It's Time to Boycott Arizona

[SuperFemme]

I like this kid. A lot.

[SuperFemme]

How losing undocumented workers is working out for AZ so far....

[The_Lady_Snow]

I am Mexican Pull Me Over (The OFFICIAL Sticker) Vamos Mexico!!! Our dignity and pride will not be beaten; we are Aztec warriors and will continue to march ahead and fight the fight against bigotry and ignorance!! Viva Mexico!!



http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...5915155?ref=ts

[dreadgeek]

Kobi:

You say kudos to the Arizona law. Okay. I think you continue to miss the problem that a lot of us have with the Arizona law so I will take a crack at explaining to you. The text of the law was amended from reading "may not solely consider race..." to reading "may not consider race". The reality is that the people here who are citizens and whose genetics run back some 9000 years in the area now called Arizona are genetically identical to the population living 10 miles south of the border. In other words, they will look exactly alike. The practical upshot of this is that if the only thing a law enforcement officer needs is 'reasonable suspicion' that the person is not a citizen and the two populations look precisely alike, the real-world affect is that citizens will be stopped unreasonably. I am against this law because while the words 'may not consider...' are nice and an improvement over "may not solely consider", it is still an invitation to racial profiling.

This country has a history of racial profiling and that history isn't ancient history.

Now, of course, one might make the argument that Sven from Sweden and Mary Katherine from Ireland also have much to fear from this law. The reality is that no one is going to pull Sven and MK over and ask to see their license because of how they look. It is entirely reasonable, given this nation's recent history, that Javier and Rosa have reason to worry that they will be pulled over even though their genes are from the L.A. basin and have been there since long before anyone remotely from the lands of Sven or MK even knew this continent existed.

I would love to say I live in an America where American citizens who happen to not be white need not worry about racial profiling. I would even be happy with an America where no non-white person need worry about it because it had been so long since those ideas had any real force in our society that no one alive can even remember when they did. Unfortunately, I don't live in that America.

No one is saying we shouldn't deal with immigration issues, least of all me. I think that the way immigration is being dealt with is, at its best, misguided and wrong and, at its worst, dangerous and playing with fire given this country's recent history. If this immigration law struck fear into the very heart of every employer in Arizona such that they wouldn't dream of not verifying the citizenship status of a person before hiring them, I would be okay with that. If the law imposed penalties that were draconian on businesses that hired workers who were not citizens, that would be okay. But that's not what this law does. Tossing a sop to the idea that businesses should verify, the main thrust of this law is targeting individuals. A guest-worker program would be a sane start. But we don't want that.

Then there's the issue of 'they're taking our jobs and eating up all the welfare'. I am a member of the last group of Americans who were taking all the good jobs, sucking up all the welfare and, while we were at it, running vast criminal enterprises selling drugs. In other words, I'm black. In the seventies it was us who were the problem. As manufacturing jobs were sent overseas--which really started in the late-sixties/early-seventies--blacks were also being given larger access to employment. Affirmative action, in this instance, was the reason why whites couldn't get jobs because all the jobs were going to 'the blacks to meet the quota'. At the same time, we were sucking up all the welfare because, apparently, we didn't want to work. So while we were simultaneously taking jobs that we were not qualified for and proudly telling our white colleagues that we weren't qualified for the job and were getting over on whitey (a popular story at the time) we were also sucking up all the social services, proudly telling OTHER white people (possibly the ones who couldn't get jobs) that we were going to pop out yet another baby so we could increase the welfare payments and, you guessed it, stick it to whitey. Then as if we weren't busy enough taking every good job in sight and simultaneously draining the public coffers with our indolent ways, we decided to take up the drug trade. So now, we were spending our workdays at jobs we weren't qualified for, would hit up the welfare office on the way home driving our 'welfare Cadillac' and then have an evening of selling drugs and engaging in some light drive-by shooting.

Any of this ringing any bells circa 1971 - 1995 or so? Now, it's the turn of Hispanics. You notice the same rhetoric (taking our jobs, sucking up social services, turning otherwise bucolic American cities into Fallujah)? Now, was it true that black Americans were simultaneously doing ALL of those things? No. But the rhetoric sounds very similar so you'll forgive me if I'm a tiny bit skeptical that this law is as race-neutral as you would have us believe it is.

