Saturday, February 01, 2025

Oil, Minerals, and Crypto — Corporate America Has Big Plans for Greenland

A Trump takeover of Greenland could open the door to tech moguls’ mineral interests and their utopian aspirations.

January 31, 2025
Source: The Lever





President Donald Trump started his second term with his sights set on Greenland.

When Trump first proposed buying the arctic nation during his first administration, it was treated like a joke. But in a phone call last week with Denmark’s prime minister, who controls the autonomous territory’s foreign policy, the president doubled down on his efforts to seize power. In the “aggressive and confrontational” conversation, Trump threatened tariffs if he didn’t get his way. In a news conference earlier this month, he also refused to rule out the use of military force. Now Denmark is taking him seriously: on Monday, it announced a $2 billion military expansion in the Arctic.

Though the island is not for sale, the president emphasized Greenland’s importance to US national security. Left unspoken: a US takeover could weaken the country’s mining laws and ban on private property, aiding Trump donors’ plans to profit from the island’s mineral deposits and build a libertarian techno-city.

Trump, who has summarized his own natural resources policy as “drill, baby, drill,” would likely approach the island’s natural resources quite differently from Greenland’s current government, which has opposed large extractive projects.

In 2019, Trump’s ambassador to Denmark and Greenland visited a major rare-earth mining project on the island shortly before Trump’s first calls to buy the country. Opposition to the mine ushered liberal political party Inuit Ataqatigiit into power two years later, which halted the mine and banned all future oil development.

The president’s renewed intention to take over Greenland has reignited debates over its sovereignty, as the country grapples with the trade-offs between economic opportunity and independence from Denmark. As the country’s glaciers recede, it’s also facing sweeping climate-driven transformations, threatening traditional industries like fishing and hunting and exposing valuable mineral resources.

These shifts have prompted interest from powerful players associated with Trump. Tech moguls in the front row of his inauguration, like Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos, are also investors in a start-up aiming to mine western Greenland for materials crucial to the artificial intelligence boom.

That company, KoBold Metals, uses artificial intelligence to locate and extract rare earth minerals. Their proprietary algorithm parses government-funded geological surveys and other data to locate significant deposits. The program pinpointed southwest Greenland’s rugged coastline, where the company now has a 51 percent stake in the Disko-Nuussuaq project, searching for minerals like copper.

Just two weeks before some of its investors were glad-handing at the Capitol celebrations, KoBold Metals raised $537 million in its latest funding round, bringing its valuation to almost $3 billion. Among the contributors was a leading venture capital firm founded by Marc Andreessen, an early Silicon Valley entrepreneur who has helped shape the administration’s technology policies, including consulting with Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency as a self-proclaimed “unpaid intern.”

“We believe in adventure,” Andreessen wrote in a lengthy 2023 manifesto that outlined his criticisms of centralized government, advocating for technologists to take control, “rebelling against the status quo, mapping uncharted territory, conquering dragons, and bringing home the spoils for our community.” Connie Chan, a general partner at his venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, is listed as a KoBold director in its 2022 Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

In addition to KoBold, Andreessen has also backed other ventures eyeing the arctic nation: he is a significant investor in Praxis Nation, a project aiming to use Greenland to establish a “crypto state,” a self-governing, experimental community built around libertarian ideals and technology like cryptocurrency.

The venture is also funded in part by Pronomos Capital, a venture capital group founded by the grandson of economist Milton Friedman and bankrolled by libertarian figures such as Peter Thiel, whose own family reportedly managed a uranium mine in Namibia. Pronomos aims to create private, business-friendly charter cities like Praxis, often in developing countries where investors could write their own laws and regulations.

These “broligarchs” now have the ear of the president. Thiel has been a significant supporter of Trump, throwing millions of dollars behind him throughout his political career and introducing him to current Vice President J. D. Vance.

Most notable, in December, Trump announced Thiel’s partner Ken Howery as his Danish ambassador, making his intentions explicitly clear: “The United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity,” he wrote on TruthSocial, his social media platform.

Greenland’s prime minister MĂște Egede flatly rejected the idea, responding on Facebook, “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale. We must not lose our long struggle for freedom.”
When the Price Is Too High

For centuries, the fight to control Greenland has revolved around its natural resources. The ice-gripped country has been part of Denmark since 1721 when a merchant-backed missionary expedition sought to spread Christianity to its Inuit population — and expand whaling and trade routes.

Greenland gained autonomy from Denmark in 1979, though the Danes continued to control its foreign relations and defense, allowing the United States to build and operate military bases there. In a 2008 referendum, Greenlanders voted for greater independence, allowing them to take control of their natural resources along with other state functions.

That same year, the US Geological Survey found the country had one of the world’s largest potential oil and gas reserves. More recent estimates suggest that the Arctic could hold 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30 percent of its undiscovered natural gas. The report drew the attention of major oil companies like ConocoPhillips, Chevron, and BP, which began acquiring exploration licenses and conducting surveys around Greenland and its offshore areas.

But producing oil in such harsh conditions is difficult and expensive due to high transportation costs and infrastructure limitations. ExxonMobil, for example, withdrew its application in 2013, as a downward trend in oil prices made further development economically unfeasible.

When Siumut, a pro-independence political party, came into power earlier that year, leader Aleqa Hammond declared the country would instead transition to mineral extraction, saying, “If we want greater autonomy from Denmark, we have to finance it ourselves. This means finding new sources of income.” In 2014, the government announced a four-year national plan to create “new income and employment opportunities in the area of mineral resources activities.”

Because Greenland’s vast mineral deposits often contain uranium, however, the burgeoning mining industry quickly came into conflict with Denmark’s strict policy against extracting radioactive materials. Denmark chose not to develop nuclear energy in the 1980s, and has comparatively strict regulations around radiation protections.

One of the measures the Siumut-led government took in 2014 was proposing a bill that would have limited public access to environmental information and decision-making processes around mineral extraction. It also lowered environmental standards for uranium mining.

The bill failed to pass, but with Siumut’s support, an international project hoping to extract uranium and rare-earth metals gained preliminary approval. The Australian-based company Greenland Minerals (now called Energy Transition Minerals) found backing from Chinese Shenghe Resources Holdings, and brought Trump’s Greenland ambassador Carla Sands to the site for a visit in July 2019. The following month, Trump announced he wanted to buy the island, comparing it to “a large real estate deal.”

Sands, a former chiropractor and soap opera actress, now works for the America First Policy Institute, a conservative think tank concerned with strengthening the US mineral supply chains, among other nationalist issues.

Energy Transition Minerals’ proposed mine triggered massive controversy: concerns over the potential impact on critical fishing industries and food supplies ushered the Siumut party out of decades of power in 2021. “There is an ongoing, generational dialectic,” says Barry Zellen, a senior fellow of Arctic Security at the Institute of the North, between pro-development and pro-subsistence movements “that tends to swing pendularly.”

As the more left-leaning Inuit Ataqatigiit party took over, it quickly passed a law reinstating limits around uranium that revoked Energy Transition Minerals’ permits and banned all future oil and gas exploration.

“The price of oil extraction is too high,” the party wrote in a statement at the time. “This is based upon economic calculations, but considerations of the impact on climate and the environment also play a central role in the decision.”

These kinds of environmental protections are exactly what Trump aims to remove from American mining. On his own first day in office, one of Trump’s many executive orders directed government officials to remove “undue burdens” on the industry, so that the United States could become “the leading producer and processor of nonfuel minerals, including rare earth minerals.”
“I Went to Greenland to Try to Buy It”

The push for control of the arctic country comes as deep-pocketed investors like Andreessen have been drawn to start-ups hoping to build experimental enclaves, sold by the promise of freedom from the constraints of government.

Proposals for these cryptostates have sprung up in Honduras, Nigeria, the Marshall Islands, and Panama, the latter of which Trump has also recently proposed taking over by military force. While each concept looks a little different, often the sales pitch includes replacing taxes and regulations with cryptocurrency and blockchain.

For Praxis, these utopian dreams have led to Greenland, which is often incorrectly imagined as an unpopulated frontier. “I went to Greenland to try to buy it,” Praxis founder Dryden Brown posted on X in November, noting he first became interested in the island “when Trump offered to buy it in 2019.” Once in Nuuk, he learned that the country has long sought independence from Denmark and that many Greenlanders support sovereignty, though the country remains reliant on Denmark for financial support. It currently receives $500 million a year in Danish subsidies that account for 20 percent of the economy.

“They do not want to be ‘bought,’” Brown belatedly discovered, concluding, “There is an obvious opportunity here.” He proposed taxes from an independently run city like Praxis could help replace Danish subsidies.

Greenland, however, does not allow private property, an arrangement that historically has given communities a stronger voice in determining how or if its natural resources are developed — and could prove a problem for Brown’s planned utopia. But perhaps that could change under a new government.

