An open letter from an immigrant

PABLO ZAVALA Assistant Professor of Spanish and Latin American studies

pmzavala@loyno.edu

I’d like to share an anecdote that I hope will comfort and empower those who have had similar experiences. I recently received an unsolicited email from someone I don’t know, a retired dean and professor at Tulane University. We’ll call him “Dr. X.” e message is cruel, insensitive, and ill-informed.

It is in reference to an interview I gave to the Times-Picayune | e New Orleans Advocate which was published on July 8, 2023. e article is about how I am personally a ected by the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn President Joe Biden’s executive order to forgive a fraction of student loans. I tell the interviewer that I have loans, and that I am saddened by the decision because I’ve struggled nancially since I was young. I also told him I came to this country when I was in elementary school. It is a very personal interview given during a time of great uncertainty.

A day later, I received a message from Dr. X in my professional inbox. He signed it with his name and his professional titles. Here is a paragraph verbatim in which he addresses me in the second person singular, in capital letters:

“ e United States Supreme Court ruling did not ‘make you responsible for an extra $200 a month in loan payments’. YOU made yourself responsible when you signed the loan (contract) agreement and gave your word to repay it. I borrowed money in 1969 to go to college and I paid it o in full after 10 years. I had a wife, rent, car, food, etc., but I made it work and never expected my loan to be

‘forgiven’ when my brothers got jobs out of high school and never went to college. As adults, we have the right to seek loans to pay for many things but with that right comes the duty (and honor) pay o the loans as stipulated in the required legal contract we sign.”.

A 2021 Brookings Institute study found that the lowest-income students borrow more, and that student loan practices in the U.S. “reinforce the racial wealth gap.” According to the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances, the average White family, at $188,200, has ve times the wealth of the average Hispanic family. In other words, despite the fact that a college degree is needed to imagine upward mobility, college debt can contribute to nancial instability. Additionally, minority folks like Black, Hispanic, American Indian, and Alaska Native fare worse than White people across several measures of health and health care, according to a 2023 study by the Keiser Family Foundation. e CDC has also recently categorized racism as a serious threat to the public’s health.

I suspect the following upbringing will resonate with many of my readers; I am an immigrant from Mexico, rst generation, who grew up poor. Our food stamps were still on a physical booklet, whose paper coupons you’d give the cashier, like some sort of dystopian game. Statistically, I should not have a PhD and I should not be a professor, but I’ve followed a gossamer American Dream like, I presume, many of you.

I still believe that this country is the holder of many valuable principles worth ghting for. But, I do think that Dr. X’s message represents a racist and xenophobic worldview, even though he may not be aware of that. e situation comes across as an extremely privileged White man yelling at a Brown immigrant to pay the system, without acknowledging inequities that cut across racial and class lines. We now know that privilege often translates to inherited wealth, social advantages and bene ts. e person is born with these characteristics, not earned. ere is certainly a place for dialogue about student loans and what we owe to each other, and a place for dialogue about the economic whims of processes like in ation, global recessions, and devastating pandemics. But, Dr. X’s analysis disregards phenomena like these. I think that those conversations are important to have, but unfortunately that is not what happened. His intention was not to engage in meaningful debate. e result of this metonymical event exempli es a fortuitous opportunity to expound succinctly on relevant systemic concerns. Understanding these power dynamics, some steadfastness, and a little bit of kindness are needed to rectify socioeconomic inequalities especially as governmental leaders – at the local, state, and federal levels – continue to modify and uphold the law in order to prolong oppression against the most vulnerable. And while the latter consists of a heterogenous gender, race, and class spectrum, the common denominators lie in the gaps between the power holders and the people.

Normally, I would ignore such a message, but I think his position of power makes his diatribe that much more insidious and worth addressing. He is well known for his views. My interview represents a moment of vulnerability meant to evoke humanity, not viciousness.

Colonialism and imperialism, as Frantz Fanon argued in “ e Wretched of the Earth”, are deeply rooted in the Western bourgeoisie’s racism as an ideology that perpetuates their power. Capitalists are like “war criminals” who defer to practices like “deportation, massacres, forced labor, and slavery” to establish and maintain their wealth. e economically powerless are at the whims of the ruling classes.

Yet to disdain immigrants’ contributions to this country is to ignore reality.

Anthony Bourdain once said that the entirety of the restaurant industry in the U.S. would collapse overnight if it weren’t for immigrants working hard in the back of the house. Agricultural elds have been worked by immigrants for decades, laying the foundations for indispensable farm produce production and consumption all across the country. Nonetheless, eld harvesters and cultivators historically have had scarce wages and bene ts, leaving the ght for these rights up to them by unionizing, striking, and boycotting. We tend to criminalize their worth.

As Cuauhtémoc César García Hernández put it, the U.S. has an obsession with locking up immigrants. Day laborers have built a myriad of houses in practically all the major cities for pennies on the dollar, leaving Florida construction companies scrambling when Governor Ron DeSantis signed o on Senate Bill 1718 in 2023 targeting undocumented workers. What is more, even those hypocritically advocating intolerance rely on this crucial force. Donald Trump’s businesses, as e Washington Post has reported, have hired undocumented workers as waiters, groundskeepers, and housekeepers for years, belying his public chauvinistic rhetoric disguised as patriotism.

Across the globe, a lack of concern for immigrants seeking shelter and a better life has resulted in unnecessary deaths that the media ignores. DeSantis and Trump represent leading conservative voices today in the U.S. that have in uenced a radical right-wing shift in the country incapable of embracing di erence. ey portend a dark future for many of us, especially in the face of looming elections. But, power concedes nothing, as Frederick Douglass once wrote.

Why am I writing this open letter?

