President Honors Chavez

Glassfan

Mostly harmless
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
3,956
Location
Kent
Civil Rights Hero Cesar Chavez, organizer of the Farm Workers Movement, will have a monument erected in his honor in California,
Cvz2.JPG
Spoiler :
Obama creates monument to Cesar Chavez: 'He cared'
By Josh Levs and Thom Patterson, CNN
updated 6:13 AM EDT, Tue October 9, 2012

(CNN) -- Describing it as a "day that has been a long time coming," President Barack Obama made modern history Monday by announcing the creation of a monument to honor the late labor and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez.
The Cesar E. Chavez National Monument becomes the 398th unit in the National Park Service system, and the first honoring a Latino born later than the 1700s, the Park Service told CNN. It's no coincidence the move comes less than a month before Election Day, as the president maintains a strong lead among Latinos. A big turnout among Latino supporters in states where the race is close could help Obama win re-election against GOP challenger Mitt Romney.

The president spoke at a ceremony in Keene, California, on land known as Nuestra Senora Reina de la Paz, where, from the 1970s until the early '90s, Chavez lived and led his farm worker movement. Decades ago, Obama said, when Chavez began his farm worker movement, "no one seemed to care about the invisible farm workers who picked the nation's food -- bent down in the beating sun, living in poverty, cheated by growers, abandoned in old age, unable to demand even the most basic rights."
"Cesar cared," the president said. "In his own peaceful and eloquent way he made other people care too." Chavez's organized labor marches and other protests, including a boycott of table grapes, led to "some of the first farm worker contracts in history," Obama said. "Let us honor his memory, but most importantly let us live up to his example."
Chavez's movement "was sustained by a generation of organizers who stood up and spoke out and urged others to do the same," Obama said. Chavez, Obama said, believed that "when someone who works 12 hours a day in the fields can earn enough to put food on the table -- maybe save up enough to buy a home -- that lifts up our entire economy." Obama acknowledged that there's still "more work to do" and "the recession we're fighting our way back from is still taking a toll -- especially in Latino communities which already faced high unemployment and poverty rates."
Earlier Monday, the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, a coalition of 30 Latino organizations, lauded the move. Chavez, who died in 1993, embodied the principle "that individuals can accomplish more as a community than they ever could on their own," said Hector E. Sanchez, executive director of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, in a statement put out by the leadership agenda.
The monument includes 120 acres, National Park Service spokesman David Barna said.
Obama's order puts property under federal protection that includes a visitor's center, the United Farm Workers' legal aid offices, Chavez's home with his wife, Helen, a memorial garden containing his grave, and other buildings, the White House said.
Barna said no sculpture is planned.
The monument, in the Tehachapi Mountains, is the fourth designated by Obama under the Antiquities Act. Obama's decision to set aside the land as a national monument also sends a political message to environmentalists -- a key group of voters, as many strongly supported him in 2008. The League of Conservation Voters, which endorsed Obama in 2008 and for his current White House run, has not always been happy with the president's environmental record. As debate raged in 2011 over air quality regulations and proposed construction of a transcontinental oil pipeline, LCV President Gene Karpinski said the administration had been "caving" to industry. LCV spokesman Jeff Gohringer said Monday that establishing the Chavez monument stands as "further proof of President Obama's commitment to our special places across the country and we hope he continues to use that authority." César Chávez an inspiration to president's campaign slogan and movements
The Chavez family donated certain properties to the federal government so that the monument could be created. Beginning Tuesday, the Park Service will take steps to prepare it as an official site, Barna said. It will become "one of those places that everyone should visit," he said, "part of our shared cultural heritage." The land includes property that was once Chavez's home, which was added to the National Register of Historic Places last year. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar called him "one of the heroes of the 20th century." Paul F. Chavez, president of the Cesar Chavez Foundation, said at the time, "For my father, La Paz was a personal refuge from bitter struggles in agricultural valleys and big cities, a spiritual harbor where he recharged batteries, drew fresh inspiration and prepared for the battles ahead. It was a place where many dedicated people spent years of their lives working with Cesar Chavez for social justice, inspiring generations of Americans from all walks of life who never worked on a farm to social and political activism."
Ruben Navarrette, a CNN.com contributor, wrote a column last year noting that many sites around the country are named for Chavez, and suggesting that that "campaign" may have run its course. Still, he wrote, Chavez "was a great American who helped bring fairness and dignity to the fields and the workers who toil there. Before Chavez and the union came along, there were no collective bargaining rights for farm workers, no toilets or clean drinking water in the fields, and little public awareness about pesticides and other dangers that workers must endure to put fruits and vegetables on our table. He helped change all that."

