DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | Chicano-Indian American Cultural Center miscellaneous newsletters, 1977-1978 |

Transcribe
Translate

Chicano-Indian American Cultural Center miscellaneous newsletters, 1977-1978

8

El Laberinto Octubre '77 page

During recent years, Mexico's economy has been one of the fastest growing in Latin America. Gross national product increased at annual rates above 6 percent during the past decade, with per capita income growth exceeding 3 percent per year. This was the fastest rate of growth among major Latin American nations and one of the very few to exceed the Alliance for Progress goal of 2.5 percent per year set at the beginning of the decade.

Economic development by itself does not give rise, of course, to  migratory pressures. While the character of Mexican development cannot be examined in detail here, the crucial point to be noted is that it has taken place within the framework of state-regulated capitalism. National corporatism shares with other capitalist strategies the fundamental trait of favoring primarily the organized upper and middle sectors to the detriment of lower groups. Consumption and investment resources are heavily concentrated, at least in the initial stages of a growing commercial industrial bouregeoisie. [Fr?]uits of development take considerable time, within this capitalist framework, to filter down to the lower classes. It is for this reason that, while Mexico exhibits one of the most dynamic economies in the developing world, income distribution remains heavily skewed in favor of the upper sectors.

Essentially, the post-revolutionary era has liberated the poor from quasi-feudalistic bonds and exposed them to the advantages and conveniences of the developed world without providing the means of satisfying the newly-created demands. Mexico has mobilized its lower classes without being able to fully integrate them into the process of national development. Results have been the heavy migration to urban industrial centers such as Mexico City and Monterrey and the growing pressure at the border. Thus, massive lower-class immigration to the US functions as a safety valve, relieving the pressures of mobilized surplus labor in a transitional economy.

Mexico benefits from wetback flow in two ways. First and most important, it alleviates the tensions and cost of income maldistribution. It provides the poor with an alternative and it buys time for the capitalist strategy adopted to attain eventual economic maturity. Second, remittances from Mexican immigrants in the US are an inconspicuous but potentially important factor in the external trade balance...

For (US) employers, wetback migration has the double advantage of providing a pool of abundant, cheap labor and of holding wages of domestic workers down by sharply increasing the supply of available manpower. Wetback labor is not subject to the usual legal restrictions concerning fringe benefits and protection of the worker. The wetback, given his precarious position, has not rights. Accidents at work, sickness, etc., are his own problem. The constant threat of discovery makes him willing to do any work at much lower wages...The law is one-sided...While it is a crime to be a wetback, it is not a crime to employ wetback labor.

The native poor--those in marginal menial services and unskilled occupations--must, in contrast, compete directly with illegal labor. Since wetbacks are willing to work more hours for lower pay and no fringe benefits, the native worker ih at a disadvantage and is often completely displaced from his job. Only the poor pay the costs of illegal immigration: the sectors most seriously affected by the wetback flow are precisely the ones least able to wield effective political power in defense of their interests.

Compounding this situation is the ambivalent relationship between wetbacks and the native poor. Areas of heaviest wetback concentration are also those in which a heavy proportion of unskilled labor is composed of native Mexican-Americans. This is especially true of Texas and California and, to a lesser extent, Chicago. Outside of friendship and kinship relations, there exists between illegal immigrant and native worker the bonds of a common language, culture, and ethnic past. Rational economic interests are pitted against deep-seated loyalties. Further, opposion.

Saving...

8 El Laberinto Octubre '77 page During recent years, Mexico's economy has been one of the fastest growing in Latin America. Gross national product increased at annual rates above 6 percent during the past decade, with per capita income growth exceeding 3 percent per year. This was the fastest rate of growth among major Latin American nations and one of the very few to exceed the Alliance for Progress goal of 2.5 percent per year set at the beginning of the decade. Economic development by itself does not give rise, of course, to migratory pressures. While the character of Mexican development cannot be examined in detail here, the crucial point to be noted is that it has taken place within the framework of state-regulated capitalism. National corporatism shares with other capitalist strategies the fundamental trait of favoring primarily the organized upper and middle sectors to the detriment of lower groups. Consumption and investment resources are heavily concentrated, at least in the initial stages of a growing commercial industrial bouregeoisie. [Fr?]uits of development take considerable time, within this capitalist framework, to filter down to the lower classes. It is for this reason that, while Mexico exhibits one of the most dynamic economies in the developing world, income distribution remains heavily skewed in favor of the upper sectors. Essentially, the post-revolutionary era has liberated the poor from quasi-feudalistic bonds and exposed them to the advantages and conveniences of the developed world without providing the means of satisfying the newly-created demands. Mexico has mobilized its lower classes without being able to fully integrate them into the process of national development. Results have been the heavy migration to urban industrial centers such as Mexico City and Monterrey and the growing pressure at the border. Thus, massive lower-class immigration to the US functions as a safety valve, relieving the pressures of mobilized surplus labor in a transitional economy. Mexico benefits from wetback flow in two ways. First and most important, it alleviates the tensions and cost of income maldistribution. It provides the poor with an alternative and it buys time for the capitalist strategy adopted to attain eventual economic maturity. Second, remittances from Mexican immigrants in the US are an inconspicuous but potentially important factor in the external trade balance... For (US) employers, wetback migration has the double advantage of providing a pool of abundant, cheap labor and of holding wages of domestic workers down by sharply increasing the supply of available manpower. Wetback labor is not subject to the usual legal restrictions concerning fringe benefits and protection of the worker. The wetback, given his precarious position, has not rights. Accidents at work, sickness, etc., are his own problem. The constant threat of discovery makes him willing to do any work at much lower wages...The law is one-sided...While it is a crime to be a wetback, it is not a crime to employ wetback labor. The native poor--those in marginal menial services and unskilled occupations--must, in contrast, compete directly with illegal labor. Since wetbacks are willing to work more hours for lower pay and no fringe benefits, the native worker ih at a disadvantage and is often completely displaced from his job. Only the poor pay the costs of illegal immigration: the sectors most seriously affected by the wetback flow are precisely the ones least able to wield effective political power in defense of their interests. Compounding this situation is the ambivalent relationship between wetbacks and the native poor. Areas of heaviest wetback concentration are also those in which a heavy proportion of unskilled labor is composed of native Mexican-Americans. This is especially true of Texas and California and, to a lesser extent, Chicago. Outside of friendship and kinship relations, there exists between illegal immigrant and native worker the bonds of a common language, culture, and ethnic past. Rational economic interests are pitted against deep-seated loyalties. Further, opposion.