|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Bracero: A Mexican laborer permitted to enter the United States and work for a limited period of time, especially in agriculture. Etymology: Spanish, laborer, from brazo, arm, from Latin brcchium, from Greek brakhn, upper arm.
Program: A system of services, opportunities, or projects, usually designed to meet a social need. Etymology: From French programme, agenda or public notice, from Greek programma, from prographein to write before, from pro (before) + graphein (to write).
"The progrem was designed initially to bring a few hundred experienced Mexican agricultural laborers to harvest sugar beets in the Stockton, California area"
I doubt very much that the program's designers wished for such a narrow scope, or its design would not have accomodated 4.5 million crossings without major revision. Its "raison d'etre" may well have been a shortfall of a few hundred workers, but to claim this as its sole purpose assumes much...
Further the assertion that the program came to provide "Much needed" farm workers is not supported, so I've replaced the phrase "much needed" with the inarguable "low wage" Bustter 06:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
changing: Over the twenty-two year period, The Emergency Farm Labor Program or Bracero Program as it is called, the United States saw the influx of some 4.5 million guest workers from Mexico. (This is wrong. There were 4.5 million contract signed during the duration of the program, but many of the workers made the trip several times, meaning there were actually significantly less immigrants than 4.5 million).
Assuming the author of the parenthetical aside to be correct, I have provided this revision: Over the twenty-two year period, The Emergency Farm Labor Program, informally known as the Bracero Program, sponsored some 4.5 million border crossings of guest workers from Mexico (some among these representing repeat visits by returned braceros). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bustter (talk • contribs) 04:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
To me, the information in the two main sections always seemed to overlap, and I wasn't sure how to separate it. Suddenly, though, I saw that the first part mainly gave the facts, and the second gave reports on published interpretations of the facts. PLEASE feel free to rearrange my work, but don't revert without discussion. Thanks! Mdotley 01:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Does the overview of the "Contemporary Temporary Worker Program" even belong here? Mdotley 02:03, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
End of program
Everything I can find in the mainstream literature seems to say that Congress' main reason for ending the program in 1964 was the belief that there were enough out-of-work Americans to do the work. See, e.g., NY Times Apr 18, 1965 p. 48. The idea that revulsion at humanitarian abuses was key looks like revisionist history. Fitzaubrey 15:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Then by all means, be bold, and put it in the article, with the sourcing. Mdotley 21:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Pre-UFW, Chavez was an outspoken critic of the bracero program, seeing it as a means to recruit strikebreakers and keep workers already in place always under threat. Whether Chavez's activism had anything to do with the program's end, I don't know. But Chavez's power and influence certainly reached its plateau in the years just following. Bustter 05:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Tom Lehrer's song George Murphy has a line in it referring to the Egyptian Pharos needing to import "Hebrew Braceros," which compares the Braceros' treatment to biblical depictions of slavery of the Jews in Egypt.
- It's 'notability', not notoriety. I come from the technology side of Wikipedia where there's less of an eagerness to put a single line of a song into an article under the premise that it is important to the topic. I see a small portion of a Lehrer song as cruft and nothing more. It would be different if an entire song were composed about Braceros, if a photographic image of Braceros were on the cover or if some musical artist called themselves Banda Bracero. Binksternet (talk) 00:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Trivia that is too trivial for the trivia section? Reminds me of this oldie: