Tag Archives: deportation

DOGE as an Active Verb: Expansionist Energies & Political Synergies in an Imperial Presidency

Donald Trump, in eyeing a new term as President, sought to make the global impact that he felt long denied–or robbed–in his first term. His frustration, if in part theatrical and hyperbolic, of the “Russia Hoax” was a deep discontent of being denied legitimacy, and a fear of being condemned to a Presidency with an asterisk beside it, either for having not gained the majority of votes for President, after all, or not winning the “landslide” that he felt a winner deserved. And as the first year of his second Presidency seemed to be gunning for an elusive Nobel Prize by bringing peace to Gaza and Ukraine as if to win legitimacy on a global stage, the image of global dominance–and hemispheric expansion of American power–had deep ties to his interest in the political lineage that was embodied by his one-time backer, and promoter, Elon Musk–who at a critical time was the needed P.T. Barnum to stage the comeback of Trump’s ungainly ride on a Republican Elephant. If Trump helped design the new logo of the GOP as a new circus animal–

–even personalizing it, by 2020, beneath a toupee echoing Donald Trump’s signature hairstyle, as an expression of fealty, the party of politics has become unprecedentedly politicized, all but obviating the need for a convention, as modifications that hairspray imbue the weave with vitality, despite its truly unearthly hue that even hairspray cannot create.

Trump has a dexterity with marketing and branding honed in the real estate business he made his name, and the remaking of the party is in his image is acknowledged in the button. But as much as a rebranding that nods to a fascist legacy in identifying the part with a personal brand, subsuming politics in a lexicon marketing in Trump’s America, the logic of rebranding did not emerge from Trump’s head, like Minerva from the head of Zeus, so much it was a product of the onslaught of rebranding and marketing across America, deeply shaped and inflected by the internet, and online communication, and deeply influenced to synergy with other brands–and possibilities of branding offered by such truly political constructions as a border wall. But the border wall became a subject of the political brand of Trump, the branding of Trump 2 is far more tied to Silicon Valley and Musk if it continues to expand the practice of national politics in ways not rooted in political traditions or the Constitution, and removed form civil law.

Without following legal precedent or legal formulations, the victory of branding the nation has a logic that is almost–and perhaps intentionally–removed from legal remedies or redress. For the logic of the building of a border wall that proceeded only by declaring a ‘border emergency’ and a national emergency became a ‘brand’ far outside of the legal framework of civil rights, and, indeed, flies in the face of civil rights. The brand of the wall by which Trump defined his first term and his candidacy may have had less power by the end of his first term, but the second term must be seen as a terrifying rebranding, and rebranding of America, by the logic of America First, rather than by laws or constitutionality, insisting on values of transparency and economy and an end to abuse–even if the reduction of government costs may mean that seventeen million Americans lose health insurance from Medicaid and the ACA, and reducing the $100 billion the government spent on food stamps and SNAP over ten years will affect the 5.5 million who depend on their food from federal funding in California alone, and leave two million without food. The simulacra of civility that the reductions of federal expenditures are a forced slimming not only of government, but of Americans.

The new branding of America is no longer limited to its borders, or territoriality, but depend on a remapping of an expansive mapping of American authority to use its military in what might be called the vaguest penumbra of actual legitimacy. For the first year of a Presidency has seen apparent expansion of the territorial waters of the nation as borders of military jurisdiction, and a definition not only of the ability to refuse visas to all deemed a potential threat to “Americans,” but to using the military–now understood as a Department of War, and not “of Defense,” in what is hardly only a semantic change or shift. Simultaneous to the unilateral rewriting of the global tariff system, as if arm-wrestling the global encamp, the lifting of protections for offshore drilling, and not only continental water but the nation’s Exclusive Economic Zone, the rebranding of the nation in maps have become unprecedentedly expansive in hopes to maximize the nation’s global impact, that not only flaunt the law, but expand the global footprint, as it were, of America on a global map.

The unprecedented expansion of the War on Drugs to an actual targeting of ships in international waters is not only a metaphor. The new “war,” this time, really is a declaration of military conditions that justify the discarding of international law in the basis of affirming national safety–as made evident in the recent reactivation of a slew of military bases across the Caribbean, to allow expanded bombing of shipping craft deemed a threat to the nation and a national emergency. The notion of a wartime powers that the Presidency has in the past assumed have become a way, at the same time, and with no coincidence, the Department of Defense is renamed the Department of War, to announce a war has been begun that will suspend civil rights and legal accords with nations, or any international body, to affirm the expansive legal domain of the United States over anything it deems a threat to the nation, whether or not such a threat exists. While the expansion of the “War on Drugs” as a metaphor of governance marked a decisive expansion of law-enforcement tactics, prosecution, and incarceration, evoking an “enemy” to be targeted among drug users and sellers, whose only alternative was decriminalization, the metaphor of a strategy of criminal justice has morphed to military policing of the nation’s vulnerable boundaries as if it was a real war understood by national boundaries. What has been treated as a shift of the metaphor to reality as if it were a confusion of categories, however, is in fact a redrawn theater of actual war.