Cvz3.JPG

I lived in Southern California when Chavez was organizing the workers, and saw him on several occasions. He's to Hispanic Americans what Martin Luther King was to Blacks - but with much less recognition.

It's a shame that politics has to rear it's ugly head and that the President may be using this event to buy some votes, but this recognition of Cesar Chavez is long overdue and I'm personally gratified that it's finally come.
 
Nice move on his part. You're right that the timing is somewhat questionable. Too many people get overlooked because their contributions to the country are unpopular with a powerful part.
 
Who needs pro-union policies when you've got union-themed baubles?
 
Civil Rights Hero Cesar Chavez, organizer of the Farm Workers Movement, will have a monument erected in his honor in California,

I lived in Southern California when Chavez was organizing the workers, and saw him on several occasions. He's to Hispanic Americans what Martin Luther King was to Blacks - but with much less recognition.

It's a shame that politics has to rear it's ugly head and that the President may be using this event to buy some votes, but this recognition of Cesar Chavez is long overdue and I'm personally gratified that it's finally come.

Cesar Chavez is a household name here in California. There are parks, fields, plazas, and stadiums dedicated to him throughout the State, all State government workers get a day off in his honor. He was a fantastic man, and it's good to see him get some National recognition for once.
 
I'm embarrassed to say I hadn't really heard of him until I started my student teaching in Arizona, then quickly tried to catch up. You're right about the timing, but the recognition is completely appropriate.
 
Cesar Chavez is a household name here in California. There are parks, fields, plazas, and stadiums dedicated to him throughout the State, all State government workers get a day off in his honor. He was a fantastic man, and it's good to see him get some National recognition for once.

Amen, brother.

I'm embarrassed to say I hadn't really heard of him until I started my student teaching in Arizona, then quickly tried to catch up. You're right about the timing, but the recognition is completely appropriate.

Just so - here in the heartland few outside the Hispanic communities know him well. If you say "Chavez", we usually think of that knucklehead in Venezuela.

CVZ1.JPG

I never met the man, but stationed at El Toro, I often drove by as he was with the fieldworkers in the vast farmlands of Southern California.
 
It took three tries to get a street in Dallas named after him. The City Council held a public online vote on what to change the name of Industrial Blvd to. Chavez won by a 2-to-1 margin, yet the city decided to change the name of Industrial to Riverfront (even though you will struggle to see a river while driving down the street). Then Ross Avenue was considered, but too many office towers were along there and the big law firms and other such businesses didn't want the name in their address. Finally, a little stretch of road on the outskirts of downtown was selected, but only for a few blocks.
 
There is another way of looking at it. No Republican president would likely create a monument to a Latino agricultural union leader who did so much for the workers, so who knows how long it would be if Obama is defeated in November.

Besides, how many Hispanics outside of far-right Cuban-Americans are going to vote for a Republican after what has occured during the past decade?
 
Good for Obama. I know very little about Chavez but the little I do know indicates he deserves greater reknown.
 
It's about time. Chavez himself would probably not be too supportive of the President though.
 
I don't claim to be an expert on Chavez, but I don't see what is so great about a man who campaigned for stricter regulation of immigration so as to reduce competition in the labor market or who threatened illegal immigrants that they would be reported to the INS and deported if they did not join his union.
 
I don't claim to be an expert on Chavez, but I don't see what is so great about a man who campaigned for stricter regulation of immigration so as to reduce competition in the labor market or who threatened illegal immigrants that they would be reported to the INS and deported if they did not join his union.

I know nothing of the man but precisely this?
Finally a non-xenophobic, actual reason to reduce immigration that's actually heard.
 
