12pm March from Mount Pleasant to the White House for “A Day without Immigrants”

Photo by PoPville flickr user Joe Flood

From Many Languages One Voice (MLOV):

“Washington, D.C’s immigrant communities answer the call for “A Day Without Immigrants”, going on general strike to protest the President’s immigration policy and to demand that Mayor Bowser take concrete steps to expand and affirm D.C.’s standing as a Sanctuary City. A multicultural, multiethnic group immigrants, including members of Many Languages One Voice (MLOV) will march from the historic immigrant neighborhood Mount Pleasant to the White House.

What: A Day Without Immigrants in Washington, D.C.

Where: 3166 Mount Pleasant Street NW, Washington D.C 20010, marching to the White House down 14th Street

When: Thursday, February 16, 12pm

The march is organized by Many Languages One Voice (MLOV), which organizes with DC’s immigrant communities to demand their rightful place in the District. The group is marching with the following demands:

  • ICE out of DC – no ICE presence and declining of all ICE detainer/notification requests;

  • If the District loses our federal funding for being a sanctuary, the local government must make up the difference;

  • Immediately pass and fully fund the Language Access for Education Amendment Act of 2015 so that all limited and non-English speaking District residents can access DC resources;

  • Stop unchecked police violence committed against immigrants, Black people and all people of color;

  • Remove the mark from DC limited purpose driver’s’ licenses and have one license for all;

  • That there is no discrimination against Muslims and that DC does not support the creation of a Muslim registry or specialized surveillance of these communities;

  • That no worker who participates in the general strike be fired for their participation.”

64 Comment

  • Cringeworthy list of demands. For instance:

    – No ICE in DC? You saying they should be barred from doing their jobs?
    – What does violence against black people have to do with “A Day without immigration”. Not all black people are immigrants.
    – IF DC were to lose federal funding for its policies, where are the funds to plug the gap supposed to come from? Cuts in public education and public transit? Higher taxes? If higher taxes will some or many of the marchers that are immigrants be okay with less spending at bars and restaurants?

    • In response to your last question, higher taxes are worth it. Ensuring that the immigrant community is not afraid to call law enforcement makes us all safer and ensuring that immigrant children can go to school makes for a better community. People should not live in fear of institutions because they are immigrants.

      • +1. And in response to your second question.

        “Stop unchecked police violence committed against immigrants, Black people and all people of color.”

        It is called solidarity.

        • DC could lose a lotttttt of money….so much so that raising your taxes (by a lot) could cripple the city and ultimately a lot of people could lose there jobs. NOT WORTH IT

    • Considering the closest port of entry to DC is in Virginia (DCA), why would ICE be necessary in DC? Serious question.

    • Let’s be real, these “demands” are street theater. (Like Republicans voting to repeal the healthcare law every day under Obama, but then stopping when they actually had power to change it.)
      Also, someone should point out that DC doesn’t have the power to “reject” federal funds, because we’re not a state. Congress has complete control–Congress could even fire Bowser and abolish city government, if they really wanted to.

  • Anyone know what route they are taking and how long the march will take? On their facebook page it says that they will be making multiple stops and will have police escorts… but I haven’t heard anything about roads being closed?

  • justinbc

    “Stop unchecked police violence committed against immigrants, Black people and all people of color;”

    Why not just “stop unchecked police violence”, period. More white people (who might also be immigrants) are killed by police than any other race. If they’re the ones you’re pitching your list of demands to then you might want to include them to strengthen your case. Know your audience.

    • There are more white people in this country so you’re right. However, police violence happens DISPROPORTIONATELY to people of color. Why do white people need to always be specifically named for them to care? I care about many causes that aren’t specifically targeted towards women or people of color, even though I am both of those things. I care about humanity, and recognize that an injustice that may not directly effect me is still an injustice worth fighting for.

      • justinbc

        “Why do white people need to always be specifically named for them to care?”