Having renamed the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America with little global pushback, if plenty of raised eyebrows, the recent expansion of targeted bombings on craft accused of ferrying drugs destined for markets of American customers–and cast as the pending incursions by foreign gangs of the nation–have occurred with the reactivation of American bases in the hemisphere, far outside of territorial waters, to a new level of alertness not seen since the Cold War–an amassing of 10,000 troops and expansion of military staging grounds that are intended only to facilitate extrajudicial executions far beyond the line of the border wall on pause since being built in Trump’s first term.

Reactivated American Military Bases in Puerto Rico, Panama, and US Virgin Islands/2025

Tense US Marines in Action Off Venezuela – Bomb Drops, Deck Shooting, Small  Boat Ops

It is as maddening as it is beguiling to map objectively Donald Trump’s relation to the world, so deeply is it performative. It does not objectively exist in ways that could be mapped, trafficking as he does so facilely with fears, existential threats and danger, that conceal a barely credible sense of purchase on reality. Trump’s inflated claims seized willfully and impulsively on maps in his political career, to validate his relatively unclear claims to a sovereign role, eager to try on ideas of sovereignty able to reoccupy the image of his early adoption of the military uniform he wore at the young age, leading a march with pomp and circumstance down Fifth Avenue, fresh from what passed as military training at the New York Military Academy,–anxious to inhabit newfound authority in the Fifth Avenue canyon of New York City–“prime property”–he had never set foot before, as he was trying on a uniform for size in ways that we cannot but associate with the imperial presidency he would later help to design.

Donald J. Trump Leads Military Academy on Columbus Day Parade at Fifth Avenue and 44th October 12, 1963

Fred Trump, no doubt drawing on his own fascist sympathies, had sent the unfortunate future president at age thirteen to learn the needed lessons of domination to reach a level of proficiency to be a capable future head of a real estate firm. But the lesson also gave him a keen sense of entitlement–not having to actually serve in the U.S. Army, increasingly the fear of the men subject to military draft from which Donald sought up to five deferments–and a sense of empowerment not previously encountered in life. The sense that the removed world of wealth was suddenly in reach, and not distant, led him to develop a sense of the synonymity of the Trump name with wealth inequality that helped Donald Trump get in bed with a variety of political forces, gravitating to a dark side of American politics of small government, low taxes, and paleo-conservatism to normalize and perpetuate wealth inequalities in America, at the cost of replacing or eroding government, or what we have come to know as government–and accept as government–without considering the withering away or puncturing of anything that is left of the welfare state or Great Society.

But before he headed to Fordham, and as he tried uneasily to imagine the status a uniform might bring to a child of wealth, the enhancement of his personal authority was but a glimmer to his young eye.

Donald J. Trump in full regalia in New York Military Academy Yearbook (1963)

If the frontiers of America have are a consistent theme of Trump’s Presidency–from the bombing of ships in international waters off of Venezuela’s or Colombia’s coasts, ascribed to “narcoterrorists” or “narcotics traffickers” in a “Trump Doctrine” of targeting what “came out of Venezuela” as if it was subject to attack as criminal. The new envelope of legality that Trump has advanced, insisting it not be covered by the War Powers Act and rebuffing international objections from the United Nations, occur under the pretenses that a nation is not being attacked, but criminal organization run by a “designated narcoterrorist organization,” as if this sanctions bombing ships and killing passengers in waters waters lying far outside of American territorial claims. If Rankin and others have suggested that the cartographic artifact of International Waters or an Exclusive Economic Zone can be seen in terms of an optic of globalization, the rejection of globalization or global orders of legal authority are likewise artifacts of globalization–but of the Trumping of globalization that is an assertion of the rejection of legal oversight on attacks of international criminal organizations. The blurring of the nation’s southern border drew condemnation of Caribbean states, claiming wartime powers in a far more open violation of international law than the US-Mexico border wall.