Lastly, to the larger issue of immigration. I think that this country would do itself a favor if, for a generation, it simply closed the border. No one. From anywhere. For any reason other than political asylum. The reason why is that it would then allow us to deracialize the discussion. Right now, it is entirely reasonable--given this nation's track record--to presume that the problem is not that there are large numbers of immigrants it is who those immigrants are. I suspect that now (not 100 years ago but now), Irish or Scottish or Danish or English immigrants could come across in such numbers that if they all stood on the Atlantic you could walk from New York to Wales without getting your feet wet. I suspect that we would hear moving and poetic paeans to how immigration is the strength of America and how our ancestors braved this and that to come here and these new people who we are just so happy to have amongst us show, once again, that America is a beacon to the world. However, if people are coming from south of the border in any kind of significant numbers then it's not so much with the poetry and more with the invective. Suddenly, the paeans to immigration become more pro forma and less feeling.

Do I know, for a certainty, that I'm correct about that? No. But my take on it is *entirely* reasonable given American history as lived JUST by people I have met personally (covering people born between 1903 and now). None of the people I'm thinking of are alive, but none of them shuffled off this mortal coil more than a quarter century ago so we are not talking ancient history.

Actually, one last thing. Your point regarding what 'those people could do if they put their energies to work in changing the conditions in their own countries'. This statement shows a kind of geopolitical naivete that, quite honestly, I'm rather surprised at with you, Kobi. I figured that you were savvy enough to know that American corporations have a *disproportionate* amount of sway south of the border. I also figured you knew that the America is the 800 lb gorilla of the hemisphere. Just things that this nation has done in the last 50 years have had large impact on the lives of 'those people'.

1954 -- US Government, because the democratically elected president of Nicaragua instituted inconvenient (for an American fruit company), land reforms engineers a coup d' etat. The CIA replaces the rightfully elected leader with a puppet who then goes on to eliminate democracy and impose the death penalty on strikers. This strongman, Carlos Castillo Armas, rules Nicaragua for 30 years.

1960 -- Government of El Salvador falls. New ruling junta promises new elections. American president, not liking where this might go, orders the state department not to recognize the new government. It falls three months later to a right-wing government which is recognized.

1960 -- Guatemalan military attempt to stage a coup. It is put down by the local government. However, US military warships with 2000 Marines on alert take up station off the coast to lend support if needed.

1961 -- Bay of Pigs. 'nuff said.

1961 -- CIA backed coup overthrows government of Ecuador

1964 -- CIA overthrows government of Brazil

1973 -- US backs military overthrow of Salvedor Allende in Chile bringing to power Augusto Pinochet. 'nuff said.

1973 -- US backs military coup in Uruguay

1980 -- Right-wing junta takes power (again) in El Salvador backed by US

1981 -- US government backs the contras in Nicaragua to overthrow the left-leaning government using Honduras as a base.

I could go on but I won't belabor the point. So are you going to tell me that nations that, just a generation ago, were playing host-nation to American Great Game machinations and CIA dirty tricks would be in much better shape if only people who are leaving those areas for various reasons--most of them very, very good--would just stay home? And when they elect another government and that government talks to Cuba or that government has the audacity to suggest that the rich ALSO should pay taxes, what do you think that the US will do? Sit idly by or go with what has proven to work time and time again? If you believe that US foreign policy would NOT follow the historical pattern I have just one phrase for you: Hamas is the legitimately elected government of Palestine and the US government refuses to deal directly with it.

Originally Posted by Kobi

From what I read in this thread, I think I am the only one who doesnt have a problem with the Arizona attempt to curb illegal immigration. I say kudos for having the gonads to tackle a problem no one else has the guts to deal with.

It is easy to say we shouldnt deal with immigration issues because there are other more pressing problems affecting the country. Unfortunately, we use this excuse to avoid dealing with many issues because no one wants to be seen as the bad guy about any issue.

Illegal immigrations costs us taxpayers billions and billions a year in services i.e. education and health care plus immigration costs of housing illegals awaiting deportation hearings and providing them with legal representation to name just a few.

With the downturn in the economy and Americans struggling to find work, my allegiance is with the people who belong here, not with those who deliberately circumvented the laws because they wanted to do so. That type of selfish, self serving behavior is insulting.