        Did you watch the same election results I did? The average, disconnected white person in America turned out to show that they want to be made to feel special, and the lawmakers in power represent them. I can’t answer why they need to feel that way, however as someone who worked for years in sales and marketing I can tell you which tactics are and are not effective. And as for percentages, at least with respect to Hispanic and Asian populations (the two biggest immigrant pools in this area for sure) they are killed at an even lower rate than whites.

        • You confuse this strike with a PR campaign. It is not. It is mostly an appeal to lawmakers, and to make people aware. When it comes to justice and doing the right thing it should never require “good PR”. Why are you isolating hispanic and asian populations from the rest? Now combine the proportion of all minority communities, don’t slice and dice the numbers until you can make your point valid. This isn’t accounting. When there is not a focus on specifically fixing the injustice directed towards people of color there is no beneficial change for us. We don’t need trickle down justice. There is implicit bias towards these communities that painting this issue with the broad stroke of “All Lives” just won’t cover. It is is ok for the focus to be on the communities, which will inevitably lower police violence against whites too.

          • “don’t slice and dice the numbers until you can make your point valid.”
            Yes, this.

          • HaileUnlikely

            I think the two of you (CapHillNative and wdc) are missing Justin’s larger point, which is not to quibble about the nature of the problem itself but about how to be persuasive to the people who need to be persuaded. And also, I don’t think Justin is the one slicing and dicing the data – he’s starting from “police violence is a big problem,” and others are segmenting the data further to make more specific (and also arguably more important, but also arguably less persuasive) points.

          • justinbc

            I mentioned Hispanics and Asians because this is happening as part of the “day without immigrants” strike/protest, and those are the two largest immigrant populations in the DC area. (and the policies they are looking to change are directed at DC politicians) If it were a BLM march / protest then obviously figures specifically for various black populations would be relevant. Just throwing every single problem that exists in America into a protest / strike dilutes the message and allow recipients of that message to be dismissive.

        • Not sure where you get your numbers, but Hispanics are killed by police at a rate second only to African-Americans.

        • It seems like every few months you (Justin, now MadMax) have this argument about police violence against black people, but it seems like you don’t get it and you will never will. The last argument in September:

          • justinbc

            I’m sorry if you’re just looking for a positive feedback loop, but I hate to break it to you that not all liberals / Democrats think exactly the same way about how to solve socio-economic issues.

          • @MadMax, I guess you are a liberal or a democrat? not that I really care. My point is you ask the same question every few months and you get the exact same answer? what is the point? Insanity?
            Ps: I didn’t mean to post multiple times, I didn’t realize my other comments posted.

          • justinbc

            It’s not exactly an issue that’s going away, is it? If I’m talking to someone two weeks from now and they phrase an argument just as poorly I’m not going to say “well I discussed this previously on PoPville and they didn’t want to have a constructive conversation about it so sorry I just can’t chat with you.”

        • Just like to have this argument about police brutality against black people every few months. He doesn’t get it and he will never get it. It is nice to belong to the privileged class!

          • Is he a part of the privileged class? You know that?

          • Yea, schmooky, that’s sort of accepted. I can’t imagine Justin would argue that point. (To be fair, I’m assuming that holds true for a high majority of the folks who comment here, myself included.)

    • In terms of raw numbers, yes more white people are killed by police. But if you look at black people as a percentage of the population they are disproporationately likely to be killed by the police. From a WAPO article on this topic last year:

      “According to the most recent census data, there are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. White people make up roughly 62 percent of the U.S. population but only about 49 percent of those who are killed by police officers. African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.”

      The reality is that due to overt racism and implicit bias POC are much more likely to be harmed in their interactions with the police. Calling for an end of police brutality directed at POC is one way to shed light on this disparity.

      • *disproportionately

        I need to stop making up words and a second cup of coffee.

