children from their parents, and even talk of limiting citizenship for legal immigrants — been in effect when Wolf-Leib made his desperate bid for freedom. The Glossers came to the US just a few years before the fear and prejudice of the “America First” nativists of the day closed U.S. borders to Jewish refugees. Had Wolf-Leib waited, his family would likely have been murdered by the Nazis along with all but seven of the 2,000 Jews who remained in Antopol. I would encourage Stephen to ask himself if the chanting, torch-bearing Nazis of Charlottesville, whose support his boss seems to court so cavalierly, do not envision a similar fate for him.
Miller, 32, is a fierce proponent of restricting both legal and illegal immigration to the United States.
As Vox’s Jane Coaston writes, he was passionate about the subject even in high school and bonded with his former boss, then-Sen. Jeff Sessions, over the matter. Miller designed the initial version of Trump’s travel ban and agreed with former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon when in a March 2016 radio interview Bannon complained that the number of immigrants in the country is a “massive problem.”
In his Politico essay, Glosser wrote that perhaps Miller and Trump “have become numb to the resultant human tragedy and blind to the hypocrisy of their policy decisions” after spending so much time “in the theater of right wing politics.” But he also noted that Miller isn’t the only family with chain immigration in Trump’s orbit: Trump’s grandfather is reportedly a German migrant, his mother fled Scotland for the US, and, of course, first lady Melania Trump’s parents became citizens just last week.
“No matter what opinion is held about immigration, any government that specifically enacts law or policy on that basis [of ethnicity, country of origin, or religion] must be recognized as a threat to all of us. Laws bereft of justice are the gateway to tyranny,” Glosser wrote. “Today others may be the target, but tomorrow it might just as easily be you or me.”
Steven Miller is a sociopath. He cannot reconsider because he’s hardwired that way.
Miller owns big shares of the Trafficking network. Don’t fall for the con. Illegal immigration is surging under him and sessions.
CROSS-POSTED FROM NAKED CAPITALISM:
Whatever union members’ core political ideology (or lack of) …
… once we have 50-75% labor union density in the USA we will have satisfied all our progressive ideology ipso facto: the poor will no longer be poor and the government will be phoning us (the unions) up to ask us what we need.
New way to get USA unionized (if not exactly “organized”) — pioneered by Republicans (!):
Even if we made union busting a mandatory five year federal felony and hired tens of thousands of enforcement agents (impossible itself; the FBI doesn’t have tens of thousands), millions of business owners would just laugh (at this stage in US labor history): “What are you going to do, lock us all up?” Ho Ho Ho.
Any kind of broad union organizing across this labor market culture that has grown so resistant to all strains of organizing activity for decades is gone forever.
Repub proposed “protection” of workers’ freedom — in the congressional hopper now:
H.R.2723 — Employee Rights Act — 115th Congress (2017-2018) — from summary
“require union recertification after a turnover in the workforce exceeding 50% of the bargaining unit;”
Read more about it:
Dem should-be-proposed “real” protection of workers’ freedom — to go into congressional hopper when blue wave comes in:
H.R. “1234” (?) Comprehensive Employee Rights Act (?)
116th Congress (2019-2020) (?) — from summary:
“require union cert/recert election in every private (non-gov) workplace — one, three or five year cycles; local plurality rules”
Repub bill seems less radical than ours because it covers so few workplaces, reflecting private union density down to (an almost terminal) 7%. Adding 93% of workplaces seems the big deal that it is. Maybe some Dem pres candidate should run on it as: The Big Deal. 🙂
Even is we have to wait for a blue Senate, starting to work on this HR bill will bring would be union workers back into the Dem fold, insuring it’s eventual passage.
Here’s a post by Matt Yglesias over at Vox that should be of interest to AB readers. Very long, but the second half is more interesting than the first.
We can accomplish everything that Warren and Yglesias want to accomplish with a simple amendment to the NLRA mandating regularly scheduled certification elections …
… on the theory that it is no longer possible to enforce organizing protections given the advanced state of brazenly illegal anti-union muscling at ever private workplace today.
I’m reading Hard Sell: Work and Resistance in Retail Chains
by Peter Ikeler
A two year saleswoman at nonunion Macy’s: “I heard that everybody who was trying to get with the union was getting let go. People got scared and the managers told them that they got fired because they was signing with the union.” Kindle loc 1574)
Even if we made violating labor law a felony and hired tens of thousands of enforcement agents (the FBI doesn’t even have tens of thousands) our millions of business owners could just laugh and challenge: “What are you going to do, put us all in jail?”
HR 2723: Repub effort to mandate recert/decert elections anytime 50% of the original membership rolls over 50%. Obvious Dem opportunity — once blue wave comes in: federally mandate cert/recert/decert elections at every private workplace (I would suggest one, three or five year cycles, local plurality chooses).
After that everything will fall in place. It will be like an unfunded mandate — just reset the power equation in this country and get out of the people’s way.
If we stipulate that both mechanisms could, in principle, achieve the same ends, the question becomes: which is more realistic?
Both don’t have the same potential. First and foremost, 93% nonunion workforce should be seen as a pathological condition of and by itself — ipso facto. It’s like losing the right to vote — losing any power over our economic and political lives.
The fact that Warren rarely ever mentions the word “union” out loud tells me she is missing a bit (giant) piece of the puzzle.
[cut and paste]
Headline: Bernie Sanders has a new plan to raise wages: Save the unions
“ … would allow employees to form a union by a majority sign-up … require companies to negotiate with a new union within 10 days [of request] … mandate that workers in every state pay some dues … expand the law’s definition of ‘employer’ … .”
Bernie seems at last catching on to the centrality of unions in a democratic society (if not caught on enough — not per regularly scheduled elections needed in our broken union movement economy — not in my sight).
“mandate that workers in every state pay some dues”
The only way that happens is to win state elections and change their laws. Meanwhile, the white working class has voted against unions for more than half a century. Yeah, take a poll and they just love unions. Take a vote and they will vote in an anti-union racist.