One can only wonder what these people might be able to achieve if they put their energy to work in changing the conditions in their own countries rather than invading others.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Kobi

[Corkey,

I hear what you are saying. I could respond in kind i.e. saying people are undocumented rather than illegal is just a marketing ploy to take legal immigration out of the picture and make ilegal immigration more palatable.

And, illegals or undocumented workers do not only take "menial jobs". I have worked with many who are doing office type work and quite proud to tell me how they came here on a visitors visa or a student visa with no intention of ever leaving.

The media hype works both ways. You can say I listen to the wrong media but then again what makes yours the correct one?

It is all in the eyes of the beholder. None of us know the "truth". And to espouse one truth is more right than another is wrong.

We are a country of immigrants. My grandparents were immigrants. Tho they came in legally and put up with waiting lists and quotas and racism.

I may not agree with your take on things but I respect your right to feel differently. And, I dont have the need to be rude or belittling about it. It doesnt make either of us right or wrong. It just means we see it differently.

Wow. Thats how a respectful conversation evolves.



QUOTE=Corkey;139717]Kobi, sincerely, there is no such thing as an illegal person. Undocumented certainly, but illegal, no. The knee jerk reaction as you call it is that you have voiced what FUAX news wants to be repeated, it isn't news and it isn't correct. White americans will not do the jobs that undocumented immeragrents do, that is a fact. Please I grew up in a very Latino rich county. All the farm workers were paid a below minimum wage, the farm owners can't afford to pay them more, because we don't pay the farmer a decent dollar for the produce we consume. It is an economic nightmare that these undocumented face. Human rights for all, or none of us have them.

[/QUOTE]

Kobi, you have every right to your opinion on all of this. I differ, many others do as well. I really do believe you are not getting factual information, however, about immigrant (both legal/undocumented/illegal) workers. Also, those on the student visa's etc. are here doing a job totally within the law. If they believe they will be able to stay in the US in light of what is going on, they are mistaken. There will be immigration reform. My hope is that this reform stops how these workers are treated here. The bigotry against Latin populations in the US is sickening.

Also, just making the kinds of assumptions you are about a person working here under a visa and wanting to stay is bothersome. Why someone that is better employed (than what is available from their home country), getting an education and, oh.. paying taxes as a immigrant with a visa (it is a legal status, thus reports for income are made to the IRS and and state taxing agency necessary), wreaks of racism to me. Why are you even talking about such people in this discussion? Frankly, folks with an education job skills seem like people I want here! I hope the visa process leads to citizenship for them!

I like you, Kobi, but I am having a problem with this. Just have to disagree, I guess. But, I hope you will begin research on the fact that it is whites that are the largest population of welfare in the United States, bar none! Not, non-whites or immigrants (illegal or otherwise). And all poor people without health insurance are using our public health care funding! I don't mind this, either. Health care is a right, not a privilege as far as I'm concerned and when people are not able to have things like communicable diseases treated... it becomes a health risk for all. This very same thing happens all around the world. Why do you think traveling persons need to get certain shots?

I am not blind to there being less and less funding available for social services, education, etc. But I do not buy that this is due to illegal immigrants. Stop and take a look at how funding is done in this country as a matter of politics.

[SuperFemme]

I think if politicians were really serious about fighting undocumented workers? That they'd have super harsh laws for the businesses and individuals that hire them.

Especially in the construction/manufacturing industries, where jobs would NOT get done w/o these workers. Why you might ask? Because the employer who hires them has no responsibility. No workers comp, no insurance, a worker can lose a limb and they are quickly replaced. No compensation happens.

It's a basic supply and demand issue. It seems far more logical to go after the sources of demand than the supply showing up to meet that demand.

[The_Lady_Snow]

First Arizona passes a law that specifically targets a group of people..

THEN Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed a bill targeting a school district's ethnic studies program.

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/inde...s_law_tar.html



I ask you sincerely Kobi, where you think this is not only about immigration, this is a blatant attack on a group of people...

It looks like to me from this angle that Brewer is all about whitening up her state....

Pretty shitty next thing she will want to put homos in lil camps...



Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress.


-Martin Luther King, Jr.

[SuperFemme]

Have you all read Texas' new GOP Platform?

http://www.theocracywatch.org/texas_gop.htm

Scary times my friends. Scary times. TX also wants to rid it's state of what it calls "multiculturalism". Meaning that the material taught in school is designed to depict WHITE Judeo Christian Americans.