On Monday, in response to a post referencing “Trump’s projects related to Greenland,” Praxis’s official X account — whose bio reads “We’re meant for more” below a version of the endeavor’s hallucinogenic flag — boasted about “A new post-state in the far North.”

The start-up “nation” has raised $525 million, though Brown, who dropped out of New York University and was fired from his last hedge fund job, hasn’t shared many specifics on Praxis’s website about his proposal for Greenland. (His previous efforts to build a city somewhere in the Mediterranean have also so far remained vague, beyond a branding guide that focused on “traditional, European/Western beauty standards” and recruiting tech employees with “hot girls.”)

But other tech tycoons’ plans for the island are more concrete.
“This Is About Critical Minerals”

Greenland is warming at a much faster rate than the rest of the planet, causing its glaciers to precipitously retreat. As the ice recedes, these valuable deposits are becoming more accessible. A 2023 European Commission survey revealed that Greenland has twenty-five out of thirty-four minerals classified as critical raw materials, or resources that are essential to the green energy transition but have a high risk of disrupted supply chains. The country boasts some of the world’s largest deposits of nickel and cobalt, and collectively, its mineral reserves almost equal those of the United States.

This wealth of resources has drawn the attention of companies like KoBold Metals, whose Silicon Valley backers have a vested interest in supplying materials for the tech industry.

KoBold has positioned itself as providing critical solutions for climate change, facilitating a global reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by supplying the materials needed for batteries and other renewable technologies. The company hailed President Joe Biden’s use of the Defense Production Act to encourage mining in 2022, along with the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures to subsidize international mining for rare earth minerals.

In Greenland, KoBold Metals’ exploration licenses focus on searching for nickel, copper, cobalt, and platinum-group minerals — materials important for green energy, but also for data centers’ rapid growth.

KoBold’s primary development so far has been developing a copper mine in Zambia, the largest such find in a century. Copper is used as a key material in the construction of data centers, and is crucial for artificial intelligence’s infrastructure. The AI boom is expected to nearly double the demand for copper by 2050. “We invested in KoBold,” OpenAI chief executive officer Sam Altman said, to “find new deposits.”

Its Zambia venture, too, has been part of a global power struggle, as the Biden administration backed the development of a railway to transport metals from the region to a port in Angola. The initiative was part of a broader US effort to counter China’s growing presence in Africa, offering investments as an alternative to its Belt and Road Initiative, a trade and infrastructure package.

KoBold’s top executive, however, likes to focus on lithium. “The growth [of lithium demand] is sort of staggering,” KoBold CEO Kurt House said in a 2023 presentation at Stanford. “It’s like a 30x increase in global production that you need.” One of the places the United States might turn to for this critical mineral is Greenland, where promising deposits were recently discovered.

“Everyone wants to have lithium” for its role in creating batteries, says Majken D. Poulsen, a geologist at the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. She explains the first exploration for lithium in Greenland was just conducted last summer in collaboration with the US State Department. Under Biden, the agency also helped the country draft a mining investment law, aimed at encouraging investment in Greenland.

Though quite different in tone, Trump’s Greenland bluster shares similar goals. Charlie Byrd, an investment manager at global assets management firm Cordiant Capital, is one of many investors now hoping the president’s gambit will result in policy changes that are more favorable to foreign investment. “There is no doubt that that would lead to bigger institutional involvement and more strategic investment,” he told trade publication Institutional Investor this week.

Much of this interest is driven by tensions with China, which currently accounts for around 70 percent of global rare-earth mining and 90 percent of its processing. This gives the Asian powerhouse enormous leverage over global tech supply chains.

Control over the minerals that power technology has become a major form of soft power, pulling invisible strings in global markets and shaping alliances. That makes mining regulations in Greenland a geopolitical chess move.

Today “regulations from the government of Greenland are quite high,” the Geological Survey’s Poulsen explains. “They have really strict regulations,” she says, including both environmental and social considerations, like “local benefits such as taxes, local workforce, local companies, [and] education.”

Michael Waltz, Trump’s incoming national security advisor, appeared to confirm that gaining access to the country’s minerals was driving Trump’s interest. “This is about critical minerals; this is about natural resources,” he told Fox News.
“You Can’t Put a Name on Land”

Glaciers loomed through Trump Force One’s cockpit window as Greenland’s coast unspooled behind a bobblehead of the forty-seventh president, his plastic bouffant bobbing in the turbulence. Dropping through the sharp, thin air, the plane delivered Donald Trump Jr to the island’s capital of Nuuk in early January with his father’s message: we intend to take over.

The tour de force — which included bribing people to participate in photo shoots — failed to win over many Greenlanders, says Inuuteq Kriegel, a Nuuk resident. “We don’t want to be Americans. We don’t want to be Danish. We’re Greenlanders,” he said.

A week after Trump Jr’s trip, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) introduced the Make Greenland Great Again Act, instructing Congress to support Trump’s negotiations with Denmark to acquire Greenland immediately. (Ogles is currently the subject of an FBI probe around his campaign finance filings and last week announced an amendment that would allow Trump to run for a third term.)

“It might sound crazy, and one might ask, ‘Why would you want Greenland?’” Ogles said in a recent video. He was speaking with Kuno Fencker, a member of Greenland’s parliament representing the Siumut party, who had traveled to Washington, DC. “Your security interest is our security interest,” Ogles told Fencker. “Our ability to make best use of your minerals, your resources, and your riches — to benefit your people and ours — is in our best interest.”

Fencker, who says taxes and royalties from the island’s minerals and fossil fuels could pave the way for the island’s independence, responded, “We have other vast resources, like oil and gas, but that has been stopped by the current government. But my personal view is that we have to utilize those resources.”

Fencker’s US trip ignited local controversy. Typically Greenland’s international negotiations require coordination and approval from Denmark; imagine someone like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) single-handedly deciding to negotiate with the European Union without congressional approval. Fencker’s party said he was not authorized to discuss Greenland’s foreign affairs, while Fencker defended his travel as a private mission at his own expense.

The rogue nature of recent developments has been reinforced by bombastic press coverage. In Greenland, Kriegel says foreign reporters “often talk to the loud people — and often the same people — and they can generalize a whole population by speaking to only a few.” His own social networks are deeply uncomfortable with Trump’s attempts to purchase the country.

Trump and his tech donors’ eagerness to seize Greenland, existing culture and laws be damned, are “representative of a particular colonial and extractive worldview,” wrote Anne Merrild Hansen, professor of social science and arctic oil and gas studies at the University of Greenland. The approach treats land and resources as commodities to be claimed, regardless of the rights or interests of the people who live there.

All the unwelcome commotion, however, has succeeded in delivering one change: Kriegel says the country is now unified in wanting to find a path to independence from Denmark, even if there’s not yet agreement on how to do so.

“You can’t put a name on land,” he says. “Land belongs to the people. It’s a part of us, and we’re part of it.”


Lois Parshley is an award-winning investigative journalist. Her wide-ranging reporting has been published at the New Yorker, Harper’s, the New York Times, Businessweek, National Geographic, and more.
Benin seeks home-grown cotton ‘revolution’


By AFP
February 1, 2025


Mathias Azonnoudo says Benin authorities are encouraging cotton growers to produce more - Copyright AFP Ahmad SAHEL ARMAN

Kadiatou SAKHO

Mathias Azonnoudo, a 50-year-old farmer in Benin, was taking a break sitting on a large pile of freshly picked cotton, which the government hopes will feed the country’s nascent textile revolution.

Azonnoudo and other farmers in the West African country have benefited from a recent uptick in demand for cotton, with the government seeking to launch a “Made in Benin” clothing industry.

“I feel like the government has found business leaders that want more, so they are encouraging farmers to produce more,” said Azonnoudo, who has been growing cotton for the past 16 years.

Benin has long vied with Mali for the title of Africa’s largest cotton producer, exporting mostly raw fibres for processing abroad to countries like Bangladesh or China, the world’s largest garment exporters.

But it now wants to process more of its “white gold” locally, to boost production and exports of 100 percent Beninese clothing.

Benin is expected to produce 669,000 tonnes of cotton during the 2024-2025 season, according to data from the Regional Program for Integrated Cotton Production in Africa.

Mali meanwhile is set to produce 569,000 tonnes in the season.

Under the initiative of Benin’s President Patrice Talon — who made his fortune from cotton in the 1990s and 2000s, earning him the nickname “King of Cotton” — authorities are racing to consolidate the nation’s lead.

– ‘All the infrastructure we need’ –


Those ambitions came to life in 2020 with the creation of the Glo-Djigbe Industrial Zone (GDIZ), a vast manufacturing district 45 kilometres (30 miles) from the economic capital Cotonou in the south of the country.

Samples of the various clothing made locally are now on display in the zone’s showroom, including shirts, trousers, dresses and military and police uniforms. It also produces towels and sheets.

