- What is 'the issue' that Farmingville faced?
Farmingville, NY faced a complex issue of illegal immigration. To simply classify it as immigration problem though would be to do the issue injustice. Economics was also a major factor driving the two parties involved in the conflict. Obviously, the immigrants were motivated by a desire to better themselves economically, however, the pre-existing nativist population of Farmingville was also facing an economic issue.
Residents were likely concerned by land values in their neighborhoods as well as the undercutting of the wages because the Mexican day laborers were willing to do tedious tasks at much cheaper rates than the locals would have demanded themselves. Ultimately, what drove the economic issues of the Farmingville residents was an education issue. If they had been better educated they would not make the calculus that day labor, landscaping, and construction, were viable jobs that they would have wanted all together. This is most exemplified towards the end of the movie when Terry Anderson, the talk show host from LA, states that his children couldn’t find jobs because they can’t speak Spanish. Indeed, what intelligent business owner would want to hire someone who can’t communicate with a large segment of the population – especially when bilingual Spanish/English language speakers are a dime a dozen?
- What were the arguments made and actions taken by members of the Sachem Quality of Life group?
Sachem Quality of Life (SQL) argued that the illegal immigrants were introducing an element of criminality to the neighborhood, were not paying taxes, and were economically disadvantaging the local population by taking jobs at low wages and exacerbating this by not contributing to the community.
SQL organized petitions, went to government meetings, and organized rallies in order to make their voices heard. Furthermore, they brought in outside speakers and groups to help them in organizing themselves.
- What were the arguments made and actions taken by immigrant advocates and day laborers?
The immigrant activists and day laborers made the case that the immigrants were simply people looking for work and were willing to do the work that the native population was not willing to actually take. This was most clearly elucidated by the contractor stating that whenever he hired local people they would work for two weeks and then disappear or otherwise do a bad job. The actions taken by the immigrants mirrored the actions taken by the SQL. They organized themselves into a group, organized rallies, brought in outside speakers and support, and held a soccer tournament in an attempt to show the population that they were just a normal group of people.
- Which side's position do you find more convincing? Why?
The immigrant’s case was more compelling and convincing. This is likely due to the presentation of the film. The directors clearly had a story they wanted to tell and they did that effectively. They vilified the SQL (admittedly an easy target) and judiciously avoided any of the darker elements of illegal immigration. I would likely find the arguments of the day laborers more convincing anyway, but one could not walk away from the movie without siding with them.
- How can we make sense of the conflict that ensued? What role does race, racial prejudice, and national identity play in this conflict? What kinds of emotions are unleashed?
Explaining the ensuing conflict simply by race is compelling by probably naïve. While race certainly played some part in the conflict as highlighted by white supremacists joining in with SQL and Mr. Spencer refusing to speak with a Spanish language broadcaster (in reality, the movie was edited in a manner to highlight racism in the activists positions). A more formidable factor was simply economics and education. If the immigrants were white poles doing the labor for cheaply than I believe that the local population would’ve been just as incensed. Furthermore, I believe that if the locals had an education of any note, they would not have fretted over menial tasks that in reality they didn’t want to perform themselves.
However, when this lack of education and economic paralysis combines with an easily visible divisive factor such as race – the mix can be toxic. The emotions that are unleashed can be frustration, anger, and really negative emotions of oneself. When one is no longer able to feed their family because they are bettered by economic competition, there is very likely despair and anger. The postscript to the movie that speaks of Maggie being pushed out by more extreme elements in SQL is a relatively good indicator that she’s not a racist – just stupid.
- In terms of solutions to the conflict: In your view, is creating a hiring hall a good strategy? Why or why not? What other steps could/should be taken to address the conflict within the community?
Creating a hiring hall is a feel good strategy that just moves the problems out of sight. The fundamental issues of economics and education still exist, but the hiring hall is the actually racist solution. It basically means that we don’t want to see these dark people on our streets so lets put them in this building where they are not a visual reminder that they exist.
The most important step to solving the problem is education. If the people in SQL could compete for work, learn another language, and learn a semi-advanced skill, they would not be complaining about a few dark people doing the gardening or putting down the concrete.
Bibliography
Farmingville. Dir. Catherine Tambini & Carlos Sandoval. Perf. Citizens of
Farmingville. Camino Bluff, 2003. Film