The border wall indeed receded into the baground, fast forgotten in comparison to the extent to which bombing offshore ships blurred the boundaries of territoriality in a misguided attempt to staunch the flow of drugs–a flow Trump and his henchmen too often argued is accomplished by smuggling routes able to be stopped by immigrants, as if this prevented the flow of cocaine, fentanyl and methamphetamines across the border–the blurring of territoriality now goes far beyond the “big stick” of the Monroe Doctrine that the nomenclature of the “Trump Doctrine” echoes, and sets a new standard for a “gunboat diplomacy” now waged from the skies, and from seven warships and aircraft carriers stationed in Caribbean waters by September 1–carrying over 4,500 sailors and marines beyond the nation’s frontiers, in a quite sudden and unexpected military buildup designed to “combat and dismantle drug trafficking organizations, criminal cartels and these foreign terrorist organizations in our hemisphere.” Is the sending warships a new expanse of borders to patrol international waters an act of aggression, or a war against non-state actors?

August 28, 2025

September 8, 2025

The nation seems to be expanding its frontiers, even as our government shrinks. The wanton summary firing of government employees during the shutdown over which he would preside in 2025, letting go of over 4,100 employees from “Democrat agencies” of government as Housing and Urban Development, Center for Contagious Diseases (shutting its entire Washington office), Education, Treasury (1,400), Interior (1,100), Environmental Protection Agency, and Commerce, and elections security and cyber in an unprecedented unilateral”Reductions in Force” as the shutdown was in its tenth day was a supreme act of plenipotentiary powers, as his Budget Director released “RIFs” in place of pink-slips, purging the note of government by massive layoffs (firings) in classic Trump style for big corporations and budget hawks. What might reduce our emergency preparedness on multiple fronts was conducted in the name of emergency cost-cutting. “March on, Dombrowski, lead the way! Our Poland has not yet perished, nor shall she ever die!” The expanding frontiers of the nation, as government sent guided-missile cruiser, an amphibious assault group, nuclear-powered fast-attack nuclear submarines with 5,000 sailors and Marines to the region–as ten Stealth Fighter F35’s have been shipped to Puerto Rico, supersonic jets of a lethality that has no clear tie to a narcotics war, save as a massive show of force, with eight destroyers.

September 2, 2025

Trump seems determined to send a new sign of his triumphal presence in the region, as if to declare a new relation to the Caribbean as an imperial space he is willing to defend by military roles and military engagement of nations. The metropolitan splendor of the broad streets of the modernist urban grid may have overwhelmed Donald as he stared downthe chasm of an urban canyon whose buildings’ art nouveau facades must have impressed him as a new social geography of which he had not been so keenly aware and a New World. It may have so impressed him as tying the historical figure of Columbus to a conquest of Fifth Avenue,–as a modern Christian soldier–stepping in his patent leather shoes into the future he would argue to have equipped him with “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military”–a distortion of magical proportions, perhaps born out of guilt for the five deferments obtained to defer service in the Vietnam War, determined to boast of a disciplined leadership without showing much true actual discipline military men are instilled. The determination with which Trump led his New York Military Academy class forward amidst along the glittering concrete neoclassical towers lining Fifth Avenue, as if they constituted a new world he had never personally seen, was a conquest of sorts, a conquest that was Columban in scale and grandeur, as if the commemoration was of his own new role in life.

Is this early image not at the heart of his deep ties to the defense of Columbus Day as a national holiday and collective celebration, in the face of reality and claims to the contrary? It is as if predating any sense of global politics, he naturalized the heightened socioeconomic divides of the impressive city. Indeed, the opening up of the landscape would long fascinated him as a developer that he set his sights on conquering this new land of wealth. Those looming towers would be a beacon of sorts for the real estate company he inherited, and provide a soundstage on which his public persona as a realtor could be orchestrated as if existed apart from his father or the rest of his family, and indeed a migration story of sorts from the outer boroughs across the bridge that spans from Brooklyn and Queens to the glittering tower of Manhattan that he traced compulsively on paper napkins as new maps to his identity and brand, even before he took to affixing his name indelibly with their glittering facades.

The new branding of the United States on the global stage is akin to a throwback mapping of a nation’s expansive authority, eerily evident in a favored map that Elon Musk may well have taken out of deep storage in his family memory as he developed plans to help resuscitate Trump’s candidacy in 2024, at a critical time, selling a new vision of the powers of the presidency that seems to have loomed large in Trump’s own struggle for power. Long before applying gold-painted polyurethane appliqué from Home Depot to the Oval Office for a mere $58 to create what he called, a real estate developer at heart, “some of the highest quality 24 Karat Gold ever used in the Oval Office or Cabinet Room of the White House” for “the best Oval Office ever, in terms of success and look” (his string of capitals), perpetuating the image of wealth inequality whose quality would impress “Foreign Leaders” who would “freak out” at its quality.