The industrial park, financed as a partnership between the government and Indian businessman Gagan Gupta, offers spinning, weaving, dyeing and knitting facilities.

Last year, GDIZ exported its first items of clothing to the French brand Kiabi.

“We have all the infrastructure we need to process agricultural products,” said Letondji Beheton, managing director of the company running GDIZ, adding that it worked with around 21,000 farmers throughout the country.

“Today at GDIZ, we transform 40,000 tonnes of cotton a year and produce between seven and 10 million garments a year,” he said.

With three new garment manufacturing units in the pipeline, production in the industrial zone is expected to grow further by year-end.

– Trust the process –


Upon ascending to the president in 2016, Talon took a number of measures to support the cotton industry, in particular by giving more room to the private sector at the expense of state-owned companies.

Benin “now processes a third of its cotton,” according to Nestor Adjovi Ahoyo, an agro-economist.

The transformation is mainly taking place at the GDIZ but also to a lesser extent at smaller businesses.

At Couleur Indigo, a clothing and jewelry brand in the coastal town of Ouidah, 50-year-old Nadia Adanle said she opened her boutique in 2007 to “contribute to the diversification of Beninese craftsmanship” and offer “an authentic, purely Beninese cotton product”.

In the short term, Beninese authorities say they are aiming to process “50 percent of the cotton produced in Benin and export the remaining 50 percent”, Adjovi Ahoyo said.

To achieve this, he said, Benin must increase production capacity and attract investors, especially foreigners.

For his part, Beheton at the GDIZ said that within five to six years the country will have “about 30 integrated textile units in the zone to process almost all” of Benin’s cotton.
Tradition and technology sync at China ‘AI temple fair’


By AFP
February 1, 2025


A dancing humanoid robot gyrates to music at a fair in Beijing during China's week-long Lunar New Year holidays. - © AFP Pedro PARDO


Matthew WALSH

A humanoid robot gyrates to pulsing music at a shopping mall in Beijing, part of an exhibition harnessing artificial intelligence to enhance the flavour of China’s biggest annual festival.

The country is celebrating the eight-day Lunar New Year holiday that typically sees people return home to eat, drink and make merry with family and friends.

From dragon dances to incense offerings, the festival is also a time to nurture centuries-old traditions — though in this corner of the capital, they come with a high-tech twist.

Billed as an “AI temple fair”, the event in Beijing’s well-heeled Haidian district is a chance for local technology firms to display their products to the public.

“(Robots) can already do a lot of things, like take things off the shelves and make coffee,” said Sophia Wu as she strolled among silicon shop assistants and binary baristas.

“I’d love to have a robot, and then it could do all my chores for me, and that would free up a lot of my time,” the 48-year-old housewife and retired engineer told AFP.

A troupe of robots manufactured by Hangzhou-based tech firm Unitree made global headlines this week after they performed a synchronised dance on China’s Spring Festival TV gala.

The singular dancer in the mall, however, put on a more modest show, staying rooted on the ground while jerkily swaying its hips and arms.


A humanoid robot in traditional Chinese costume answers questions at an AI-themed temple fair in Beijing. — © AFP

Described as a “high-quality human imitation robot” called Xiao Xin, it was capable of communicating with people and making tiny adjustments to the expressions on its lifelike prosthetic face, a display placard said.

Nearby, a visitor tentatively asked a life-size humanoid dressed as China’s traditional wealth god what it had eaten for breakfast.

“This morning, I enjoyed a hearty breakfast that included fresh fruit, delicious fried eggs, and sweet bread,” the robot replied in a resounding baritone, shaking its wispy beard and glittering crimson robe.

“I hope that in the new year, you can also eat healthily and deliciously, and be happy every day.”

– ‘Charm of robots’ –


Elsewhere, a motley band of automated musicians cranked out holiday songs on analogue instruments, and finely tuned robotic arms wielded ink brushes to write calligraphy on thick red paper.


Robots are seen during the Spring Festival Science and Technology Temple Fair in Beijing on January 31, 2025.. — © AFP

Waiting for his scroll to dry, Bai Song, 34, said the exhibition had left him with a “deep impression of the charm of robots”.

“Every era inevitably produces different things. It’s possible that AI will replace some of us, but there will also be new jobs, or new types of work,” the IT professional told AFP.

“Also, we’re a socialist country, so there’s no way that people’s lives are suddenly going to get worse, because the state will provide our safety net.”

China leads the world in some advanced technologies and aims to achieve global supremacy in AI by the end of the decade.

An AI chatbot developed by Chinese start-up DeepSeek sent shockwaves through the industry this week with its R1 programme that can match American competitors seemingly at a fraction of the cost.

Still, not everything at the AI temple fair seemed quite so disruptive just yet.


Robots vie for the ball during an exhibition football match at a fair in Beijing during China’s week-long Lunar New Year holidays. © AFP

A robotic koi carp repeatedly swam into the wall of its water-filled enclosure, and two semi-automated football teams plodded around an indoor pitch, colliding with each other and scuffing their kicks.

On the touchline, Cheng Cheng, a software development engineer at manufacturer Booster Robotics, said the company was working on “research-oriented applications” like refining foot and hand movements and interactions with AI.

Despite the scrappy game — won 5-2 by a pair of robots in pink jerseys — the 36-year-old was upbeat about the firm’s future prospects.

“This is a starting point for us to make our robots more robust and fall-resistant… (and to) enhance their strength,” he told AFP.

NORTH AMERICAN BLACK HISTORY MONTH *    

The Black librarian who rewrote the rules of power, gender — and passing as white


The Conversation
February 1, 2025 

A 1910 watercolor portrait of Belle da Costa Greene by Laura Coombs Hills. The Morgan Library & Museum, New York, gift of the Estate of Belle da Costa


“Just Because I am a Librarian doesn’t mean I have to dress like one.”

With this breezy pronouncement, Belle da Costa Greene handily differentiated herself from most librarians.

She stood out for other reasons, too.

In the early 20th century – a time when men held most positions of authority – Greene was a celebrated book agent, a curator and the first director of the Morgan Library. She also earned US$10,000 a year, about $280,000 today, while other librarians were making roughly $400.

She was also a Black woman who passed as white.

Born in 1879, Belle was the daughter of two light-skinned Black Americans, Genevieve Fleet and Richard T. Greener, the first Black man to graduate from Harvard. When the two separated in 1897, Fleet changed the family’s last name to Greene and, along with her five children, crossed the color line. Belle Marion Greener became Belle da Costa Greene – the “da Costa” a subtle claim to her Portuguese ancestry.



One of the nine known portraits of Belle da Costa Greene that photographer Clarence H. White made in 1911.
Biblioteca Berenson, I Tatti, the Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies

When banking magnate J.P. Morgan sought a librarian in 1905, his nephew Junius Morgan recommended Greene, who had been one of his co-workers at the Princeton Library.

Henceforth, Greene’s life didn’t just kick into a higher gear. It was supercharged. She became a lively fixture at social gatherings among America’s wealthiest families. Her world encompassed Gilded Age mansions, country retreats, rare book enclaves, auction houses, museums and art galleries. Bold, vivacious and glamorous, the keenly intelligent Greene attracted attention wherever she went.

I found myself drawn to the worlds Greene entered and the people she described in her lively letters to her lover, art scholar Bernard Berenson. In 2024, I published a book, “Becoming Belle Da Costa Greene,” which explores her voice, her self-invention, her love of art and literature, and her path-breaking work as a librarian.


Yet I’m often asked whether Greene mentions her passing as white in her writings. She did not. Greene was one of hundreds of thousands of light-skinned Black Americans who passed as white in the Jim Crow era. While speculation about Greene’s background circulated in her lifetime, nothing was confirmed until historian Jean Strouse revealed the identities of Greene’s parents in her 1999 biography, “Morgan: American Financier.” Until that point, only Greene’s mother and siblings knew the story of their Black heritage.

“Passing” can often raise more questions than answers. But Greene did not largely define herself through one category, such as her racial identity. Instead, she constructed a self through the things she loved.
‘I love this life – don’t you?’


In my view, any consideration of Greene’s attitudes toward her own race must remain an open question. And uncertainty can be acknowledged – even embraced – with judgments suspended.

The Morgan Library & Museum currently has an exhibition on Greene that will run until May 4, 2025 – one that’s already generated debates about Greene and the significance of her passing.

One section of the exhibition, “Questioning the Color Line,” includes novels on passing, paintings such as Archibald J. Motley Jr.’s “The Octoroon Girl,” photographs of Greene, and clips from Oscar Micheaux’s 1932 film “Veiled Aristocrats” and John M. Stahl’s 1934 film “Imitation of Life,” which portray painful scenes between white-passing characters and their family members.


None of these objects clarifies Greene’s particular relationship to passing. Instead, they place the librarian within melodramatic and conventional representations about passing that stress self-division and angst.

