By Demet Haksever
Demet Haksever is an occasional guest columnist. All candidates were invited to send submissions.
Editor’s Note: On Sept. 28, WHAV sent all candidates a notice of opportunities to appear on Open Mike and submit a column. “Candidates are invited to submit a bylined article to appear in a special section at WHAV.net, which will also be shared via social media. The candidate may author the article or may permit a third party to write one (an endorsing individual or organization, for example). Articles will appear in the order received and may be subject to editing to correct grammatical errors or meet Associated Press Style guidelines. No content will otherwise be altered. WHAV recommends you use “inverted pyramid” style—that is, place what you believe to be the most important information at the top of the article.”
Paul Magliocchetti’s statement accusing his opponent of “divisiveness” based on the word “nativist” used in a newspaper post by someone else is very disturbing, especially coming from a candidate running from the Democratic Party for the state representative seat.
First of all, Paul Magliocchetti should allow Andy Vargas to speak for himself. But more importantly, Magliocchetti’s statement shows a misconception of the word “nativist” and lack of knowledge of American history regarding the origins of the word “nativism.” The term nativist refers to someone who favors “native inhabitants” against “immigrants,” and currently this term refers to “anti-immigrant” attitude. In other words, the “nativism’ is the very definition of “divisiveness,” not the other way around as suggested by Paul.
The use of the term “nativist” originated with mid-19th century anti-immigrant movements in the United States directed against Catholic immigration from countries such as Germany and Ireland and continued as an anti-Chinese nativism in 1870s. Later, nativist movements targeted immigrants from southeastern Europeans, Italians, as well as Jewish and Mexican immigrants. In fact, the term ‘nativism” encompasses racist movements such as KKK and neo-nazists. In the same way, Donald Trump’s and Bannon’s policies are defined as “nativism” by many political historians.
If Paul Magliocchetti is not embracing those divisive, anti-immigrant and anti-American policies, he should immediately retract his statement and apologize from Andy Vargas and his supporters.
“In other words, the “nativism’ is the very definition of “divisiveness,” –
These are the words of the anti-Trump narrative by the far left ideologues, and of course Haksever is doing her best carrying the ideological banner.
No where, in any dictionary, could I find “nativism” being synonymous with “divisiveness”. This is part of the far-left rhetoric. Maybe some of the devout Party loyalists could stop repeating what they’re told to say and start actually thinking for themselves for once? The “right” does the same thing, but in this case, Haksever is promoting something that isn’t even factually true, but is in fact an opinion and/or belief, presenting it as being fact. Typical rhetorical bullshit, but bullshit nonetheless while being red meat for their fellow sycophants and Party loyalists.
Take a look in the mirror Demet, that’s divisiveness staring back at you.
Come on, Duncan. Nativism connotes divisiveness. You can figure it out. Save the tirade for another day.
I know exactly what it means, and I also recognize context. That was not the INTENT here.
I thank you for this post as well, to clarify an important issue. I’m deeply concerned by the behavior of Mr. Magliocchetti
Thanks Tim for publishing Demet’s clarification of what “nativism” means. Nativists in this country have a sorry history of opposing almost all immigrant groups that have given so much to this country. And that is what is happening now. I think the views of all are well represented at WHAV. Mr. Magliocchetti’s statement was published right before the election, for instance.
Appreciated the article, and the point of view being expressed. And since when is being politically active a negative. I’ve been a Democrat, but also a Democrat who is tired of the Party telling me who I should support. Vargas is a newcomer, not in my district, but I can see the traditionalists closing ranks to shut him out, and improperly using words like Nativist to scare people. Sick of it. Good for you Demet Haksever for calling Paul Magliocchetti out.
Wow…
So an anti-Trump Vargas supporter, and one who hosted a private, invite only town hall for Niki Tsongas gets her own space?
Come on Tim, I’m usually in support of you not getting involved in partisanship, but one-day before an election and you let this person have ink on your pages in this manner?
This was a tough call and readers will decide whether it was the correct one. On Sept. 28, WHAV sent all candidates a notice of opportunities to appear on Open Mike and submit a column. “Candidates are invited to submit a bylined article to appear in a special section at WHAV.net, which will also be shared via social media. The candidate may author the article or may permit a third party to write one (an endorsing individual or organization, for example).
Articles will appear in the order received and may be subject to editing to correct grammatical errors or meet Associated Press Style guidelines. No content will otherwise be altered. WHAV recommends you use “inverted pyramid” style—that is, place what you believe to be the most important information at the top of the article.”