      • justinbc

        I’m not disagreeing with that at all. I just don’t understand why you would alienate an entire pool of people, especially if that is the pool of people that you’re trying to appeal to. Nobody should be killed by police without some sort of repercussion or investigation, there’s no need to purposely exclude one group if you get the same benefit either way.

        • Why is having a particular concern about one group of people inherently “alienating” to anyone else? The idea that rights are a zero-sum game… wherein when minorities get more, whites get less, is not only a fallacy, but a stock argument against equal rights that dates back centuries.

          • HaileUnlikely

            I don’t think that was his point. Without regard to the topic under discussion, almost any human being (including an elected official) is much more likely to be receptive to an argument of the general form “This is a problem that affects YOU and people like YOU!” than they are to be receptive to one of the general form “This is a problem that affects THEM and people like THEM,” even if the latter argument is technically more accurate or feels like it should be more compelling on a moral level.

          • justinbc

            You’re talking about a utopia where everyone is inherently out to better each others’ lives. We don’t live in that reality. Whether you like it or not if you want the “other” side to listen to you then you have to make personal appeals to them. This is not unique to this issue. For a perfect example at completely stark changes in perspective see Dick Cheney’s stance on the LGBT community after finding out his daughter was gay.

          • Really? It’s a “utopia” to just be left the hell alone and not get shot in the back or suffocated by the police for just looking suspicious? The point of protest is not to appeal to those with whom you disagree – it’s to let people know where you stand. Quit thinking this is some kind of high school persuasive essay and more about DEMANDING social change. If you’re not offending someone, you’re not doing it right.

          • Really? It’s a “utopia” to just be left alone and not get shot in the back or suffocated by the police for just looking suspicious? The point of protest is not to appeal to those with whom you disagree – it’s to let people know where you stand. Quit thinking this is some kind of high school persuasive essay and more about DEMANDING social change. If you’re not offending someone, you’re not doing it right.

          • justinbc

            That’s not at all what I said and I’m pretty sure you know it. I’ve offered up my insights into how to reach a broader audience if you want to actually make change rather than talk about it, as someone growing up in a blue city in a very red state, I can tell you I have a lot of experience with it. Take it or leave it, you won’t offend me either way.

    • Because it’s pretty obvious that the current immigration policies are directed at immigrants who are of color as opposed to all immigrants. Additionally, while in terms of sheer numbers, yes, Caucasian people make up the largest segment of those killed by police, but that’s really a function of their population numbers. On a whole, people of color are represented disproportionately higher than their population numbers at all levels of the criminal justice system. There exists mountains of data and statistics showing that people of color, particularly those of low income backgrounds, have much higher rates of coming in contact with police forces. The violence referred to does not start or end with police killings but with the entire scope of how police forces interact with communities of color and it’s a real problem, so the whole “all lives matter” argument really isn’t going to work here.

      • justinbc

        It’s not about ALM vs BLM, it’s about building an effective sales pitch that includes the target audience you want change from. Anyone who’s been paying attention knows all the stats by now from every side, and so far how’s it working out in terms of engineering change? There were some advances under the previous administration in terms of addressing systemic issues, but that was a progressive regime…this one is most certainly not.

      • Let me be clear why this matters, if you say violence against citizens committed by police is wrong and we need to reduce deaths resulting from police shootings by 20% and you achieve that 20% reduction in people killed by police, that’s great, HOWEVER, there would STILL be a disproportionate number of people of color being killed in comparison to their population percentage so you still have the same problem of it affecting a greater percentage of people of color than it does whites. So saying we need to reduce all police violence does nothing to address why it happens to people of color more than it happens to whites.

        • justinbc

          That’s an excellent point that frankly I hadn’t considered. However, I’m still concerned with actually getting people to the table to make those distinctions, which is what my suggestions are framed towards doing.

          • Justin – I think you’re probably right that this could be better worded to appeal to a larger audience. But why do you keep belaboring this point? This isn’t the best place to reach those responsible for the PR; if you genuinely want to express this point to those controlling the PR for [this] movement you need to reach out elsewhere. No need to pick dubious fights with internet strangers.