We don’t know – perhaps we will never know – whether Greene had similar moments of self-doubt.


Greene frequently received glowing press coverage.
The Morgan Library & Museum

Yet some critics have concluded as much. In his review of the exhibition for The New Yorker, critic Hilton Als laments what Greene’s passing had cost her. He describes her as a “girl who loved power,” a woman who “became a member of another race – not Black or white but alternately grandiose and self-despising.”

There’s a lot of certainty in such a pronouncement – and scant evidence furnished to support such declarations.


New York Times columnist John McWhorter takes issue with Als’s depiction of the librarian’s passing in a Jan. 23, 2025, article.

Citing passages from her letters in which Greene excitedly describes reading the Arabic folktales “The Thousand and One Nights” and seeing exhibitions of modern art, McWhorter asks readers to reconsider this “witty, puckish soul who savored books and art” and “had an active social life.”

What if Greene gave her race little thought, McWhorter wonders. What if she simply saw the notion of race and racial categorization as “a fiction” and instead lived her life to its fullest? Of course, her light skin afforded her the opportunity that other Black people of her era didn’t have. But does that necessarily mean that she was self-loathing or conflicted?


“[W]e are all wearing trousers and I love them,” Greene writes in one letter to Berenson, adding, “The Library grows more wonderful every day and I am terribly happy in my work here … I love this life – don’t you?”

Greene’s vitality captivated Berenson, who once described the librarian as “incredibly and miraculously responsive.”

The connoisseur was not the only contemporary who admired Greene’s effervescence. In “The Living Present,” an account of the activities of women before and after World War II, Greene’s friend Gertrude Atherton paid tribute to Greene, a “girl so fond of society, so fashionable in dress and appointments” that she could impress any stranger with her “overflowing joie de vivre.”

Crafting an aura

Viewed through a more expansive lens, Greene’s passing can be seen as part of an exercise in self-fashioning and self-invention.

Greene dressed to be noticed – and she was. Meta Harrsen, the librarian Greene hired in 1922, offers a rare eye-witness account. On the day Greene interviewed Harrsen, “she wore a dress of dark red Italian brocade shot with silver threads, a gold braided girdle, and an emerald necklace.”

Greene understood well the power of clothes to project a distinct identity – a highly crafted one in this case, and one befitting a connoisseur of rare books.


Greene poses for a Time magazine portrait in 1915.
The Morgan Library & Museum

At that, she excelled. She became known for her stunning acquisition coups: her purchase of 16 rare editions of the works of English printer William Caxton at an auction; her procurement of the highly coveted Crusader’s Bible through a private negotiation; and her acquisition of the Spanish Apocalypse Commentary, a medieval text written by a Spanish monk that Greene was able to buy at a steep discount.

To me, a 1915 photo captures Greene’s confidence and aura more than any other image of the librarian.

She posed in her home and wasn’t shot in soft focus with a studio backdrop as other photographs tend to portray her. Sitting on the arm of a large chair upholstered in a tapestry weave, she wears an elaborate hat with a large ostrich plume, a high-necked blouse under a long, loosely belted jacket with a ruffled cuff over a long dark skirt. The decor is no less striking: Flemish tapestries decorate the walls behind her, and a liturgical vestment is draped over the bookcase. Looking directly at the viewer, Greene is assured and poised.

Greene’s stylish flair was not simply decorative. It was a testament to her vibrant personality and the joy she took in her work. Rather than judge her according to contemporary notions of racial identity, I prefer to marvel over her achievements and how she became a model for generations of future librarians.

Greene didn’t just pass. She surpassed – in spectacular ways.

Deborah W. Parker, Professor of Italian, University of Virginia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


* UK BLACK HISTORY MONTH IS OCTOBER
The Evolving Strategy for Defending Immigrant Workers

January 30, 2025
Source: Rosa Luxemburg Foundation


SAN FRANCISCO, CA - 24MARCH17 - San Francisco janitors and other workers supporting AB 450, a bill introduced by Assembly Member David Chiu, to protect workers during immigration raids and enforcement actions. Copyright David Bacon

The current fight within the Republican Party highlights, once again, that ensuring a steady labor supply for corporations remains Trump’s primary focus. I say “once again” because this mirrors what happened in 2017, when he met with corporate growers to assure them that his immigration enforcement would not deprive them of workers in the fields. In fact, that is just what happened with the expansion of the H-2A guest worker visa program and the absence of mass firings of farmworkers at critical times because of their undocumented status.

Two months ago, construction companies in Texas made media appeals, not for more border enforcement, but urging Trump not to use enforcement to deprive them of workers. Now, the tech industry is demanding more workers too. The supply of workers for the tech industry “simply does not exist in America in sufficient quantity,” according to Tesla owner and billionaire Elon Musk. Tech corporate titans, including Google’s Sundar Pichai, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos all visited Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate during and after the campaign, making the same demand. Just before New Year, Trump responded by saying, “I have many H-1B visas on my properties. I’ve been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It’s a great program.” In his hotels and golf courses, he has also used another Federal guestworker visa program, H-2B, to supply gardeners and housekeepers.

Whether for tech titans or corporate growers, the key issue is supplying workers at a price employers want to pay. Agriculture and construction laborers are just two industries built on a workforce at close to minimum wage. Guestworker contract labor programs in these industries are structured to provide labor at that wage. Tech companies want to use the H-1B visa program to keep their software workforce at substandard wages as well. They all expect Trump to meet their demands, and poured money into his campaign to make sure that happened.

For defenders of immigrant workers, this is a threatening moment. Some immigrant workers, like the million-plus undocumented laborers in agriculture, will certainly feel the brunt of Trump’s threatened immigration enforcement. The corporate need for labor will not ultimately protect them. Employers, if given the opportunity to replace workers with others at lower wages, have no loyalty to their current workforce. However, it does give undocumented workers some leverage to resist raids, firings, and other forms of enforcement, where employers remain dependent on them. That can be a crucial protection. In addition, if unions and workers living here ally with contract workers under H-2A, H-2B, and H-1B visas to expose and protest abuses within these programs, it can further strengthen protections for all workers

The benefit of organized resistance goes beyond fighting raids and keeping jobs. Organizations and coalitions that defend immigrant workers, their families, and their communities have historically been the pillars of movements for deeper social change. They have shown great persistence and strategic vision, as they fought back against threats of deportation. More than that, they have imagined a future of greater equality, working-class rights, and social solidarity, and have proposed ways to get there. That vision, the capacity and willingness to fight for basic change, is as necessary to defeating repression as action in the streets

.
LOS ANGELES, CA – 22JULY11 – Los Angeles janitors, members of United Service Workers West SEIU, protest the firing of immigrant workers by Able Building Maintenence. The company has fired workers whose immigration status the company questions, even though the workers have been cleaning the buildings where they work for many years. In protest, workers marched through downtown Los Angeles at lunch hour, and sat down in an intersection, stopping traffic. Copyright David Bacon


Replacing Migrant Workers

Immigration enforcement does not exist on its own. It functions within a larger system designed to serve capitalist economic interests by ensuring a labor force for employers. Immigrant labor is more vital than ever to many industries. More than 50 percent of the entire agricultural workforce in the country is undocumented, and the list of other industries that rely on immigrant labor is long: meatpacking, some construction jobs, building cleaning, health care, restaurants, retail, hotels, and more.

Trump is not free to eliminate this workforce. This is potentially a source of power for workers. Employers know this, and within months of his inauguration in 2017, agribusiness executives were already meeting with him to ensure that threats of border closures and raids would not jeopardize their access to labor. Last month, Texas construction companies warned Trump that mass deportations would threaten their profits. In 2006, some California farmers bused workers to big marches in the hope that the Sensenbrenner Act would not deprive them of workers.

But workers, communities, and unions cannot rely on employers to fight Trump for them. What businesses seek is labor at a price they are willing to pay. The current system has served them well. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that about 8 million of the 11-12 million undocumented people in the United States are wage workers, most earning near or at the minimum wage. The abysmal federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour produces an annual income of $14,500. Even higher minimums in states like California result in incomes barely double that amount. The median household income for farmworkers is less than $25,000. Yet Social Security estimates the median wage in the United States at $66,000.

That huge gap is a source of enormous profits. If industries reliant on immigrant labor paid the national median wage, they would owe undocumented workers an additional $250 billion annually. The profits they make from low-paid labor are enormous. Trump’s role is to ensure not only the availability of labor but also that its cost remains acceptable to corporate employers.

In 2017, Trump assured farmers he would expand the contract labor system, which allows employers to hire up to a million workers annually. These workers can only come to work, not stay. Visa categories include the infamous H-2A program for agricultural labor, like the old bracero program of the 1950s. Last year, farmers received 378,513 H-2A visa certifications, one-sixth of the entire U.S. agricultural workforce. The program is notorious for exploitative practices, and recent reforms by Labor Secretary Julie Su are not going to survive. Similar programs are expanding into other sectors like hospitality, meatpacking, and even education.