For Trump ran for President the second time almost under the promise to naturalizewealth divides in a landscape that dazzled him with its display of opulence, as a New World he seemed to have first confronted and remains, for the moment, to be vertiginously in complete command. The deep ties of Trump to a naturalization of wealth divides would lead not only to the demonization of migrants, blacks, and other undesirables, expressing a sense of grievance against them as a real estate developer preoccupied with fears of declining values of their properties,–but to find an eery kinship, at great costs to the nation, with the naturalized wealth divides of apartheid that were a formative part of the worldview of Elon Musk–similarly attracted to the promotion of fool’s gold.

Musk was an icon of the entrepreneurial abilities that seemed to be tied to genius, but was hardly American, and tapped, as has been shown, an eery brand of libertarian politics, not foreign to America, but a dark current that was accessible to the young man who grew up in a white enclave of Pretoria amidst a sense of the deep dangers of those without wealth, amidst the jacarandas and elite schooling, and his heroic grandfather, the dashing adventurer Joshua Haldeman, a refugee of sorts from Canada, who had played an uncelebrated but rather profound part in the social movement Technocracy, whose political imaginary is preserved in the map that is at the header to this post, and received attention as a political imaginary that has informed the apparent contradictions of the expansive isolationism of Trump’s second presidency. The expansion Trump has directed of Homeland Security to apprehend “illegal” migrants is not only an attack on the legal status of refugees–promised safe harbor in the United States and other countries by international accord since 1951 providing that no refugee be expelled or returned to the frontiers of a territory their life or freedom was compromised or in danger. As fears of political persecution have multiplied and the flow of refugees grown globally, the United Nations Convention has been not only questioned–but the safeguarding acquired rights were called into question by declaring the border a ‘state of emergency’ not demanding the following of agreed laws. Indeed, the digital dragnets that are targeting alleged “illegal” migrants compels many to present themselves before court without any right to a lawyer or legal defense, as they have no ability or right to hire one.

Donald Trump had been sent to military academy to dissuade him from a passion for films. Donald was wowed by leading a spectacle that of which he was the center–leading a Columbus Day march!–whose theatrics led him to remember the event. He boasted of being instilled with obedience and rules at the New York Military Academy, endorsing the creation of an online “American Academy” as he ran for U.S. President in 2024 to undermine the place of “radical left accreditors” in American educational institutions and the “left-wing indoctrination” so endemic to schools he argued were “turning our students into communists and terrorists and sympathizers of many, many different dimensions.” Trump was vexed by the protests at universities after his first election, channeling attacks of alt right online journalism as Breitbart News against the universities they argued had become opponents to free speech. Trump adopted a Manichaean grievance of disconcerting alliterative bounce, vowing to “fire the radical left accreditors that have allowed our colleges to become dominated by Marxist maniacs and raving lunatics” as if they had perpetrated a crime against the nation only he, the graduate of a Military Academy, was properly able to solve.

Trump Leading New York Academy on 1963 Columbus Day Parade, to immediate right of Flag Bearer

Trump as he marched down Fifth Avenue must had no sense of a defined a relation to the world–he was seeing New York luxury properties for the first time, but was opening his eyes to the scale of what seemed a global stage as he led the march with utter pride in his uniform and bearing. But President Trump’s conviction he is leading a white nation to an age of plenty, as he led the Columbus Day parade months after I was born, is tragically curtailed in its vision.

In glorying in a nation of closed borders, Trump has clung to a. geographic fantasy and a myth. The scale of global leadership may have long been a problem for Trump to comprehend. But the eagerness with which he entertained and promoted the mythic geographies Trump long trafficked in real estate have sought to promote the nation in a new global context, whose toxic spin is reflected in insistently casting Columbus as a basis for the Christian white foundation of America, embodied in his deep commitment to restoring prominence to a holiday named after the Italian Christopher Columbus. Even as we have documented and uncovered the scale violence Columbus and his sailors perpetrated in taking possession of Santo Domingo, the whitewashed elevation of Columbus as a, a founder of the nation if not of Christian Empire, with deep roots in the nineteenth century at great cost tot a nation. Even as Trump vouches opposing the “woke” change of critiquing Columbus as a figure of veneration, one who “all of the Italians love him so much,” Trump courted white supremacy by Columbus; he embraced a vision of imperial supremacy that animated a proposed monument to Columbus for New York Harbor of bronze kitsch designed by Georgian monumental sculptor Zurab Tsereteli,–in an effort to promote and re-imagine Columbus as a father to the Country, akin to Peter the Great in 1997, whose statuary Tsereteli had previously designed on the banks of the Moskva River to celebrate three hundredth anniversary of the Russian Navy in the very same year.