I want to put people like Dr. X and the oppression he represents on blast. I consider Dr. X’s remarks nothing short of an act of microaggression, maybe vehement animosity, not only towards me – something I, like many of you, have experienced for a long time – but towards most of the country. I publicly denounce his disrespectful and inappropriate message.

I don’t mention his name simply because it is the behavior and rhetoric I wish to condemn. e aggressive narratives I’ve just written about threaten U.S. democracy to the extent that we value human rights. Furthermore, to my reader: if you are Brown, Black, LGBTQ+, Latinx, indigenous, poor, an immigrant, or a woman, you are not alone. I am sorry if you have been treated in a similar fashion and continue to be treated that way by our leaders.

We need to stay the course on breaking down structures of economic, political, and social subjugation, the same kind represented by the Confederate statues taken down in New Orleans a few years ago. Resistance – including allies – has proven to be intersectional in the ght for the Jesuit tenets of social justice, solidarity, and kinship. e values this country can represent in many ways to many of us are still those of kind heartedness and inclusion, embedded within those sacred foundational words: “We the People.” If we want a new reality, full of equity, equality, socio-economic justice, liberty, and a real shot at the pursuit of happiness, then we must continue to ght and have the hope that it can be done.

In solidarity, Pablo Zavala

" e best part is being back on campus seeing all these fresh new faces and knowing that new communities are about to be born. All these new people about to join the wolfpack. I don’t see a bad part but if I had to pick one I would say the heat."

" e best part was meeting people and the worst part was the elevator."

What are the best and worst parts of move-in?

"I liked decorating my room and the worst part was taking the stairs because the elevators were too full and that was rough. e best part is being done and seeing the room all nished and complete. e worst part was lugging everything up the stairs"

" e best part was de nitely decorating the dorm and the worst part was waiting in the line."

Opinions/Letters to the editor Quote of the week

The Maroon actively promotes the inclusion of a wide range of perspectives and opinions within our letters section.

Opinions should preferably be around 500 words Letters should preferably be 150-200 words can have a commitment to Jesuit values, equity, and inclusion, but it's not helpful if it's only displayed on a website, if it's not implemented in proper faculty, proper courses."

Letters should refer to an article that has appeared within the last two weeks.

Opinions/letters must include the writer's name and major. Submissions are due no later than 4 p.m. the Sunday before publication.

Email us your letters — letter@ loyno.edu.

Submissions may also be made online at www.loyolamaroon.com.

- Psychology senior Akilah Toney on lack of support in minors.

The Student Government Organization here at Loyola continues to prove themselves as an organization that is fundamentally disconnected from the people that it serves. In last semester’s election, out of the thousands of full time students that attend Loyola, only 92 people voted in total – 83 voting for the current president - the only candidate and nine people abstaining.

When last year’s elections were taking place, only two emails were sent out. One was sent the day before the election, and the other was sent the day of. Combined with the fact that fewer than 100 people voted for our current SGA administration, the lack of transparency in our student government shines bright in a stark light.

The purpose of the student government is to be the student body’s representative on campus. Specifically, they are our representation to the Board of Trustees, the highest level of authority on campus. Student participation in student government elections is crucial to having our voices be heard by those who have the power to drive change. If our student government is not truly representative of the student body then we, as a student body, lack a voice in one of the places where we need it most. It is impossible for the student government to be truly representative of the student body when so few people participate in the voting process.

It is negligent on the part of the student government to not ensure that students are aware of elections when they happen and how students can participate.

The student body needs to have faith that their student government represents them. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3 of the

SGA Constitution states that their purpose is “to act as the principal representative voice of the student body to the Loyola University.” The SGA does not understand its own purpose as our representative.

It also proves that the student government needs to improve people’s understanding of what the student government is responsible for, especially in regards to funding.

Along with the primary responsibility of being the “principal representative voice” of the student body, in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8 of the SGA Constitution, it is stated that one of SGA’s responsibilities is “to budget and allocate the revenue received from student fees for student services and organizations.”

This puts the student government in charge of hundreds of thousands of dollars. These funds come out of our tuition. In the fall of 2022, SGA was given $125,000 to allocate to students in the forms of events, clubs and club sports, grants, and travel funds. How this money is spent matters because it is ultimately our money. And, when less than 100 people decide who gets the checkbook, then we cannot be sure they would spend that money in our best interests.

The student government needs to do better and foster better elections and act as better representatives for our student body. Because of their negligence, they have failed to fulfill their responsibilities as “the principal representative voice.” The funding we as students receive for events and organizations should not be decided by a cabal of individuals led by someone chosen by less than 10% of us.

HOWLS & GROWLS

HOWL to 100 Years of The Maroon

GROWL to the HEAT

HOWL to indictment season

GROWL to Austrailian beach worms

HOWL to Aron Boehle

GROWL to umbrellas

HOWL to the RICO Act

GROWL to authoritarian governments

HOWL to enviromental justice

Editorial Board

Patrick Hamilton Editor-in-Chief

Maleigh Crespo Managing Editor for Print

Addison Laird Managing Editor for Digital

Daniela Martinez Maroon Minute Executive Producer

Maria DiFelice Maroon Minute Operation Manager

Sophia Maxim Design Chief

Anna Hummel Photo Editor

Kloe Witt News Editor

Melody Newsome Breaking News Editor

Natalia Silva Life & Times Editor

Jacob L'Hommideu Worldview Editor

Sofia Johnson Comics Editor

Athena Marks Chief Visual Artist

Mark Michel Opinion and Editorial Editor

Taylor Falgout Senior Staff Photographer

Ava Acharya Senior Staff Writer and Copy Editor

Ecoi Lewis Content Editor

Editorial Policy