Independent Senator Bernie Sanders, a democratic socialist, has criticized the H-1B visa program, primarily used by the tech industry. There its function, he says, “is not to hire ‘the best and the brightest,’ but rather to replace good-paying jobs with low-wage indentured servants from abroad. The cheaper the labor they hire, the more money the billionaires make.” While the number of new applications for those workers is capped at 66,000 per year, the limit is often exceeded. he visa lasts three years and can be renewed, resulting in a cumulative total of 619,327 H-1B workers in the U.S. by 2019, according to U.S. Customs and Immigration Services. Sanders pointed out that the top 30 corporations using this program laid off 85,000 American workers while hiring over 34,000 H-1B workers.

There is no way to recruit and deploy so many workers without displacing the existing workforce, which, in agriculture and meatpacking is largely made up of immigrants who already live here. For unions and worker advocates, this poses a dilemma. How can they organize and defend existing workers, including their members, while also defending those who replace them? The expansion of programs like H-2A and H-1B exacerbates this tension.

H-2A farmworkers, for instance, are not passive victims. Despite the risk of being fired, losing their visas, and facing blacklisting, they have a history of protesting exploitation when conditions become dire. Unions like Familias Unidas por la Justicia (FUJ) in Washington state have helped contract workers when strikes break out. However, employers often isolate workers, making organizing difficult. FUJ and other unions also protest against displacement, as job losses in farmworker communities lead to widespread hardship, including hunger and evictions.

In some farmworker localities, fear of being replaced is growing. Strikes to demand higher wages have become less frequent due to the risks involved. At the Ostrom mushroom plant in Washington state, United Farm Workers members have been striking for two years against replacement by H-2A visa workers.

By the early 1960s, the increasing willingness of braceros to leave their camps and join local workers’ strikes caused the program to lose popularity among growers. This shift contributed to its abolition. Trump’s labor policies may lead to similar challenges, but they also present opportunities for organizing and collective action.SAN FRANCISCO, CA – 24MARCH17 – San Francisco janitors and other workers supporting AB 450, a bill introduced by Assembly Member David Chiu, to protect workers during immigration raids and enforcement actions. Copyright David Bacon


Resistance in Working-Class Communities

For decades, immigration enforcement has combined workplace enforcement with community-based raids and sweeps. Chicago’s working-class neighborhoods have a long history of resisting these actions through large marches protesting immigration raids. In 2013, as President Obama entered his second term, activists, including members of Occupy Chicago, blocked buses transporting detainees to immigration courts. Labor activists, including Emma Lozano of the Center Without Borders, were arrested during these direct actions. Similar tactics were employed in Tucson, Arizona, where young people chained themselves to buses carrying detainees to specialized immigration courts.

Trump’s 2016 campaign promised to turn Chicago into a hotbed of enforcement. As the anti-immigrant hysteria promoted by his campaign spread, ICE began stopping people on the streets, knocking on apartment doors, and pulling people out for detention. The enforcement spree, which continued through 2019, included raids on street corners and sidewalks near Home Depot and other gathering spots for day laborers. The public presence of day laborers has historically made them a particular target of immigration street raids.

Activists responded to Trump’s threat with action. In 2019, thousands marched through the Loop, chanting “Immigrants are welcome here!” Protesters gathered in Federal Plaza when news broke of impending ICE deployments. Labor unions played a significant role in organizing these efforts. Don Villar, a Filipino immigrant and leader of the Chicago Federation of Labor, told protesters: “Throughout the labor movement’s history, immigrants have enriched the fabric of our city, our neighborhoods, our workforce, and our labor movement. Many of the fundamental rights that immigrants struggle to attain are the same rights the labor movement fights to secure for all workers every day.”

Chicago has also been the site of some of the most impactful direct actions against deportations. As President Obama prepared his re-election campaign in 2012, young undocumented immigrants—brought to the U.S. as children—occupied his campaign office. This occupation capped two years of organizing, including marches and fierce opposition to activist detentions. The pressure led to Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order, which provided temporary protection from deportation.

DACA has withstood a legal onslaught for a decade, but right-wing courts and the MAGA administration will no doubt try again to kill it. The program’s applicants, required to provide personal information, face the risk that this data could be used to locate and detain them if protections are revoked. A similar issue confronts beneficiaries of Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which allows people fleeing environmental or political crises to live and work in the U.S. Should Trump or others withdraw these protections, the government already possesses the information needed to target these individuals.

The most effective resistance to immigration enforcement in recent history came during the massive immigrant marches of 2006. Triggered by the passage of HR 4437 (the Sensenbrenner Act) in the House, millions marched on May Day. The bill sought to criminalize undocumented status, posing an existential threat to countless families. Spanish-language radio played a vital role in mobilizing participants, along with immigrant rights activists and organizations that rallied communities across the country.

Labor unions were prominent among the mobilizers, organizing one of two marches held on the same day in Los Angeles, each drawing more than a million participants. Unions and immigrant networks also organized marches of hundreds of thousands in cities across the country. The message was further strengthened by a grassroots movement, “A Day Without Mexicans,” which urged immigrant workers to stay home to demonstrate how essential their labor is. When some participants were fired on their return, some unions became involved in defending their right to protest.

The movement achieved its immediate goal: HR 4437 died in the Senate. But its cultural impact was just as important. May Day, long maligned during the Cold War as a “communist holiday,” was revived in the U.S. after 2006, aligning with global celebrations and marches are now held widely every year. Although not as large as in 2006, annual May Day marches continue to bring together progressive labor and community activists and could serve as a platform to challenge renewed deportation threats under Trump.

A similar bill, California’s Proposition 187, which sought to deny schools and medical care to undocumented children and families, had similar unintended consequences. It galvanized many immigrants in Los Angeles and their citizen children to become voters, contributing to the city and state’s leftward political shift. Today, labor wields significant political influence in Los Angeles—a city once known as the “Citadel of the Open Shop.”

Both May Day and the Day Without Immigrants became vehicles to protest Trump’s first inauguration. In San Francisco, members of several chapters of the Democratic Socialists of America marked the first May Day after Trump’s election with a direct action blocking ICE’s garage doors with a human chain, brandishing signs reading “Sanctuary for All” and “We Protect Our Community.” During these mobilizations, labor’s solidarity with immigrant workers facing raids deepened. Four unions publicly declared: “We will march and stand in solidarity with our immigrant worker brothers and sisters against the Trump administration’s terrorist tactics.”

EAST PALO ALTO, CA – 26FEBRUARY14 – Immigrants, workers, union members, people of faith and community activists demonstrated in front of the Mi Pueblo market in East Palo Alto, calling for a moratorium on deportations and the firing of undocumented workers because of their immigration status. Thousands of workers have been fired as a result of the audits of I-9 forms by the federal government, and the use of the E-Verify database, including hundreds at the Mi Pueblo markets. Almost 400,000 people have been deported every year for the past five years. The demonstration was organized by groups in Silicon Valley Copyright David Bacon


Defending Against Workplace Raids

In the decades following the Cold War, workers and unions developed increasingly sophisticated strategies to resist immigration enforcement. From factory floors to union halls, these battles helped shape today’s immigrant rights movement.

One of the earliest battles against workplace raids took place at the Kraco car radio factory in Los Angeles in the early 1980s. Workers who had joined the United Electrical Workers union stopped production lines, forcing the owner to deny entry to immigration agents, thereby protecting each other from deportation. Later, the Molders Union Local 164 in Oakland collaborated with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund to sue the Immigration and Naturalization Service over the practice of locking factory gates, detaining workers, and interrogating them without cause. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled the practice unconstitutional, affirming that agents cannot enter workplaces without a warrant or specific names.

In one of the Bush administration’s final raids in 2008, immigration agents took 481 workers from Howard Industries, a Mississippi electrical equipment manufacturer, to a private detention center in Jena, Louisiana. The detainees were held without charges, denied access to lawyers, and unable to secure bail. Jim Evans, national organizer for the AFL-CIO in Mississippi and a leading member of the state legislature’s Black Caucus, said, “This raid is an effort to drive immigrants out of Mississippi and a blow to immigrants, African Americans, whites and unions — all those who want political change here.” Evans, other members of the black caucus, many of the state’s unions, and immigrant communities all saw shifting demographics as the basis for changing the state’s politics. They organized the Mississippi Immigrants Rights Alliance (MIRA) as a vehicle for protecting the immigrant part of that constituency.

By the 2000s, workplace battles against immigration enforcement had evolved into complex struggles over race, labor rights, and political power, especially in the South. Howard Industries, one of the state’s few unionized factories, paid $2 an hour less than the industry norm. “The people who benefit from Mississippi’s low-wage system want it to stay the way it is,” Evans said, charging that the immigration raid was used to undermine the union.