Zurab Tsereteli, Columbus Monument first proposed offshore Trump Properties on the Hudson River

Tsereteli specialized in designing monuments, and the patriotic monument of grandiose statuary was underwritten by Russian funds as a free “gift” in 1997, in a stunning three hundred feet of kitsch to rival the Statue of Liberty in a foray into American politics. The monstrous kitsch statue of an apparently impassive navigator may have been in the back of his head as he appropriated government funds to reconstruct Columbus statues as his final act as President in 2020, seeking to leave his imprint on a society that had refused to commemorate Columbus as a savior to the nation.

Trump has perpetuated the grotesque myth of living in a prosperous nation within closed borders, as if the arrival of Columbus was triumphant and peaceful–not acknowledging indigenous peoples, slavery, or even non-white history, even in the face of historical evidence of the enslavement and violence that followed the disembarking of European settlers to the contrary. The massive whitewashing of the historical record pandering to visions of white supremacy redefined America in a globalized world as provincial and out of his league as that young costumed military school brat, marching in pants too short and outsized cap shortly before the American troops would be sent in escalating numbers to Vietnam. To be sure, Trump feigned his “military experience” as a doge for five successive draft deferments from military service. Elevating the Christian heritage of America Columbus has come to incarnate romanticized America in a global map of the powerful that Donald Trump could get behind. Yet the uneven distributions of global wealth–far greater than were defined by New York in the 1980s–offered by 2024 a vision Trump’s candidacy seemed ready to naturalize–offering Trump a means to orient his sense of politics to the world. claiming as President to bring “back from the ashes” the celebration of the Genoese navigator’s voyage, and end celebration of Indigenous People’s Day, by renaming the Federal Holiday. The new vision of global prominence for the nation that Trump promised was not dependent on or tied to Columbus, but to a vision of global economic dominance not only rooted but trafficked in myth.

Trump did so, this post imagines, side by side the other spokesperson of wealth inequality who offered a critical endorsement of the candidate in 2024–the South-African born Elon Musk–with world-changing consequences. Musk, like Trump, while super wealthy, also saw himself as an outsider, but claimed a persuasive way to orient Trump 2024 to the world, if not to orient the second Trump Presidency to a map that preserved the wealth inequality incarnated in the buildings and skyscrapers of Fifth Avenue within an increasingly globalized world, perpetuating the illusion of the wealth of the United States by whatever legal fiction possible to provide a vision of American pre-eminence that has some surprisingly scary echoes to the cartographic fiction Elon treasured from his father-in-law, and perhaps the largest paternal figure of his childhood, Joshua Haldeman, a chiropractor from Saskatchewan who accumulated wealth from ruby mines in Tanzania during Apartheid but ended his life piloting airplanes convinced of the hidden riches of the sandy savannah of the Kalahari Desert–not its actual resources of diamonds or uranium, even if it possesses one of the largest diamond mines in the world, but the ancient wonders of the Zambezi Basin of the Lost City of the Kalahari–an obsession of late nineteenth century geography that has survived in board games–of a lost pre-Ice Age civilization only officially given up on in 1964, but incarnated a vision of wealth inequality the likes of which rarely existed before globalization.

Advanced Pre Ice Age Civilization Discovered in the Kalahari Desert –  African Explorer Magazine

Lost City of Kalahari (Late Nineteenth Century and Modern Reconstructions)

The visions of wealth inequality by which both Trump and Musk were so attracted and obsessed made them a far less likely pair to endorse the divides of income inequality that have increasingly defined the United States and the world by the twenty-first century, but which we have been almost unable to glimpse. The manner in which Trump has shifted attention from income inequality to spectacles of state, indeed, is a critical means by which we have allowed our attention to be distracted by the policing of a southern border, but to turn the other eye to urban poverty and the social fissures exposed temporarily in the pandemic, but that exist in both health care, educational attainment, and life expectancies across America, in ways we have hardly seemed able to process.

