Relics

  “Not a Nation of Immigrants – Settler Colonialism, White Supremacy and a History of Erasure and Enclosure” by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, 2021

Dunbar-Ortiz attacks the phrase 'nation of immigrants' used by Democrats and abandoned by Republicans as a “mid-twentieth century revisionist origin story” that hides a very real settler-colonial origin. The phrase Nation of Immigrants was popularized by Senator John F. Kennedy in 1958 in a book titled just that. Her analysis is not really new on the left. Let's see what she does with it.

The slaughter and seizure of the land of the original 'first immigrants' - native Americans; the annexation of Mexican territory; periodic mass deportations of Mexicans; ten years of La Matanza terror in Texas; the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882; the Puerto Rican and Hawaiian colonies; the 1924 Immigration Act which limited immigration to western Europeans; the incarceration of Japanese during WWII; or referring to slaves as 'immigrants' – all show what actually occurred. Even discrimination against the Irish, Italians and Jews goes unsaid, although they were later granted light-skin status. All well known on the left.

Dunbar-Ortiz later adds capitalism to the mix and follows the story up to the present, where John Birch Society politics are now mainstream. She touches on Lin-Manuel Miranda's celebration of the arch-colonialist Alexander Hamilton. Other chapters discuss settler-colonialism; slavery; the continent-wide spread of the empire; the Irish diaspora; Catholic and Jewish immigrants; anti-Asian panics; and lastly the border, which is one of the key places were 'immigration' politics play out, mostly violently directed against Mexicans and those from Central & Latin America. If any of these subjects are new or of interest you, then buy the book!

HAMMING IT UP

New is the chapter on the recent play Hamilton, which was an upper-middle class sensation, even premiering for the Obamas. It represents Hamilton as pro-immigrant and anti-slavery - when he was the exact opposite. To boot, the white faces are done by black faces in the play, a form of disguise. Is this a new form of blackface or 'white-washing?' Hamilton actually married into the wealthy New York Schulyer family, which bought and sold slaves – a business he aided. He also owned slaves himself. He supported the French during the Haitian Revolution. He came from the slave-ridden Caribbean and entered New York society as a prominent Britisher. He advocated deporting all immigrants unless they were merchants or 'of good character.' Part of the reason was his Federalist Party wanted to cut the voting pool for the opposing Jeffersonian Democrats, who were more plebeian and getting migrant votes. Sound familiar?

Hamilton's reviled opponent Aaron Burr was actually to his left. According to Dunbar-Ortiz, Burr embraced immigrants, the rights of women, criminal justice reform, more democracy in the election of senators and press freedom. The play makes Burr out to be an envious jerk. Hamilton, on the other hand, was a fierce advocate of property rights, a “fiscal-military state” and heartily supported the 3/5s rule. He led troops to crush the Whiskey Rebellion in the Appalachian mountains. He plotted plans for war with France, the invasion of Spanish Florida and into the lower Americas. He also advocated conquering Shawnee territory in Kentucky.

The right man died in that duel... Hail Aaron Burr!

THE BORDER

Fun aside, a few facts about the border. According to Dunbar-Ortiz, between 1930 and 1934 some 2 million Mexicans were forcibly deported back to Mexico, with 1.2M being naturalized U.S. citizens or born in the U.S. In 1954's 'Operation Wetback' between 300k-800k migrants were deported, which she considers a show for political consumption, as the key has always been the need for cheap labor. Under Obama 3 million were deported and 2.1 million 'voluntarily' left.

The 'spirit' of settler-colonialism?

THEORY?

The last chapter includes Dunbar-Ortiz' overall conclusion. In it she criticizes 'multi-culturalism' and diversity as kind of updated forms of the 'melting pot' thesis. She contends that aspirations to blend into the 'melting pot' or 'become white' are now weaker. And that immigrants “do not automatically become settlers unless they resist that default.” (The default is 'white.') So being a 'settler' today is in the mind, behavior and skin color. The problem with this somewhat dated, idealist / individualist take on being a settler is that people are moving all over the world right now, mostly because they have to. Many countries are gaining or losing workers, immigrants, refugees, students and asylum seekers of various kinds, fleeing from all manner of misery, much of it created by imperialism. So unless you oppose 'whiteness' you are the enemy. A weird, post-modern ideological slant.

She wants to 'deconstruct' settler-colonialism.  She says: “Diversity and racism are widely accepted but the problem is the general denial or refusal to acknowledge settler-colonialism.” The problem? Settler-colonialism was the template for the expansion of mercantile capital all over the world and the establishment of countries in Latin America, the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and later, Israel. Yet if we accept that somewhat archaic understanding of ALL U.S. history, where does that leave us?

There is no hint of a class or anti-capitalist understanding here. Depending on the country or area they are coming from, many immigrants are working-class, especially from Africa, Latin and Central America. Some are not - they are professionals, upper-class students, HBI white-collar techies or here to start small businesses. Her idealist take ignores these class differences, or even how they work within the U.S. color-caste and privatized land systems.

The other unsaid idea that floats behind the concept of 'settler-colonialism' as still the key issue is that all the settlers should leave. This is not a viable politics, especially in a highly-developed and unequal capitalist class society that started more than 500 years ago. The verbiage theoretically avoids the present and any program to overthrow modern capital. On page 281 she explicitly rejects a proletarian social revolution, and by implication any class line. Logic like this is academic liberalism run amok.

Get Your Quill Pen Out...

MANY RELICS 

The U.S. Constitution itself is a relic of this colonial period, promoting an anti-democratic structure based on private property and military expansion. It is like our prehensile tail site or the tiny 'canines' of the human body, reminding us that we have not always been upright ground-dwellers. It is part and parcel of the enduring love for 'the Founders' that animates both Democrats and Republicans – as if time has not passed, ideas have not changed and society has not developed since 1789. U.S. capital still carries with it this prehensile 'tale,' an example of combined and uneven development, of which settler-colonialism is one.

Dunbar-Ortiz has now written 3 books with basically the same view, the other two being “Loaded” on the real meaning of the 2^nd Amendment and “An Indigenous Peoples History of the United States.” (Both reviewed below.) Certainly this book has additional facts, but as to theory, there is no real movement here. Perhaps this is a default for many historians, writers or academics who ride their ideas into the indefinite future and never broaden their views. Chock full of facts, polemics and a broad palette, this book might be right for you - or might be more of the same.

Prior blog reviews on this subject, use blog search box, upper left, to investigate our 16 year archive, using these terms: “Loaded” and “Indigenous People's History of the United States” (both by Dunbar-Ortiz); “Bad Mexicans,” “The Latino Question,” “The Convert,” “The Open Veins of Latin America” (Galeano); “Land Grabbing,” “Guns, Germs and Steel” (Diamond); “Silence” (Scorsese); “Dream of the Celt” (Lhosa); “Last Train to Zona Verde” (Theroux); “Washington Bullets” (Prashad); “Caste – the Origin of Our Discontents” (Wilkerson).

And I bought it at May Day Books!

Red Frog, not written by ChatGPT / February 6, 2023