MIRA activists responded to the raid with organizing and sitting on the grass with the families of detainees. “When the shift changed, African American workers started coming out and they approached these Latina women and started hugging them,” MIRA organizer Victoria Cintra recalled. “They were saying things like, ‘We’re with you. We’re glad you’re here. ’” Building solidarity between African American and immigrant workers became a cornerstone of MIRA’s strategy.

In 2011, Chipotle fired hundreds of workers in Minnesota for lacking immigration papers. Thousands of laid-off workers were targeted by the Obama administration’s key immigration enforcement program: identifying undocumented workers and then forcing companies to fire them. Without work or money for rent and food, they would presumably “self-deport.” In Minneapolis, Seattle, and San Francisco, more than 1,800 janitors lost their jobs. In 2009, more than 2,000 young women working on American Apparel sewing machines were fired in Los Angeles. Obama’s ICE director, John Morton, said ICE had audited more than 2,900 companies in just one year, and the number of layoffs ran into the tens of thousands.

In Minneapolis, the Service Employees Union Local 26 helped Chipotle workers organize marches and demonstrations, in cooperation with the United Workers Center in Struggle, a local worker center, and the Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee. They were arrested for civil disobedience at a Chipotle restaurant and organized a boycott of the chain. Their pressure successfully halted further layoffs at Chipotle.

It is now almost certain that this enforcement tactic will be key for the new administration as well. When Trump took office in 2017, workplace raids and firings became a central enforcement tool. The hotel union in Oakland, California, proactively negotiated contract provisions requiring employers to notify the union if immigration agents sought to enter the workplace. In one case, hotel workers—both documented and undocumented—collectively refused to provide immigration documents, forcing the employer to back down. It also called on the Oakland City Council to protect immigrants on the job. The city council passed a resolution noting that it has been a “city of refuge” since the anti-apartheid movement of the mid-1980s.

Trump is threatening again, as he did in 2016, to end federal funding to more than 300 sanctuary cities. In addition, many cities, and even some states, have withdrawn from the 287(g) program, which requires police to arrest and detain people based on their immigration status. Trump promises to reinstate it and cancel federal funding to cities that do not cooperate.

California unions further pushed back through legislative action. The janitors union SEIU United Service Workers West championed the Immigrant Worker Protection Act, a state law that prohibits employers from granting ICE access to workplaces or sharing sensitive information without a court order. This law built on years of organizing against workplace raids. In 2011, Los Angeles janitors sat down at city intersections to protest layoffs at Able Building Maintenance, and fought similar layoffs at Stanford University cafeterias and among janitors at Apple and Hewlett-Packard’s Silicon Valley buildings.

When Trump took office in 2017, unions and worker advocacy groups also conducted raid preparedness training. The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), in collaboration with Filipino Advocates for Justice, held sessions where members role-played scenarios to protect colleagues during workplace raids. Some were veterans of an earlier organizing drive among recycling workers, in which they stopped work to prevent the company from firing employees for not having papers.

At the beginning of the Bush administration, workers in wealthy Palm Springs, California, fought a crucial battle. They were earning just $4.75 an hour at the luxury Palm Canyon resort. When they began organizing with Hotel and Restaurant Employees Local 309, the hotel hired security guards dressed as Border Patrol agents to intimidate them. In response, immigrant housekeepers staged a silent march and refused to return to work. After a four-month strike, workers won back pay and reinstatement. When the hotel attempted to limit reinstatement to those with legal status, all workers—documented and undocumented—struck again for another month, ultimately returning together.

What makes the Palm Canyon experience important today is not just the workers’ inspiring courage, but also the strategic ideas that guided them. They organized around the concrete conditions of their lives. Faced with legal repression and layoffs, they defied efforts to make them suffer. Knowing they could not fight alone, they sought help. The union stood by them. And most important, they stuck together.

That same year, the AFL-CIO held its convention in Los Angeles, focused on organizing immigrant workers. Rejecting its history of supporting anti-immigrant legislation, the union federation adopted a resolution calling for immigration amnesty for undocumented immigrants and the repeal of the 1986 law that prevents them from working. Palm Canyon strikers were among the many witnesses at the subsequent union hearings organized around the country to expose the violation of immigrant workers’ rights. Public hearings and exposure, as demonstrated then, continue to be critical tools for resisting workplace enforcement.




Beyond the Threat of Deportation

During the civil rights era, the fight against Cold War mass deportations and the bracero program was two-pronged. Leaders of the Chicano civil rights movement in particular—Bert Corona, Cesar Chavez, Larry Itliong, Dolores Huerta—fought to end the program, a demand they won in 1964. But the movement did more than address abuses. It proposed and fought for more fundamental change.

In part, this played out on the ground. In 1965, Larry Itliong and veteran Filipino farm unionists initiated the Great Grape Strike, just a year after the program ended. That same year, the civil rights movement among Chicanos, Mexicans, and Asian Americans achieved a fundamental change in U.S. immigration law. The family preference system, which favored family reunification over the labor needs of employers, became the foundation of U.S. immigration policy—at least temporarily.

In the flow of people crossing the border, “we see our families and coworkers, while the farmers only see money,” says farm and domestic worker organizer Rene Saucedo. “So we have to fight for what we really need, and not just what we don’t want.” In other words, the fight to stop deportations requires fighting for an alternative. Over the past two decades, many such alternative proposals have emerged, including the Dignity Campaign and the American Friends Service Committee’s New Path. Today, the movement for an alternative is centered on the Registry Bill, a proposal that would provide legal status to an estimated 8 million undocumented people. The bill seeks to update the cutoff date that determines which undocumented immigrants can apply for legal permanent residence. Currently, only individuals who arrived before January 1, 1973, are eligible—a tiny and dwindling number. The proposed update would bring the date to the present.

A more ambitious, long-term demand is the extension of voting rights. It is no coincidence that many counties and states with high concentrations of undocumented workers—where their labor generates significant profit for employers—are MAGA strongholds. If the entire working population of Phoenix and Tucson could actually vote, they would likely elect representatives who prioritize social protections for all workers. Extending the franchise could strengthen the political coalition in Mississippi enough to finally expel the Dixie establishment. Instead of viewing voting as a restricted privilege, as we are often taught, we should see it as a working-class tool—and recognize the transformative potential of class unity across immigration status lines.

Likewise, the political education of the American working class must include an understanding of the roots of migration. U.S. actions abroad—ranging from military intervention to economic sanctions to neoliberal reforms—make migration a matter of survival. When Mexicans fight for the right to stay home rather than come north, and elect a government that promises to move in that direction, they deserve and need the support of the working class north of the border. Cross-border solidarity has a rich history, but mainstream media often obscures it. Without independent efforts to educate workers, the door remains open to MAGA narratives and closed to the possibility of organizing in our collective interest.

Faced with 281 million people living outside their countries of origin, the United Nations has adopted the Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. This Convention supports the right to family reunification, establishes the principle of “equal treatment” with citizens of the host country in relation to employment and education, protects migrants against collective deportation, and holds both origin and destination countries responsible for upholding these rights. However, only forty-nine migrant-sending countries, such as Mexico and the Philippines, have ratified it.

No U.S. administration, Democrat or Republican, has ever submitted it to Congress for ratification.
The Importance of History

The history of working-class organizing in the United States is full of examples of immigrant resistance to mass deportations, sweeps, and other tactics. Time and again immigrant workers have reshaped society through their actions. They have built unions representing workers across industries, from copper miners to janitors. Their efforts have even transformed the political landscape of cities like Los Angeles. This tradition of worker resistance is the true target of immigration enforcement waves, both those currently in effect and those threatened by the incoming administration.

Organizers of the past confronted deportation threats much as we do today, and their experiences offer valuable insights for the present. Not only did they show tremendous perseverance in the face of direct threats, but they also envisioned a future of greater equality, working-class rights, and social solidarity—and proposed pathways to achieve it. Increased immigration repression has a way of exposing the underlying structure of the system, making the need for change abundantly clear. Organizations and coalitions defending immigrant workers, their families, and their communities have often served as foundational blocks for broader movements for deeper social transformation.

The rich tradition of worker organizing against immigrant repression is a testament to courageous struggle and a reservoir of strategic thinking—resources that can help immigrant workers and communities confront the looming MAGA wave of repression.

Amid the fear and outrage sparked by Donald Trump’s threats to deport millions of undocumented immigrants, many have drawn comparisons to the mass deportations of 1932–33. At the height of the Great Depression, hunger plagued millions of working-class households. Relief authorities denied food to Mexican and Mexican American families, urging the government to deport them under the pretense that their removal would save money and create jobs for citizens. These recycled lies have been used repeatedly over the past century, most recently by MAGA proponents.