1 Comment

Filed under DOGE, Donald Trump, Elon Musk, global refugees, imperial presidency, national borders

Strongman on the Border

The border was closed and immigration authorities simply ‘at capacity,’ announced newspapers, after a Caravan of migrants from Central America arrived.  In rejecting the ability to process new arrivals who lacked necessary papers of transit, the papers parroted a an anti-immigrant line, revising the southwestern border from a line of passage, or space of transit, in what seemed a meme about the border as a threshold of legality-as if a line defines the legality of those who cross it.  If the border wall is a “new” creation, it seems designed as a monument of the “new” nation, bisecting an area that was not truly demarcated for some time, despite it suggestion of eternal authority–the Thono O’odham Nation of the Sonoran Desert long lived on both sides of the modern “border” before either nation existed across its divide, and are recognized as “border dwellers” in both the state of Arizona and Sonora.   But the wall served as a label, and a divider between “us” and “them,” a boundary where the outsider was defined as an enemy, and “politics” was indeed the definition of the enemy lying outside of the social body. To affirm that distinction, the wall needed to be built–and to explain the enemies to the body politic, the performative spectacle of the confrontations that might occur at the border was in need of staging, again and again, as a primal scene, as much as the wall-as-border might be mapped.

Department of Homeland Security

The creation of the border as a defining feature of the nation–a nation that was able to be recreated, or literally “made great again” as a nation by its border wall as a human creation–suggested the deep belief in the making and remaking of nations, a concept of the intellectual creation of nations that oddly echoes the legal historian Giambattista Vico in its insistence on the making of a nation not in reference to its laws, but as a collective whole who felt that borders were defining characteristics of modern states.  But the institution of this border at the same time exists outside of the law, and assumes an oddly primal characteristic as a site of sacrifice, echoing in surprising ways how the Neapolitan jurist Giambattista Vico saw borders as defining the inclusion and exclusion of rights to property, and senses of citizens, that was prior to and predated the law. Although the massive public works project that the state had mandated at the U.S.-Mexico Border was not at all an Enlightenment project, so much as a mega-project that was destined to incarnate state authority in an age of mass politics: a public works project proclaimed to fill multiple needs of protecting property, securing wealth, and building the nation’s power, of Neo-imperial dimensions, akin to Mussolini’s draining of Pontine Marshes or to the state programs of collective transformation of the mid0twentieth century, by dramatically staging the power of the nation in its ability to incarnate mythic notions of a powerful state for the benefit of all its members.

The creation of a strongman, who has arrogated the American eagle clutching fasces and a laurel, announcing that it will transform “many” to “one,” but only the many admitted past its sign. For the legist Vico, the ongoing brutality and conflict of society was not only natural, but a position even of possible growth: the very words of one society and culture might be reused and adopted by the following in even discordant ways.

But if Vico was clear about the “boria delle nazioni“–the conceit of nations–that they were unique in the very national characteristics that only they possessed, and the each nation had most critical aspects only it alone possessed. The conceit is amplified by the border wall, and the lie that it is built on to keep out others–and indeed to perform a sort of ritualized sacrifice of the other on the built barrier that the nation sought to create. For the Border Wall, if the most vain construction of any nation, a homeostatic barrier or norm of sorts that proclaims the identity of the nation, the unveiling of the border wall was an exploitation of the potential of television and the stagecraft of nationhood to stage that identity, as a fascistic or photo-fascist rehearsal of national foundation, or refoundation, by newly erected boundary walls that lack all porousness of the past. Indeed, the border wall seemed to be an occasion to re-educate the nation on the notions of citizenship, and the barrier that needed to be created on which to sacrifice the other. Was the conceit of the border wall a medieval conceit, or a form of statehood that was only made in the twenty first century?

The image that suggested migrants atop the wall, or of others scaling a dilapidated section of slatted border fence near San Isidro–“through a dark, treacherous canyon, notorious for human trafficking and drug smuggling”–collapsed multiple tropes of border-crossing on the least likely of targets:  a peaceful procession through Mexico that began on Easter Sunday, crossing borders to call global attention to migrants’ rights.

_101103435_mexico_caravan_migrants_route_640-nc

While the simple visualization of the course of the procession that wound through Mexico City from the southernmost border of Mexico cannot trace the mental geography on which the arrival of migrants was mapped in the United States, the progress of Central American migrants was viewed and mapped by Donald Trump and FOX in terms of the desire to see their arrival from behind the proposed $18 billion border wall that has become a contentious object of debate.  As the number of arrests along the border has grown above 50,000 for the third straight month in a row, and more children separated from parents in an attempt to broadcast cautionary warnings about the dangers of attempting to cross the border, or to appeal to existing immigration laws by asylum pleas, stories of migrants that the proposed wall would silence are increasingly difficult to silence or contain, and the human narratives of migrants are increasingly difficult to place behind the imaginary screen of an insurmountable border wall,–which of course does not exist, save as a mental construct–but is cherished as one and difficult for many to relinquish or deny.  

