De la Torre, Navarrette on 187

Re “Many a Slip ‘Twixt Passage and Enforcement,” Commentary, Nov. 16:

The intellectually dishonest attempt by Adela de la Torre to propagandize the issue of Prop. 187 was shown by her choice of the word “immigrant” instead of the correct term “illegal immigrant.” Citing actions of the Nazis to stigmatize Prop. 187 proponents is extremely offensive and morally bankrupt. De la Torre characterizes Prop. 187 as “immigration reform”; it has nothing to do with immigration reform, but is an attempt to prevent illegal activities and limit the damage caused by those illegal activities.

However, the most destructive part of the commentary is her attempt to racialize the issue. We are told that when “Anglo voters . . . cross ethnic lines to vote for Latinos” this is a phenomenon that reflects “the real political revolution,” but that “the white electorate” (presumably simply by voting for Anglo candidates) “still determines the political fate of many Latinos, African Americans, and others disenfranchised from our political system.” It is sadly obvious who is trying to play the race card and divide the state.

CHARLES M. MESSALL II

Newport Beach

*

* The piece from Ruben Navarrette Jr., “At the Birth of a New--and Younger--Latino Activism” (Nov. 13), was unfortunately nothing new from activists of his stripe. Instead of attempting to understand the meaning of the Nov. 8 election (specifically the Prop. 187 vote), Navarrette chooses to ignore possible shortcomings in current Latino positions on the issues affecting this segment of the population. For Navarrette, the fault of 187’s passage lies in not having enough soldiers to vote the “right” way. I beg to differ.

While I applaud the prospect of increased Latino political participation, continued alliance and reliance on more government programs to create opportunity may prevent this movement from generating the credibility it so eagerly craves. Government’s attempts to remedy the plight of urban, ethnic constituencies have failed over the last 40 years. The thought of securing political clout in order to re-travel this path seems nonsensical. But liberal leaders and scholars, like Navarrette, never get the message.

Instead, I suggest Latino leaders promote private-sector solutions, individual empowerment and less reliance on the government (from all levels), to pursue the real meaning of the American Dream.

The path of separatism, long the chosen route for many Latinos, has not gotten our people anywhere. True economic and cultural respect can only be gained by working within the societal framework, not by the incessant drumbeats of how we are different.

JOHN C. HERNANDEZ

Claremont