Hunger was indeed a powerful weapon to force people to leave. Thousands were swept up in street raids, while many more fled in terror. Voluntarily or not, people were loaded into boxcars and dumped at the border gates. The euphemism of the 1930s was “repatriation.” Today’s immigration enforcers call it “self-deportation.” The idea remains the same, and Trump and J. D. Vance are only the latest proponents of this inhumane policy.

Resistance to deportations during this era was organized through radical groups like the Congreso de Pueblos de Habla Española and unions formed during bloody strikes in mines and fields. The largest farm labor strike in US history, the Pixley cotton strike, erupted in 1933 across the barrios of California’s San Joaquin Valley during that peak deportation year. Radical activists were singled out for deportation but were defended by communist and socialist defense organizations, including the Committee for the Protection of the Foreign Born. Even the Mexican government, then just a decade past its revolution, protested these actions and sought to assist deportees.

This history of resistance is as important to remember as the history of deportations themselves. The organizations born from this resistance resistance—and the larger working-class movement to which they belonged—outlasted the deportation wave. While many groups were put on the attorney general’s list of subversive organizations during the Cold War, others emerged during the civil rights era. When the immigrant rights movement gained momentum in recent decades, it inherited this legacy.

This is a history of courageous struggle and a reservoir of strategic thinking that can help immigrant workers and communities as they face the repression promised by today’s MAGA

.
OAKLAND, CA (3/13/11) — Members of the Progressive Jewish Alliance, the Jeremiah Fellowship, Mexican supermarket (or mercado) workers and union organizers protest the firing of 300 workers by the Mexican market chain, Mi Pueblo. They sang and protested inside an Oakland store, and then picketed outside it. An estimated 10,000 mercado workers work in the Bay Area and most are recent immigrants from Latin America and Asia. Workers lack proper meal and rest breaks, earn poverty wages, and often endure abuse. 

Copyright David Bacon

David Bacon  is a photojournalist, author, political activist, and union organizer who has focused on labor issues, particularly those related to immigrant labor. He has written several books and numerous articles on the subject and has held photographic exhibitions. He became interested in labor issues from an early age and he was involved in organizing efforts for the United Farm Workers, the United Electrical Workers, the International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, the Molders' Union and others.


[Editor’s Note]

On Saturday, February 1, 2025 at 1:00 pm EST, ZNetwork is hosting a 1 hour online panel discussion with Zafiro Patiño, Aviva Chomsky, and Peter Bohmer that will focus on the critical and increasingly contentious topic of immigration.

The panel will highlight the key dangers for immigrants once Trump comes to power, the current mood in immigrant communities and how they’re preparing, and practical action that can be taken to resist what might happen. There will be time for some questions from the audience too.

Register here: https://actionnetwork.org/events/immigration-immigrants-in-a-fascist-us-panel-discussion


What to make of Trump’s Guantanamo plan for migrants


By  AFP
January 31, 2025


The United States leases the site holding the Guantanamo Bay prison from Cuba under a treaty dating back to 1903 - Copyright AFP PEDRO UGARTE

President Donald Trump has said he wants to send 30,000 “criminal illegal aliens” to the notorious Guantanamo Bay US military base in Cuba.

The site houses the prison where hundreds of terror suspects labelled “enemy combatants” were held — many for years without charge — after the 9/11 attacks. Some were tortured.

Trump said this week he had ordered the construction of a detention center there to “double our capacity immediately” to hold undocumented migrants.

The plan has raised questions and concerns.

– Is it new? –

Guantanamo Bay has for decades been used to hold Caribbean asylum seekers and refugees caught at sea. Migrants are held in a different part of the base than that used for terror suspects.

In the 1990s, it was used to house tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans who fled crises in their homelands.

They were accommodated in tent cities, many eventually sent home after being held at Guantanamo for years.

Trump’s move would entail a significant expansion of what is known as the Guantanamo Migrant Operations Center (GMOC).

But Deepa Alagesan of the New York-based International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP) says migrants are already being held “in inhuman conditions, and expanding the facility will be nothing short of disastrous.”

In a report last September, the IRAP reported conditions at the GMOC including “undrinkable water and exposure to open sewage, inadequate schooling and medical care for children, and collective punishment of detained Cuban and Haitian refugees.”

– Is it legal? –

“Some of them are so bad that we don’t even trust the countries to hold them because we don’t want them coming back,” Trump said of the migrants he plans to ship off to Guantanamo — adding it is “a tough place to get out of.”

Bill Frelick, refugee and migrants director at Human Rights Watch told AFP that Trump’s intention appears to be “to detain people indefinitely.”

He explained there was leeway under domestic and international law to detain migrants administratively for short periods of time until they can be sent back to their home countries.

If they cannot be returned, “there is no longer a legitimate reason for the detention, and it becomes arbitrary,” said Frelick.

Making matters worse, Guantanamo is a remote, closed military base “which the US government has used to evade legal protections and public scrutiny” in the past.

“When detention becomes prolonged and indefinite and untethered from proper oversight, it violates human rights and may amount to torture,” said Frelick.

The UN human rights office said Friday that migrants should only be detained “as a last resort. And only in exceptional circumstances.”

Observers say migrants in Guantanamo would find it hard to access legal counsel.

Many would be legitimate asylum seekers who have the right under US and international law to live and work in America while their applications are considered.

– Is it necessary? –


Thousands of undocumented migrants have been arrested since Trump’s January 20 inauguration, including some accused of crimes.

An unknown number have been repatriated to Colombia, Mexico, Guatemala, Brazil and other countries. Trump has vowed to expel “millions.”

The US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency currently has funding for 41,500 detainee beds, according to the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington.

In a report this week, it said US military facilities such as Guantanamo “can play a central role in management of detention and deportation” — and already have been used for this purpose under previous administrations including that of Joe Biden.

The United States leases the site holding the prison from Cuba under a treaty dating back to 1903.

The communist government in Havana considers it an illegal occupation, but the US Department of State website states the lease was the product of “international agreement and treaty” and can only be ended by mutual agreement.




THE UGLY AMERICAN

Panama police clash with protesters ahead of Trump envoy visit

Agence France-Presse
January 31, 2025

Panamanian demonstrators burned an effigy and photos of US President Donald Trump and his Secretary of State Marco Rubio. (AFP)

Panamanian police on Friday fired tear gas and clashed with protesters angered by Donald Trump's threat to take control of the Panama Canal, ahead of a visit this weekend by the US president's top diplomat.

The demonstrators, who included university students and teachers, burned an effigy and photos of Trump -- who accuses China of unfair influence over the interoceanic waterway -- and his Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The protesters "categorically reject the United States' attempts to turn Panama into a protectorate and a colony again," said teachers' union leader Diogenes Sanchez.

"We are going to fight to defend our national sovereignty," he added.

Earlier, another group of protesters burned tires before they were dispersed by riot police.

The unrest came on the eve of a visit by Rubio to the Central American nation, part of his first trip abroad in the post.

Trump, in his inaugural address on January 20, alleged that China was effectively "operating" the waterway, which the United States handed to Panama in 1999.

"We didn't give it to China, we gave it to Panama. And we're taking it back," Trump said.

Panama's President Jose Raul Mulino this week ruled out negotiations with the United States over ownership of the canal.

"I cannot negotiate, much less open a process of negotiations on the canal. That (the matter) is sealed. The canal is Panama's," said Mulino, who is expected to meet Rubio on Sunday.

Rubio's visit is also expected to address the issue of irregular migration between Colombia and Panama through the Darien jungle, as well as regional security.


After Panama, he is due to visit El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala and the Dominican Republic.






















WAR ON WOMEN

Pentagon ends policy that helped troops access abortions

Agence France-Presse
January 31, 2025 

A view of the Pentagon on December 13, 2024. (AFP)


by W.G. DUNLOP

The Pentagon has quietly scrapped a policy that assisted troops who needed to travel to receive reproductive health care including abortions, a US defense official said Friday.

President Donald Trump's new administration has taken aim at multiple military policies opposed by Republicans, including seeking to end "transgender ideology" in the armed forces and to reinstate troops dismissed for refusing Covid vaccines.

The end of the reproductive health care policy took effect earlier this week, the defense official said, without providing details on the decision.

While the policy has been contentious, it was only used a limited number of times -- 12 -- at a cost of less than $45,000 between June and December 2023, the only time frame for which figures were released by the Pentagon.

The US Supreme Court in 2022 struck down the nationwide right to abortion, meaning troops stationed in states that restricted or banned the procedure must take leave and travel to areas where it is legal to obtain one.

The Defense Department responded by permitting service members to take administrative absences to receive "non-covered reproductive health care," and establishing travel allowances.

- Security held 'hostage' -



The policy drew fire from Republicans, especially Senator Tommy Tuberville, a former football coach who sought to delay the approval of hundreds of senior military officers' promotions in response.