Even though there is no structure corresponding to the height, thickness, and architectural design that Trump had treated audiences during his campaign, the Caravan threatened to remind us that the wall didn’t exist, despite the attention that has been lavished on its proposed construction at a cost of an estimated $18 billion, far below what actual costs might in fact be. Yet the specter of the arriving migrants from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras–the triumvirate of “failing states” that Trump has demonized has provided a new basis to affirm the urgency of its construction. The caravan of migrants was cast as a threat to the nation, of urgency to place at a distance from the nation–even if they were also cast an oddly unstoppable “horde” able to evade or defy Mexican immigration authorities who had not successfully turned them back. As if to say that the “buck stops here,” their impending arrival was rhetorically magnified as a threat to create a persuasive image that reminded the nation of the urgent need for the border wall as an artifice of defining the nation.  

After months of dehumanizing migrants as faceless hordes, poised at the border, migrants seemed to have arrived at the border fencing, about to breach an inadequate barrier that is a relic dating from the era of the Vietnam War.  The news of the progression of the Caravan–and clouded interpretation of what their aims for crossing the United States’ southwestern border truly were–led them to become a poster child for the urgency with which Donald J. Trump has so stridently advocated the construction of a “real wall,” with an intransigence that almost embodies the physicality of an actual concrete wall, a month before the construction of the border wall began in San Diego and Calexico, CA, replacing some fourteen miles of improvised border fencing that was long ago made of scrap metal to “secure our border” as a way to “make America great again.”  The promotion of building the border wall was a way to ensure “public safety” followed repeated images of migrants attempting to scale or protest before existing improvised fencing–

image

-whose inadequacy to deal with the border threat Trump had relentless ridiculed as useless during his Presidential campaign.  The danger of cross-border traffic that Trump had repeatedly magnified circulated back to prominence within the national media with the arrival of the migrant Caravan.  The hope for the migrants to gain asylum in the United States was immediately questioned as their true agenda was assumed to be one of evading the border controls before the Wall was built–and the immigration laws that would permit their entry changed.

If the announcement of the construction was a feign of a a show of strength, and promoted as a basis for national pride, it was an insult to migrants petitioning for asylum, as the promotion of the border wall as a sign of national security debased the notion of the nation as one of laws and civil society.  The promotion of the wall as a slogan of nationalism remapped the nation in relation to the border, after all, in the Newspeak of social media and twitter–“Strong Borders are Security”, “Immigrants are Criminals”; “Refugees are Terrorists”–the border wall protected national security and projected the idea that all migrants were illegal.  The spatial imaginary of the border wall echoed the longstanding claim, made without evidence, that the immigrants at the border were “the worst” of their society, and for allowing an untold number of undesirables to enter the the nation.  As well as protesting the treatment of the United States”the dumping ground of European Refuse” as an insult to the nation, the insult was accepted by the nation.  The blame rests on citizens who are accept the very immigrants Europe does not want.  The image, which appeared just before Bartholdi’s “Statue of Liberty” was erected in New York Harbor, raised objections to accepting those rejected by Europe’s crowned heads, of dubious value to the nation that echoed Trump’s position.

European Refuse.pngKendrick, “And We Open Our Arms to Them” Life Magazine (July 12, 1885), 

The very chaotic narrative of depositing “human refuse”–a group of former colonials identified as “not like us” but being advanced by an invisible broom–was repeated in the image of the approaching Caravan, as the legitimacy of their requests for asylum from Central American nations were questioned, and suggested to be fundamentally an illustration of disrespect for the law.  The “Caravan” of over 1,000 migrants seeking a better life was widely mapped as a threat to sovereignty and law, recasting a protest march that promoted migrants’ rights as an invasion of sovereign space–and a grounds to deny migrants’ rights.  The  tweets of President Trump directed the attention of the country to the border to query the status of the migrants who were headed to the nation, as he announced instructions  “not to let these large Caravans of people into our country”–magnifying the migrants as a national threat through a dichotomy between “them” and “us.”   The anxieties about immigration policies that Kenrick’s cartoon registered panic at the caricatured faces of the new arrivals.

In announcing an intent of illegal entry across the border, Trump once again conjured the need for a border wall, as if trying to co-opt the message of migrants to create an image of a cross-border threat.  The construction of border walls against an “existential threat to the nation”–as did the former commander of the southern border who was named Trump’s director of Homeland Security and now his Chief of Staff—creates an urgency for protection that corrodes the possibility of an open society.  Kelly’s disparagement of migrants as “people who would not easily assimilate into the United States,” “overwhelmingly rural,” from countries where “fourth, fifth, and sixth grade education are the norm,” described them with the same disdain as Kendrick’s cartoon from the early Life of the 1880s protested the insult by which ex-colonials were sent to the United States as to Australia or India, which had indeed become “dumping grounds” for convicts, remittance men, and socially unwanted cast-offs, as well as seeing them as barbarians who threatening the social fabric of the United States.  The disparagement of migrants who are seeking asylum as uneducated, of rural origins, or indeed, as Kelly’s remarks must have reminded his audience, criminals.