        • @PettyShabazz
          Sure, but would you rather have NO reduction in deaths from police shootings (against both people of color or whites) because your argument is not compelling/salient/familiar enough to lawmakers and the people who elect them? I realize this is a thought experiment, but assuming the “ALM” narrative results in overall 20% reduction in all police shootings and the “BLM” narrative results in static figures in police shootings – which one would you pick? Sometimes I wonder, if given the choice, some of my liberal allies would prefer 100 police shootings that are proportional to demographics, over 10 police shootings if all of those shootings were against people of color.

          • Are we really contemplating the notion that a significant number of people would simply come around to social justice by changing the name of an organization? People opposed to BLM are opposed on principle and not on some philosophic disagreement on branding or name. They could change the name and opponents would simply move on to their next objection in an ever-expanding quest for more and more concession with no sincere intention to ever acknowledge the legitimacy of their concerns.

          • @James
            I’m not talking about BLM vs. ALM as groups or hashtags. I’m using those terms to summarize the “narrative” i.e. sentiment of each argument which is either:
            A. Focusing on the disproportionate unjustified police shootings against people of color = “BLM”
            B. Focusing on the amount/frequency of unjustified police shootings in America = “ALM”
            Assuming the goal is to reduce the total amount of police shootings, specifically against people of color, then we must ask ourselves which narrative/sentiment/argument (A. or B.) is most effective at bringing about this desired outcome (given the circumstances of having to appeal to lawmakers/voters). I’m not convinced argument A is/was effective at producing the desired outcome and I’ve read many articles, on Vox for example, that argument A could be hurting or delaying the desired outcome. Similar to what MadMax was saying, are you more concerned about retaining your sense of moral superiority or accomplishing a goal? If it’s the latter, I might suggest you bite your tongue and try a new message to get the job done.

          • @schmooky This choice misses the point. The point is that whether it’s the criminal justice system, the education system, housing policy, finance, healthcare, etc. (systemic racism) people of color are routinely treated worse than whites and that is what has to be addressed because it is the problem. That lawmakers and key stakeholders do not wish to address this problem or consistently deny that it is a problem is what prevents us from addressing the problem.

          • HaileUnlikely

            Shabazz – I don’t think Schmooky is missing the point. I think your stated point and Schmooky’s stated point are simply different points. Neither one is the only valid point, and having a different point is not tantamount to missing the one and only point.

    • Come on, man. You can make the “more white people…” argument about anything because there are just more white people than anyone else. If we’re still at the point where people can’t acknowledge disproportionate police violence and incarceration of African-Americans, some of you just aren’t ever gonna get it… because you don’t want to get it.

      • justinbc

        I am a white male completely sympathetic to your (or this) cause, what I’m telling you is how to get that message across to other people in my cohort who are less sympathetic, or not at all. Read into it whatever you want, I’m merely suggesting how to make a more effective statement.

        • Like I said above, if you’re not offending someone with demands for social change then you’re doing it wrong. This idea that you can craft some kind of universally palatable marketing campaign that magically transforms entrenched thinking is pretty cute, but hardly realistic.

          • justinbc

            “Like I said above, if you’re not offending someone with demands for social change then you’re doing it wrong.”
            I could easily say that’s pretty cute, but hardly realistic as well. Get back to me in a year under this administration who wants to go back to 1950 and let me know how effective that strategy is.

        • Are you honestly telling me that if BLM changed its name to ALM you’d buy into the premise? Otherwise, what you’re asking is for BLM to abandon it’s entire raison d’etre – that African-Americans are disproportionately victimized by racial bias.

    • HaileUnlikely

      I’ve read a couple of interesting articles recently (on Vox.com no less – not exactly a hotbed of conservatism) by authors who argue that we are where we are today because the left has basically decided that being exactly right is more important than being effective.