[Kobi]

dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well. It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

[apretty]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Again, just because you dont like my views, does not give you the right to be disagreeable.

what you consider 'disagreeable' most everyone else (in this conversation) considers 'logical, linear thought' --that's about perception.

Originally Posted by Kobi

Nor does disagreeing with you have anything to do with racism. It doesnt matter if you are brown, black, yellow, white or purple. There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

before there were 'immigration laws' there was scapegoating--for the bible tells me so: leviticus chapter 16

link: http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/16/21-22#21

from reference.com:

scapegoat


In the Old Testament, a goat that was symbolically burdened with the sins of the people and then killed on Yom Kippur to rid Jerusalem of its iniquities. Similar rituals were held elsewhere in the ancient world to transfer guilt or blame. In ancient Greece, human scapegoats were beaten and driven out of cities to mitigate calamities. In early Roman law, an innocent person was allowed to assume the penalty of another; Christianity reflects this notion in its belief that Jesus died to atone for the sins of mankind.

Originally Posted by Kobi

But then again, it is easier to just pull out the race card and feed on emotions than it is to deal with the people deliberately and willfully breaking the law.

it's been proven and i can find a source if you'd like that racists are frequent users of the term, 'race card'. additionally, hitler was also within the law when he began to (and continued to) exterminate Jews in nazi germany. which brings up an interesting related bit of information: you do realize that the man (russell pearce) behind much of the wording and passage of the bill has neo-nazi ties, right? does that make you uncomfortable? that makes me uncomfortable.

(below) that guy on the right is pearce, the one on the left is locally known neo-nazi, JT ready.



JT Ready at a Nazi rally: (2nd from right)

Originally Posted by Kobi

Just because I see things differently doesnt mean I am not uneducated or ill informed. Again, that is liberal rhetoric to divert attention from the matter at hand by knitpicking every detail for which there is evidence for both points of view. But then again, it serves your purpose to claim superior knowledge without having a clue about what my history or experience might be. Self serving I guess.

you can see things differently, or you could also invest some time in discovering what is really going on. (and not every person that disagrees with you is a "liberal")

Originally Posted by Kobi

And that is what a knee jerk liberal is. Saying you have the only truth and your views, being more compassionate must be right, and you must quell anyone who dares to speak a different truth because it doesnt fit the program.

self-examination is rad.

Originally Posted by Kobi

One can have compassion and also be reasonable and logical. But, again, it doesnt fit the liberal agenda to have such people speak out.

who's a liberal?

i can have compassion for people and still think they're ignorant, intolerant racists:

i see more people pro SB1070 and pro a ban on ethnic studies (which you don't even mention) as a vehicle to further their racist agenda--these aren't people that were "against" racism in any way, prior to the bill--they're just now able to pretend that they hate brown people because they're "illegal" and they're now able to thinly veil their racism behind a totally fascist law that once-again targets brown people. (read: racists have been empowered by this law which totally sucks. and by racists in arizona i mean gun-carrying, no license-requiring guns allowed in bars, RACISTS.)

[Corkey]

Kobi, you aren't getting it, it is UN Constitutional. The federal government is the only entity that has the authority to make and enforce immigration reform. It is not a states right. What this law did was to usurp federal law, it won't pass muster. Please go back and read the bill of rights and the rest of the amendments, I do believe it is the 14th amendment.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by Kobi

dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well. It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

Yes you do....

You stated so in your original post...

[Kobi]

Corkey, if it is unconstitutional it will be challenged and overturned.

Lady Snow...I give up. I have my views on immigration which is different from rhetoric but it is not even worth the effort.

Suffice to say, there are people outside of this forum with different views.

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Corkey, if it is unconstitutional it will be challenged and overturned.

Lady Snow...I give up. I have my views on immigration which is different from rhetoric but it is not even worth the effort.

Suffice to say, there are people outside of this forum with different views.

Still missing the point, in the meantime, US citizens are being arrested and they're rights violated because of this. I just don't get how you can be this uninformed.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Corkey, if it is unconstitutional it will be challenged and overturned.

Lady Snow...I give up. I have my views on immigration which is different from rhetoric but it is not even worth the effort.

