I know this is going to be a screwed up mess quote wise, because I do not understand the multi quote function. I may have to delete it if it's too messy, or there's always that ignore button for those who find it too cumbersome, aj i may pm you if you please
*****
---End Quote---
Actually no one has said or implied anything remotely like the idea that anyone should die. I will, however, reiterate that laws have consequences.
the consequences you mentioned, could cost lives. there is no need for casualties. how much acceptable collateral damage will you allow?
*****
---Quote---
When anyone says "boycott a state" they are recommending bankrupting all of the residents.
---End Quote---
No, they are recommending putting pressure on the state of Arizona to change the law. The whole idea of a strike or a boycott isn't to ruin businesses, it is to put pressure on them. Right now, Arizona has a law that is explicitly racist and is an open invitation to racial profiling. It is meant to make a particular population feel unsafe and unwelcome and like second-class citizens. It is meant to intimidate citizens. That law must be repealed.
how do 'THEY' recommend putting pressure on a state? it's the state legislature that needs to make the changes, not the innocent citizens, second class, third class, steerage, everyone went down on the titanic, too. i understand the racist laws and their intended target, but everyone will get blood spatter on them before this boycott is through. no one here is saying that anyone deserves to feel unsafe or unwelcome. but a boycott, intimidates ALL of the inhabitants of the state. how does that resolve the situation? 6 million wrongs make a right? the laws must be repealed, yes i agree wholeheartedly. but 'THEY' won't do it successfully by boycotting anything/everything associated with arizona. people i know and love in the state, regardless of their color or immigration status, will be impacted negatively and unnecessarily.
*****
---Quote---
Bankrupt people starve to death. It's hard to move an entire family to make a political statement -- just as it is difficult for everyone HERE to move TO arizona to make a political statement.
---End Quote---
No one is suggesting that people move to 'make a political statement'. I do believe it would behoove Hispanics living in Arizona to find the exits but that is not about making a political statement, that is about making sure that they are safe. Whites living in Arizona have no reason to move. Let them stay. As I said last night, an exodus is a boycott by another name. I think that Hispanics should leave the state of Arizona and move somewhere they will be welcome.
You said earlier in post #921, this:
"I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that the good people of the Birmingham Bus Company did not think that the Birmingham Bus Boycott was the answer for the problem of blacks sitting in the back of the bus. I'm going to also suggest that the good people of the Woolworth's company didn't think that a boycott of the Woolworth's lunch counter was the right way to deal with that manifestation of segregation. The targets of a boycott NEVER think that it's a good idea--that's kind of the whole point of a boycott is to motivate people to change the conditions that precipitate the boycott.
However, I'm all ears. If a boycott isn't the answer and a mass exodus of Hispanics isn't the answer, what is?"
I gave you my best solution, to fill the state with a majority of card-totin registered voters who could put the legislature's feet to the fire. It's not a bus company that's writing bad laws in AZ, it's not Woolworth's doing it either. If you say boycott the state, it sounds too large and too vague for people to grasp. But how does one boycott a legislature? Well, there are a couple of ways. Ringing the hook off the legislator's desk has usually proved fruitless -- but people can try that. What COULD work is already being done, which is involving the Department Of Justice and the US Supreme court to decide a couple of matters pertaining to the issue.
A boycott is defined as "a form of consumer activism involving the act of voluntarily abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with a person, organization, or country as an expression of protest, usually for political reasons."
An exodus is defined as "a journey by a large group to escape from a hostile environment"
I can't find any references showing the two are linked or any way similar. But for the sake of argument, if you do advocate hispanics finding the exits, what's to say they would be any safer in another state? i mean no disrespect, but i cannot figure out what state of the US, if any, has rolled out the welcome mat for hispanics, whether they are in the US legally or not. this is why i suggest to fill the state up with a majority of fair minded people who can push a recall of Brewer, for one who could strike down what she signed -- but I suspect her replacement would be a similar clone. if all hispanics leave Arizona, do they get to come back after the smoke has all cleared? if you say they are welcome in one of the 50 states, would it not be similar to the ghettos of WWII?