ICE 2014 arrests gangs--ms13?ICE Arrests of undocumented immigrants, 2014

The disproportionate warnings of a “border threat” or “trouble at the border”  telegraphed on Twitter was inserted in a narrative rooted in the plan to create a border barrier of cast concrete in August 2015, in the heat of the Presidential election–a mission that crystallized support behind Trump’s campaign.  Trump insisted that the border wall he advocated wasn’t rhetorical, symbolic, or virtual–a space defined by hi-tech monitoring–but an impervious barrier that would succeed where other poor-quality fencing had failed.

The build-up of the arrival of the migrant caravan ran against the disproportionate attention that Trump had drawn to the border.  As Trump pedaled the fiction that the wall had already been begun, newscasters on FOX mapped a showdown by the approach toward the border of “that scary migrant caravan” of Central Americans with American law enforcement as inevitable, placing the migrants in a narrative of unwieldly crisis of immigration management on the US-Mexico border.  In ways that intersect with a broad unease of increased immigration–often manifesting itself in extreme xenophobia, othering and racism–a vaguely masked anti-immigrant sentiment that has growth in the United States over the last four to five years which Trump has deftly exploited. For the ‘border wall’ was recognized code for a thinly disguised racism, captured in John Kelly’s characterization of the Caravan–and migrants–as “overwhelmingly rural people” not capable of assimilating, who “don’t have the [necessary] skills” to do so, and are “overwhelmingly rural people,” as if ignoring just how dependent U.S. farms are on immigrant labor.

The disproportionate attention the Trump and his planned border wall directed to the southwestern border made the region seem far more immediate to all Americans–and defined the Caravan’s approach as national news.  Although the formation of such “Caravans”–a name not coined by Americans, though it gained new spin in the mouth of President Donald J. Trump, who had grown frustrated with an uptick in U.S. Border Patrol metrics of illegal entry–the tactic that was long adopted by advocacy groups to foreground migration difficulties was used by the group Pueblos sin Fronteras, or Peoples without Borders, whose name was seen as revealing their opposition to the redefinition of the southwestern border of the United States, which has also been mapped onto the wall–creating a reflexive panic at the sight of large crowds of unidentified migrants marching toward the border.  The legal and physical obstacles that Trump promised to place on Mexicans or Central Americans seeking entry to the United States were always twinned, but the arrival of the migrant Caravan seemed to give it a new urgency, and to legitimize, as a suddenly mainstream demand of border management, the ability to control human cross-border flows.

image.png

The march was described disdainfully as a “political stunt” in media, as the Attorney General and Director of Homeland Security demonized the “Caravan of migrants.”  Trump had promised the nation a border wall unlike the reclaimed corrugated metal fencing in Tijuana, but made of  “precast [concrete] plank,” a protective barrier far more powerful and robust than the inadequate fencing he treated as “a joke” and a disgrace to the nation, and which the multitude of migrants were seen as able to cross, but in need of immediate arrest and detention in a fantasy of border enforcement.  If Trump had promised to be a strongman at the border, the old border wall seemed indeed flimsy obstacles, unable to stop even the crowd from the Caravan who arrived to petition for asylum at San Ysidro, CA.

Migrants arrive at Tijuana

The peaceful protest of the Caravan de madres centroamericanas, to use their full name, was recast as a march of opposition to Trump’s border policy, while for Trump, as some three hundred odd members of the Caravan arrived at San Isidro, a recognized port of entry, in five busloads, and mounted on a fence made of repurposed scrap metal became for President Trump evidence of a crisis of sovereignty.  In response to a crisis he seemed to have created on Twitter, he ordered the Department of Homeland Security to “stop the caravan,” displaying his knack for sound bytes and slogans, and imagine that, searching for the right string of capital letters on his keyboard,  only “a strong, impenetrable WALL. . . will end this problem once and for all”–even if the problem lay with the places the migrants had fled.  The motion of “migrants,” now cast as “illegal aliens” in the right-wing press, even as they hoped for a miracle from god able to “touch the hearts of immigration agents,” was not able to be seen clearly by many, even if their course was carefully mapped over the previous month in increasingly colorful reportage.

image.png

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under border barriers, border policy, Donald Trump, immigration, undocumented migrants