At the top of the US armed forces, Tuberville's actions led to three officers serving as the acting heads of military branches and on the Joint Chiefs of Staff while also performing their previous jobs as deputy service chiefs.

Tuberville eventually backed down, but US officials have said his "hold" on promotions caused significant disruption.

The senator hailed the end of the policy, saying Trump and his Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had secured "what I've been fighting for since I got to Washington: ZERO taxpayer dollars should go towards abortions."

Hegseth responded to Tuberville's post on social media site X, saying: "Thank you for your leadership, Coach."

Others were opposed to the change, including Jeanne Shaheen, a Democratic member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The end of the policy "will harm the health and wellbeing of our service members and does nothing to support our military readiness," Shaheen said on X.

Senator Tammy Duckworth -- who lost both legs when her Black Hawk helicopter was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade in Iraq -- slammed Tuberville in a post on X.

"You held our national security and military readiness hostage for 9 months over this compassionate policy," said Duckworth, another Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
'Not going to do a damn thing': MSNBC host blisters lawmakers letting Trump gut the FBI

Tom Boggioni
February 1, 2025 
RAW STORY

Michael Steele (MSNBC screenshot)

Reacting to a firing of key FBI officials late Friday by one of Donald Trump appointees, combined with a threat to purge every FBI employee who had anything with investigating the Jan. 6th insurrection that Trump inspired, MSNBC's Michael Steele ripped into lawmakers who are standing by doing nothing.

On Friday, acting deputy attorney general Emil Bove began the purge and demanded the FBI put together a list of all agents and F.B.I. staff “assigned at any time to investigations and/or prosecutions” tied to the Capitol riot.

Saturday morning, Steele, from his perch as co-host of "The Weekend" launched into scathing attack on both parties, singling out so-called "law and order Republicans."

"You've got [Democratic House Minority Leader] Hakeem Jeffries in a statement saying Republicans are 'hollowing out the world's premier law enforcement agency and leaving everyday Americans more vulnerable to violent criminals and terrorists. This complete disregard for national security in pursuit of vengeance should shock every American.'" Steele quoted the lawmaker. "Okay, color me shocked! Alright, everybody in this town is shocked but the crap still happens and no one seems to be doing anything about it!"

"No one seems to be outraged and put out," he exclaimed. "People are losing their jobs, people are on the verge of retirement, two years, one year, six months from retirement. Lose out on that opportunity."

"You've got folks who are now in situations where Monday comes, 'What am I doing? I'm just sitting around waiting to be fired.' What are what are the responses from Democrats and Republicans on the Hill? Or is this one of those oh, you know, 'Color me tears, color me shocked –– we're so, so upset by all of this, but we're not going to do a damn thing about it.'"

Watch below or at the link.

- YouTubeyoutu.be



'Tragedy for the rule of law': Congresswoman shreds Trump's purge of FBI agents

Matthew Chapman
January 31, 2025 
RAW STORY

Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) tore into President Donald Trump over the Friday night purge of FBI agents involved with criminal investigations into him.

The D.C. Field Office, in particular, has seen a wave of firings. It comes as the acting head of Trump's Justice Department is also moving to eliminate the jobs of prosecutors who handled the Jan. 6 cases and worked with special counsel Jack Smith.

"Trump’s DOJ Deputy AG is ordering the FBI Acting Secretary to create a blacklist of officers for termination because they LAWFULLY INVESTIGATED an insurrection at the Capitol that resulted in severe injuries and deaths, including of law enforcement," wrote Crockett, a former public defender, on X. "Instead of respecting the acts and contributions of the FBI for holding people to account for desecrating the hallowed halls of Congress, my Republican colleagues are now cheering for their removal."

"LET’S BE CLEAR: Firing these experienced law enforcement officers is a victory for lawlessness, organized crime, and corruption," she continued. "It is a get out of jail free card for the drug smugglers, human traffickers, child exploiters, and violent extremists that the FBI investigates."

"But most importantly, tonight is a tragedy for the rule of law," Crockett concluded.

Trump ran his 2024 campaign in part on being an anti-crime candidate — but the message was continually muddled with tirades against the justice system for prosecuting him and his allies, and accusations of misconduct and political bias against the prosecutors and law enforcement officials investigating the plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election.


FBI agents in Trump probes facing dismissal: reports

By AFP
January 31, 2025


Kash Patel, President Donald Trump's pick to be FBI director, during a campaign rally in Arizona - Copyright GETTY IMAGES/AFP Rebecca Noble

FBI agents who participated in the investigations that led to now-abandoned criminal charges against President Donald Trump are expected to be fired in a sweeping purge of the top US law enforcement organization, US media reported Friday.

Dozens of FBI agents involved in the probe of Trump supporters who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 and some supervisors are also “being evaluated for possible removal,” CNN said, quoting people briefed on the matter.

The Washington Post, citing people familiar with the plan, said “officials are working to identify potentially hundreds (of FBI agents) for possible termination.”

The newspaper said that in addition to the purge at the FBI, about 30 federal prosecutors who worked on Capitol riot cases and were on probationary status had been dismissed.

The Justice Department fired a number of officials on Monday who were involved in the prosecutions of Trump.

A Justice Department official said the positions were being terminated because the acting attorney general did not believe they “could be trusted to faithfully implement the president’s agenda.”

NBC News said among those being fired at the Federal Bureau of Investigation were the heads of more than 20 FBI field offices including those in Miami and Washington.

According to CNN, at least six senior FBI leaders have been ordered to “retire, resign or be fired by Monday.”

The Post said the FBI’s acting director, Brian Driscoll, a veteran agent who was appointed by Trump to run the bureau until his nominee as director is confirmed by the Senate, had refused to approve the mass firings.



– ‘Brazen assault on the rule of law’ –




Senator Dick Durbin, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, strongly condemned the dismissals at the FBI and Justice Department.

“The Trump Administration’s purge of dozens of DOJ and FBI officials involved in investigating Donald Trump and the January 6 rioters is a major blow to the FBI and Justice Department’s integrity and effectiveness,” Durbin said.

“This is a brazen assault on the rule of law that also severely undermines our national security and public safety,” he said. “Unelected Trump lackeys are carrying out widespread political retribution against our nation’s career law enforcement officials.”

The FBI Agents Association, a non-profit group that advocates for FBI employees, said if the reports of widespread dismissals are true the actions are “fundamentally at odds with the law enforcement objectives outlined by President Trump and his support for FBI Agents.

“Dismissing potentially hundreds of Agents would severely weaken the Bureau’s ability to protect the country from national security and criminal threats and will ultimately risk setting up the Bureau and its new leadership for failure,” the FBIAA said in a statement.

Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought two federal cases against Trump, resigned earlier this month.

Smith charged Trump with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House.

Neither case came to trial and Smith — in line with a Justice Department policy of not prosecuting a sitting president — dropped them both after the Republican won November’s presidential election.

Trump, on his first day in the White House last week, pardoned more than 1,500 of his supporters who stormed the Capitol in a bid to block congressional certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.

FBI director Christopher Wray resigned following Trump’s reelection and the president has named Kash Patel, his former advisor and staunch loyalist, to head the bureau

PERJURY

Patel, at his confirmation hearing before a Senate committee on Thursday, was asked if he was aware of any plans to punish FBI agents who were involved in the investigations of Trump.

“I am not aware of that,” he said.

Patel also told the Senate Judiciary Committee that “all FBI employees will be protected against political retribution.”

Trump administration guts sex misconduct policy for schools: report

Erik De La Garza
January 31, 2025 
RAW STORY


High school students in classroom (Shutterstock)

President Donald Trump ordered a dramatic revamping of Title IX rules that promise to transform how federally funded K-12 schools and colleges handle sex assault claims and LGBT students.

The order, the latest in a dizzying deluge of executive actions since Trump returned to the White House last week, came Friday and restructures how the nation’s teachers interpret Title IX, the federal law that forbids sex-based discrimination in education, the Daily Beast reported.

Trump’s new policy change brings back to life the Title IX changes he saw through during his first presidency in 2018, the publication noted. The new rules usher in stronger protections for the accused.

“It reduces the liability placed on schools in sexual misconduct cases,” according to the Daily Beast. “It also requires live hearings and cross-examinations and allows lawyers to be present at those hearings.”

The rule change also eliminates LGBT safeguards expanded under the Biden administration that included gender identity and sexual orientation, according to the publication. Those protections will no longer be enforced by the Trump administration.

The development comes as a federal judge in Kentucky earlier this month struck down former President Joe Biden’s protections for transgender students as unconstitutional.

Emma Grasso Levine, a Know Your IX senior manager, described the decision to the Daily Beast as “incredibly disappointing” and claimed it “will leave many survivors of sexual violence, LGBTQ+ students, and pregnant and parenting students without” important accommodations.