Suffice to say, there are people outside of this forum with different views.

You realize this whole thread is about A LOT more than just immigrations issues, that law is just more than that as well..

Kobi this law has given power to someone to pull over another human being cause their skin color makes them suspicious...

You really can't see how this is a civil rights violation?

What about the ethnic studies issue?

This is an A-OK thing with you as well???

[apretty]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Suffice to say, there are people outside of this forum with different views.

at klan rallies.

[Nat]

I was listening to a podcast the other day from the Southern Poverty Law Center, and their latest report is that hate groups in the US have risen to almost 1000. Racist hate groups are focusing more on anti-immigrant stuff right now because it's an effective way of recruiting more mainstream white people during a bad economy, but racism is still at the heart of things for many of these groups.

A bit of timeline

Early 1845 James Polk promises Texas he will support moving the historical Texas/Mexico border at the Nueces river 150 miles south to the Rio Grande provided Texas agrees to join the union. "The traditional border between Texas and Mexico had been the Nueces River...and both the United States and Mexico had recognized that as the border." (Zinn, p. 148)

June 30, 1845 James Polk orders troops to march south of the traditional Texas/Mexico border into Mexican inhabited territory, causing Mexicans to flee their villages and abandon their crops in terror.
"Ordering troops to the Rio Grande, into territory inhabited by Mexicans, was clearly a provocation." (Zinn, p. 148)

"President Polk had incited war by sending American soldiers into what was disputed territory, historically controlled and inhabited by Mexicans." (John Schroeder , "Mr. Polk's War")

Early 1846 Colonel Hitchcock, commander of the 3rd Infantry regiment, writes in his diary: "...the United States are the aggressors....We have not one particle of right to be here....It looks as if the government sent a small force on purpose to bring on a war, so as to have a pretext for taking California and as much of this country as it chooses....My heart is not in this business."

May 9, 1846 President Polk tells his cabinet: "...up to this time...we have heard of no open aggression by the Mexican Army."

May 10, 1846 Violence erupts between Mexican and American troops south of the Nueces River. Of course Polk claims Mexicans had fired the first shot, but in his famous "spot resolutions" congressman Abraham Lincoln repeatedly challenges president Polk to name the exact "spot" where Mexicans first attacked American troops. Polk never met the challenge.

May 11, 1846 President Polk urges congress to declare war on Mexico.

May 12, 1846 : Horace Greeley writes in the New York Tribune: "We can easily defeat the armies of Mexico, slaughter them by thousands, and pursue them perhaps to their capital; we can conquer and "annex" their territory; but what then? Who believes that a score of victories over Mexico, the "annexation" of half of her provinces, will give us more Liberty, a purer Morality, a more prosperous Industry...?

1846 Congressman Abraham Lincoln, speaking in a session of congress "...the president unnecessarily and unconstitutionally commenced a war with Mexico....The marching an army into the midst of a peaceful Mexican settlement, frightening the inhabitants away, leaving their growing crops and other property to destruction, to you may appear a perfectly amiable, peaceful, un- provoking procedure; but it does not appear so to us."

after war is underway, the American press comments:

February 11, 1847. The "Congressional Globe" reports: "...We must march from ocean to ocean....We must march from Texas straight to the Pacific ocean....It is the destiny of the white race, it is the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon Race."

The New York Herald: "The universal Yankee Nation can regenerate and disenthrall the people of Mexico in a few years; and we believe it is a part of our destiny to civilize that beautiful country."

American Review writes of Mexicans "yielding to a superior population, insensibly oozing into her territories, changing her customs, and out-living, exterminating her weaker blood."

1846-1848 U.S. Army battles Mexico, not just enforcing the new Texas border at the Rio Grande but capturing Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, and California (as well as marching as far south as Mexico City).

1848 Mexico surrenders on U.S. terms (U.S. takes over ownership of New Mexico, California, an expanded Texas, and more, for a token payment of $15 million, which leads the Whig Intelligencer to report: "We take nothing by conquest....Thank God").

(date unknown) General Ulysses S. Grant calls the Mexican War "the most unjust war ever undertaken by a stronger nation against a weaker one."

And for those who prefer cartoons:

[SuperFemme]

Arizona Immigration Law Violates Constitution, Guarantees Racial Profiling

By Mary Bauer, SPLC Legal Director

Arizona’s newly adopted immigration law is brazenly unconstitutional and will undoubtedly trample upon the civil rights of residents caught in its path.