*****
---Quote---
hmm... but why *aren't* we ALL moving *TO* arizona to register to vote as arizonans to change things?
---End Quote---
Why should ANY person of color put themselves in harm's way? If it were *just* this law, maybe you would have a point but it isn't *just* this law. There's the 'no teaching ethnic studies in school' regulation with its attendant 'no teaching if you have a 'thick' accent' provision. There's the billboards showing a Hispanic family as "the biggest threat facing our nation". And then there's this gem; on 3 Oct 2009 an interracial couple was walking through a park and a man came up to them and asked the black man what he was doing with a white woman. They walked on, he got into a car, followed them and shot them. She died, he lived. In 2009. Over interracial dating. In Arizona.
no one should be put in harm's way. i'm not saying people of a specific color should move to arizona and register to vote. i'm saying everyone eligible to vote regardless of color COULD move to arizona, to work to change the laws that need to be changed. by keeping a white moneyed elite majority, arizona will *never* be safe for people of color. or for anyone except the moneyed elite, really. just as school busing did not improve racial relations, neither will promotion of the busing of hispanics OUT (or however you propose to move them out) of arizona. the billboard you mentioned is meant to pander to the worst kind of fear, and that is the fear that the "HAVES" could lose the value of their property or their supposed 'supremacy'. the incident in october 2009, has been re-enacted in almost every state of the union in the past decade (or longer). those stories are told to instill fear. to keep people of color down. yes, sadly they are true. but if everyone of color leaves arizona in 2010, it's a win-win for the white supremacists of arizona, and a lose-lose proposition for every other state in the union, because the copy-cat laws will really get rolling across the country.
*****
---Quote---
How can anyone EXCEPT a privileged individual expect *others* to make sacrifices to make america better, instead of taking the bull by the horns ourselves? the ONLY pro-active measures are votes, according to this thread. So... if you're not a registered arizona voter, GET THERE AND REGISTER.
---End Quote---
Except that sword cuts both ways. It is always people of color who have to exercise infinite patience. At each step in the last century, black people were told we had to wait. ONE day, but not today, we could go to any school. ONE day, but not too soon, we could live in any neighborhood. ONE day, but wait for it to come, we will be able to marry anyone we love. And on and on and on. Even today, if someone says something offensive it is always and forever people of color who are supposed to be patient, forbearing and understanding.
i hear you. i think the only thing african american people never hear is accusations that they are illegal immigrants. these days, it seems like everywhere i go, people complain about illegal immigrants. undocumented, workers and otherwise. surprisingly, some people who have made some of those comments to me were people of color other than hispanic. millions of americans are now out of work, and they point to everyone for blame -- but first, the ones who "took their jobs." When logic shows them that it's overwhelmingly true that corporations are opting out of using american workers and choose overseas labor instead, they still don't get it. there is a blind spot. i'm not asking anyone to have infinite patience. if (A) votes are the answer to changing arizona's laws, then (B) the fastest way to do that is to fill the state with residents who will vote to do the right thing.
Or, "vote early and vote often" as they once used to say in Chicago. I'm really surprised no one has suspected Brewer of having a 'fix' in the registrar's office, counting her ballots twice for every one of Goddard's.
*****
Votes have consequences or they should have. Arizona, a state in a democratic republic, elected people who passed a law that in 2010 makes a segment of the population second-class citizens. The state, by its democratic behavior, made a choice and yes it absolutely sucks that people who made another choice will feel pain because of it. They don't deserve it. But neither does the Hispanic mother deserve to have to fear being pulled over by a cop when she was just running down to get a few items at the grocery store and so doesn't have her birth cert on her. For that matter, neither does the Hispanic father who may have to hold it together while he is humiliated by some cop who asks him questions along the "so how long have you been in this country" line. You have not truly tasted of life's bittersweet tragedy until you have had to watch your father hold it in while his very dignity is assaulted in front of his family. They don't deserve it either.
i understand that this is a very emotional issue, and is the crux of the matter. no one in america is so superior that they have the right, just because they wear a badge, to speak condescendingly to a fellow human being. the state's democratic behavior voted a buffoon into office, she is a pawn who was put into office by big moneyed interests. but the state's democratic behavior has no say on sb1070. it's not a ballot initiative. every person who I know personally in Arizona is against SB1070 -- and they cannot undo it. Every one of them did not vote for Brewer, but she's there sitting in the governor's chair.