      • justinbc

        I find quite a good bit of content on Vox from time-to-time, when they’re not blatantly baiting some topic du jour. Just have to be careful in sharing because many people will pre-judge it.

    • Justin like to have this argument about police brutality against black people every few months. He doesn’t get it and he will never get it. It is nice to belong to the privileged class!

  • Why are they having this march at noon? You’d think that more people – i.e. the ones who don’t work for restaurants closing today – would participate if this was held after people get off of work. I’m guessing that this is being held so early because the city would block a march from happening during rush hour, though the marchers could have just stuck to the sidewalks.

    • It is convenient for those that do work for restaurants that may not be closed for the day. Most of their shifts would start for dinner service, making their shifts begin at around 3pm.

      • That’s fine, but essentially knee caps any chance of this march bringing in people who don’t work in the industry. The organizers could have included an evening gathering at Lafayette Square so that people who wanted to support the cause but who had 9-5 jobs could join.

        • You can get involved in other ways. Don’t spend money today. Amplify their voices. Call your congressional members or encourage those who are represented in congress to do so. Have a conversation with someone who may not understand the issue. They didn’t fail by not making the march convenient enough to those who work 9 to 5. To some, this issue is important enough to take a day or a half day from work, others won’t be able to, so they do other things. This is not about you, or your convenience, if you support it, then support it, in any way you are able to.

          • Way to take the high road in response to my question by saying that it’s not about me. Class act. The organizers are holding a march in a city that voted 90% democrat. These are not the people they need to be convincing that immigrants are important.

          • It is not a low road to remind you and others like you that your convenience is not a priority. The fact that it offends you so much is the alarming concern. It seems that any reminder that your support will require selflessness and empathy is utterly damning. Also, I guess you don’t know anyone outside of the city? I guess your social media, phone service, and general communication only involve those that reside within the city limits?

          • News flash, this is the nation’s capital. This is where people protest things. Anythings. Sorry you can’t get a latte this afternoon.

          • justinbc

            “Sorry you can’t get a latte this afternoon.”
            This myopic point of view towards someone who is telling you that they’re sympathetic to your cause is why things like this continually flame out. Don’t burn your bridges. And the focus that people keep having on minimum wage, unskilled labor does a major disservice to the immigrant population not just in the U.S. but especially in this region. Imagine if your doctor didn’t show up to perform surgery because he’s Iranian, or the public defender from Colombia just decided to take the day off and not help any clients. What if your accountant is from Korea and he decides just not to file your taxes this year. Those are big, sweeping impacts to people’s lives that they take for granted, a lot more than a freaking latte.

          • CapHillNative, it “offends me so much” because I am sympathetic to what the protest is about but can’t make it. For some reason that required you to say that people like me (i.e. those who couldn’t march at noon) don’t really matter. Can I contact Congressional members from outside DC? Sure. Can I try to find someone who doesn’t share my views and tell them that this is important? Absolutely. The trouble is that you are approaching these things as substitutes to gathering with like-minded people, and all I’m saying is that it would have been nice for their to be a continuation of events later in the day. Sheesh.

            As for James W., spending a couple of extra seconds reading would have helped you realize that no one was against people closing up shops today.

          • @MadMax, you seem completely dismissive of the value of provocation. You don’t have to like me to get the point. This isn’t a toothpaste commercial, it’s a campaign for social change.

          • James W. – I think this is precisely the point that Justin fails to understand. They don’t require too many history electives for those in IT, and I think it clearly shows here with his relative lack of understanding about how the fight for civil rights transpired in the 20th century.

          • HaileUnlikely

            Anon – that was a gratuitous ad hominem attack and also a bad analogy.

          • justinbc

            Ignoring the ad hominem aspect of it, it’s also just patently incorrect with their respect to my background. I’ve never worked in IT, not sure where this clueless troll picked that up. I was actually a history and political science major in undergrad, not that one needs a degree to understand societal woes.

Comments are closed.