By requiring local law enforcement to arrest a person when there is “reasonable suspicion” that the person is in the country illegally, Arizona lawmakers have created a system that guarantees racial profiling. They also have usurped federal authority by attempting to enforce immigration law.

Quite simply, this law is a civil rights disaster and an insult to American values. No one in our country should be required to produce their “papers” on demand to prove their innocence. What kind of country are we becoming?

When Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was asked what an undocumented immigrant looks like, she responded: “I do not know what an illegal immigrant looks like. I can tell you that I think there are people in Arizona who assume that they know what an illegal immigrant looks like."

We all know what the outcome of all this double-talk will be. People with brown skin – regardless of whether they are U.S. citizens or legal residents – will be forced to prove their legal status to law enforcement officers time and again. One-third of Arizona’s population – those who are Latino – will be designated as second-class citizens, making anyone with brown skin a suspect even if their families have called Arizona home for generations.
Given the authors of this law, no one should be surprised about its intended targets. The law was drafted by a lawyer for the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), whose founder has warned of a “Latin onslaught” and complained about Latinos’ alleged low “educability.” FAIR has accepted $1.2 million from the Pioneer Fund, a racist foundation that was set up by Nazi sympathizers to fund studies of eugenics, the science of selective breeding to produce a “better” race. The legislation was sponsored by state Senator Russell Pearce, who once e-mailed an anti-Semitic article from the neo-Nazi National Alliance website to supporters.

Making matters worse, lawmakers have allowed citizens to sue local law enforcement agencies that they believe are not adequately enforcing the new law. One can be sure that FAIR and its proxies are salivating at the prospects.

The law is not only unconstitutional, it’s bad public policy and will interfere with effective policing in Arizona’s communities. That’s why the legislation was opposed by the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police. As Latinos grow more fearful of law enforcement, they will be more reluctant to report crimes, and witnesses will be less likely to cooperate with police. Criminals will target the Latino community, confident their victims will keep quiet.

Lawmakers in other states are eager to replicate this ill-advised law. Their frustration with current immigration policy is understandable, but this system must be remedied by our Congress, which should enact fair immigration reform. The federal government must craft a policy that repairs our broken immigration system and, at the same time, protects our most cherished values. States that attempt to follow Arizona’s example will only succeed in sowing fear, discord and intolerance in our communities while undermining law enforcement and inviting costly constitutional challenges.

Learn more
The Tanton Files: Nativist Leader's Racist Past Exposed
The Teflon Nativists: FAIR Marked by Ties to White Supremacy

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informe...cial-profiling

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Kobi

dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well. It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

The idea that a law that is unconstitutional in nature and allows US citizens with skin color other than white to be asked for documentation for entry into the US is just plain bigoted. This is not any way to begin any sort of immigration reform! Not even close! NADA!!!

Yes, there are problems with immigration policy and what goes on our borders. Drug trafficking, kidnapping and other crimes against people are not something I support at all. Yet, it is the job of the federal government to enact immigration law and enforce it. States (and other municipalities) doing this period is unconstitutional, period. There are reasons the constitution calls for this.

I have feelings for those immigrants that have done all of the necessary legal requirements to enter the US in all of this. Yet, it is so clear that corporate and big agri-business are the real culprits here. And frankly, they have a lot of blood on their hands with the treatment of illegal workers being brought here in inhumane ways to work for shit wages and no benefits.

When will people take off the class blinders and get why people are so desperate to take these kinds of chances in order to feed their families? And that the millions of undocumented immigrants here today have really been indentured servants (remember this phrase from history?) based upon racism. Just the fact of the differences between the feelings US citizens have about the northern and southern borders of the US tell us it is racist!

Look at the parallels between indentured servant contracts during US colonial times (and other periods in our history) and what goes on now!

Immigration reform will have to grant amnesty and a path to citizenship for those already here that are undocumented. There is no way that over 12million people can be displaced and deported! Isn’t going to happen (and should not). It is just time to see this and do it! And develop sane immigration policies at the federal level that must be observed by every state. Then, the tax base widens, crime decreases, etc.


An indentured servant was a worker, typically a laborer or tradesman, under contract to an employer for a fixed period of time..........

