Oberlin has joined the nationwide debate on immigration reform. On Tuesday night, the nascent Oberlin Coalition for Im/migrant Rights kicked off a three-part series of events with a thought-provoking panel discussion titled “Immigration Then and Now.” The designation “im/migrants” signals support both of immigrants and migrants: those with papers and those without. Presenting three diverse perspectives to a packed West Lecture Hall were professors Pam Brooks of the African American Studies department, Pablo Mitchell of the Comparative American Studies and history departments and Associate Professor of History Anne-Marie Sammartino.

According to its mission statement, OCIR was created “to work in solidarity with the millions of protesters across the nation demanding justice for documented and undocumented im/migrants.” Potential immigration reforms currently being considered in Congress encompass a wide range of thinking. One bill proposes legislation that would provide a path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented laborers living in the United States; one proposes the criminalization and deportation of those workers.

The panelists addressed historical and contemporary issues concerning immigration, drawing on rich, varied bases shaped both by their professional disciplines and interests as well as by personal and familial experiences.

Mitchell provided a detailed history of major events in US immigration law from the 1920s to today, identifying discriminatory motifs present throughout. He cited the lawful denial of entrance of homosexuals into the US that existed from 1917 to 1990, and the bias towards normative families underlying past and current immigration policies — a bias inherent even in the national dialogue.

“There’s a discussion of [migrant] children and families, and what happens to families torn apart by deportation, but these are always heterosexual families,” said Mitchell. “A defense of patriotism, nationalism and straight families doesn’t make space for a broader movement.”

Mitchell closed his presentation with a call to action.

“What about children of workers who can come here [to Oberlin College]?” Mitchell asked. “There are so few Latinos here. Unless we take up a vigorous fight for immigration rights, I don’t see that changing.”

Brooks shared anecdotes from her family’s tradition of activism that demonstrated the power and possibilities for coalition building among oppressed peoples. She also spoke about activists such as Cesar Chavez, a Mexican American labor activist who led the United Farm Movement in the mid-20th century, and Fanny Lou Hamer, a black civil rights crusader in the 1960s. These activists worked through building unions and reaching out among groups.

“There is a history to be drawn upon for solidarity to exist between peoples of color,” said Brooks. “There is a precedent for working cooperatively.”

In this vein of cooperation between groups, Brooks warned especially against citing the familiar anti-migrant refrain, “They want to take our jobs.”

“This is a specious argument,” says Brooks. “How could black people have forgotten what our history has taught us? What our labor is worth here? Let’s strategize and not be divided by federal forces who want to confuse the debate about who can come into the country.”

Providing a comparative perspective, Sammartino spoke of European views on immigrants. Sammartino pointed out that much of Europe fails to make any effort to sensitively incorporate immigrant populations and in fact marginalizes and discriminates against them.

“Europe seems warm and cuddly to Americans,” said Sammartino. “Universal health care, gay marriage legislation.... But they look to the US for progressive immigration models.”

Sammartino cited as examples the Algerian population in France, which has not been integrated into French society even after several decades, and the failure of Germany to grant citizenship to the children of immigrants. In Germany, second generation immigrants convicted of crimes are deported to their parents’ country of origin — even if they were born and raised in Germany.

“There is no viable European model of pluralism,” said Sammartino. “Growing Muslim populations represent a serious challenge for countries that are culturally homogenous and don’t like subcultures, particularly with religious practices.”

One of the issues raised in the discussion following the faculty presentations was the dominating rhetoric of Mexican immigration, resulting in a notable lack of, for example, Asian immigrant involvement in the current reform movement. A related issue was lack of unification in general among immigrants in the United States.

“People have the stories about their families immigrating,” said Sammartino. “This, a seemingly unifying discourse, has broken down. This proves how difficult it is to build a unifying theme, which has, to this point, been through ‘illegal acts’: using illegal migration as rallying cry against people who are not unlike our own migrant parents and grandparents.”

On Thursday night, the OCIR invited members of the Mexico Solidarity Network to speak about the dynamics of contemporary immigration.

On Monday at 11:45 a.m., the coalition will have a student walk-out and rally in Tappan Square, in solidarity with the May 1 Nationwide Immigrant General Strike.