I know nothing of the man but precisely this?
Finally a non-xenophobic, actual reason to reduce immigration that's actually heard.

Because the latinos in one side of the border are better and more deserving than those on the other?

But anyway, this right here is the reason why the left-wing/Democratic hold over the Latino vote cannot last for too long. You can't at the same time support unionization and a comprehensive welfare state and open immigration. Many left-wing Democrats know this, and they only support mass amnesty for illegals and a liberal immigration policy because they're sure Republicans will block it.
 
No because the latinos on that side of the border want to bend over to people with disgusting, self-immolating opinions like yours to get some bread crumbs while US-taxpayers and citizens lose jobs and lose all they have built up through a bitter struggle over 100 years.

All of this while the richest man on the planet lives in Mexico. Go bank on his door instead!
 
Because the latinos in one side of the border are better and more deserving than those on the other?

But anyway, this right here is the reason why the left-wing/Democratic hold over the Latino vote cannot last for too long. You can't at the same time support unionization and a comprehensive welfare state and open immigration. Many left-wing Democrats know this, and they only support mass amnesty for illegals and a liberal immigration policy because they're sure Republicans will block it.

I think only the farthest left-wing activists are calling for truly open immigration. Lots of liberals (and some conservatives) have called for work permits, making the process easier, or for expanding the number of immigrants allowed...but not removing restrictions completely.
 
I think only the farthest left-wing activists are calling for truly open immigration. Lots of liberals (and some conservatives) have called for work permits, making the process easier, or for expanding the number of immigrants allowed...but not removing restrictions completely.

Well, even if you just keep the average level of immigration of the last couple decades, but expand the rights of immigrants, you can never have a comprehensive welfare state and any push to mass unionization will be hampered. So there's a very obvious collision of interests of those who would expand the rights of immigrants (and immigration itself) and the "traditional left" (for lack of a better word).
 
No because the latinos on that side of the border want to bend over to people with disgusting, self-immolating opinions like yours to get some bread crumbs while US-taxpayers and citizens lose jobs and lose all they have built up through a bitter struggle over 100 years.

All of this while the richest man on the planet lives in Mexico. Go bank on his door instead!

How is my opinion "disgusting and self-immolating"?

I do find it hypocritical to fight fiercely for the rights of people who crossed the border illegally 10 or 20 years ago while denying that same opportunity for those who would do it presently. Immigrants, both of the past and of today, are only looking for a better life. It's your prerogative as a sovereign nation to restrict immigration as much as you like, but don't pretend to do that out of some moral high ground.
 
Well, even if you just keep the average level of immigration of the last couple decades, but expand the rights of immigrants, you can never have a comprehensive welfare state and any push to mass unionization will be hampered. So there's a very obvious collision of interests of those who would expand the rights of immigrants (and immigration itself) and the "traditional left" (for lack of a better word).

It could perhaps be a detriment to certain unionization efforts, but I don't see why that would remove our ability to administer a fairly modest welfare system. I can see how specific local governments might get overwhelmed if everybody moved to one spot at once, but those kinds of concerns can be addressed in a federal system.
 
It could perhaps be a detriment to certain unionization efforts, but I don't see why that would remove our ability to administer a fairly modest welfare system. I can see how specific local governments might get overwhelmed if everybody moved to one spot at once, but those kinds of concerns can be addressed in a federal system.

A fairly modest welfare system, probably. A comprehensive, European-style one? No way.
 
How is my opinion "disgusting and self-immolating"?

I do find it hypocritical to fight fiercely for the rights of people who crossed the border illegally 10 or 20 years ago while denying that same opportunity for those who would do it presently. Immigrants, both of the past and of today, are only looking for a better life. It's your prerogative as a sovereign nation to restrict immigration as much as you like, but don't pretend to do that out of some moral high ground.
'

It is because if you are of the working class then your anti-unionist policies for which people died and fought for in America, well you general attitude towards worker self-organization is disgusting and self-immolating that is self-destroying.

You said it yourself, he accepts immigrants if they register with the union.
If they do not it means that you have a bunch of people entitled to a bunch of stuff, often working under minimum wages while paying little or no taxes. Bad for everyone except the very few.
 
Top Bottom