*****
I'm not talking about people in the country without proper documents or people who have overstayed their visa. I'm talking about people whose bloodlines have lived on the same patch of land since not long after the last ice age ended. They are citizens. I'm talking about people born here. They, too, are citizens. After the Civil Rights movement, I and many others thought, it would appear incorrectly, that we had at long last settled the issue in this country of whether you could make laws designed to make a group of people second-class citizens based upon race. Since Arizona has chosen to take a step backward, I think two things should happen until the state comes to its senses:
1) Every Hispanic person who *can* leave the state should give very serious consideration to finding a new zip code.
2) People should not vacation in Arizona, organizations should not have their conventions in Arizona.
The people who *own* the businesses in Arizona want to continue doing so. If they begin to feel the pressure, they *will* pressure their government to repeal the bill. That's how strikes and boycotts work. That's why they are used.
I really hear what you're saying. It's a huge step backwards. I understand too, about harrassing people of color simply because of their color. It has happened to members of my own family who live in Arizona and elsewhere. They are citizens too, some of them for generations and some of them are first generation, they all have 'papers' and now they have an added burden of having to carry a shitload of paper around but even larger than the wad of paper is the pervasive fear. This pressure you say business owners should put on the government to change the laws, how does one go about pressuring the government when the legislature is being driven by a corporate machine?
*****
---Quote---
There was an article that came out a couple of days about about how next door in Nevada they are considering their own version of SB1070.
http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/...ntProfile=1058 - "2 Nevada lawmakers to push for immigration law"
sooooo..... BOYCOTT ARIZONA and while you're at it, BOYCOTT NEVADA ... and BOYCOTT THE OTHER 20 STATES CONSIDERING SIMILAR MEASURES TO SB1070
---End Quote---
Any state that passes a similar law should have to fear the exact same set of consequences. Perhaps that would give them a moment of pause.
I'm afraid that the results of that could be widespread panic, not a moment of pause.
*****
---Quote---
in case everyone is unaware, the latest racist policies of arizona are driven by a rigged corporate game. I'll be back with details of that, too. early in the thread, someone named dean robert hit it on the head.
---End Quote---
They may be driven by that and I think that a number of us are aware of it. However, that does not change, substantially, the effects on the ground. Racist laws should have consequences for states that pass them and NOT just the sole consequence that the ethnic minority targeted by them gets to live in fear.
Where you and I differ on "the ground" aspect is that to me, the first order of business is do everything possible to reverse the law. Not engage in fear-mongering and telling people to leave the state and boycott anything/everything Arizonan. Unfortunately, reversing bad law takes time. But hasty decisions such as moving away, or wishing ill consequences on 6 million people is not the answer, for *me*. I understand you have your reasons, and I read them several times to really understand them and know there are no pat answers to a challenge of monumental proportions.
These links tell a little bit about who drove the campaign money machine for brewer, and why:
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conten...igrants-profit
http://mydd.com/users/restore-fairne...mmigration-law
The states that are eyeing SB1070 are not doing it because they hate illegal immigrants, the Pollyanna in me believes it in my soul. But since they have learned that a majority of "white americans" have this knee jerk reaction to immigration, they go for the lowest common denominator which in this case, also happens to be the largest voting bloc. Whether it's a state bill or a voter initiative, the copy cats know their game better than we do. I can't remember what the statistic is, but in not too many years, whites will be in the minority in the US. During Clinton's presidency (when it looked like queers might actually gain the right to legally wed in a few states), we were blindsided with DOMA. This latest attempt to put people in their place is driven by the same thing: MONEY and PROPERTY RIGHTS.
The other states are probably being wooed by the same corporate interests that are cozy with Jan Brewer. It's all about $$$! I know there is much more truth to come out, and it will be too late for some people
******