Companies that hire illegals do this all of the time.... they are at the heart of this problem and have been getting away with this for many years! And we have paid less for produce and service off the backs of what are really people enslaved by a form of indentured service!!!


http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.c...migrants3.html


It just makes me crazy to hear that anything like the AZ law is in any form immigration reform. It isn't, it is racism in action and an insult to the Constitition of this country which many non-white people have lost their lioves fighting for along with whites. All of which have immigrant roots with one exception only- Native Americans. Oh, and there is a hell of a lot to discuss about this in terms of border states like CA that were part of Mexico at one time.

Take your blinders off!

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Kobi

[FONT="Comic Sans MS"][SIZE="3"][COLOR="Navy"]dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

Okay then, it would appear you are far more sanguine about American citizens being treated as criminals when they are not for no other reason than that their genetics make them stand out from the majority population than I am. The Arizona law is no more a good starting place as Plessey v. Ferguson was a good start in making America a place of more equal opportunity and for much the same reasons.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

So you didn't say the following?

Illegal immigrations costs us taxpayers billions and billions a year in services i.e. education and health care plus immigration costs of housing illegals awaiting deportation hearings and providing them with legal representation to name just a few.

Both education and health care count as social services.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

Okay then if it is a labor problem deal with it as a *labor* problem and not as an immigration problem. The issue of outsourcing and a race to the bottom as far as wages and benefits is an issue, deserving of concern, in its own right and has the benefit of being race-neutral as well.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

Well, that is OUR fault. WE have created a society where the next worse thing you can be is an 'egghead' (Poindexter, nerd, geek). It is not because of foreigners that native-born Americans aren't majoring in the hard sciences, mathematics or engineering--it's because Americans think that the those subjects are *hard* and why spend the best part of a decade getting an advanced degree in, say, nuclear physics when you could get a degree that is far less work? The work still needs to be done and if we aren't pushing our kids to go into those fields then employers will look far afield for them.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

No, not strange at all--unless, of course, you cannot make a useful separation between a national government, the nation and the people of that nation. It appears that Americans, on the whole, have a singular inability to do so. So, for Americans, the Iranian government, the Iranian people and Persian civilization are all the same thing functionally indistinguishable from one another. So if the Iranian government takes some action that is harmful to America or Americans, then from our point of view the Iranian PEOPLE did this and therefore Persian culture is irredeemably corrupt, violent, etc. So from that point of view it IS ironic that people would want to come to America because, from the point of view implied in your statement, what the American government does is what the American people has done which is what America is all about and therefore it WOULD look ironic for people to immigrate here. However, if you have a more subtle--let's call it--view of things then you can realize that there is what the American government does, there is what the American people do and there is what America stands for. America's government is not particularly popular around the globe and certainly not popular in South or Central America. The American people, on the other hand, are not particularly hated around the globe and the idea of America is positively loved! So it isn't ironic although, from a certain point of view, I can understand why it might appear so.

As a quick aside, this complicated view of America--as opposed to the simplistic view of either you think America is good or you think America is bad--is something I think that most people of color in this country have to develop to greater or lesser degrees. You see, it's impossible for someone like me to ignore what happened to my parents or grandparents no matter HOW convenient that might be for the majority if I were to develop historical amnesia. However, since I can't do that AND since America is my home I have to come to some form of peace with American history and the American present. It requires being very cold-eyed realistic about where we've come from and where we are. So I can be VERY critical of America while still being patriotic.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well.

I'm not sure that the CIA's involvement in opposition to the civil rights movement was particularly significant. I certainly can think of no instances where the CIA was implicated in the assassination of civil rights workers--unless, of course, you are going to argue that MLK, Medgar Evers or those freedom riders were killed by the CIA. It's one thing to have dirty tricks and black bag jobs carried out against your movement--it's another thing entirely to have people assassinated. For one thing, if your leadership is being assassinated they wind up being inconveniently dead which, to put it mildly, seriously reduces their leadership effectiveness.

It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I'm not arguing that people are helpless. I'm arguing that it is incomplete to put the blame for the state of Latin America solely or even primarily on people who are immigrating OUT of that region by saying that their nations would be far better off if they stayed at home. To say that, for instance, them staying in Nicaragua circa 1981 would have made Nicaragua a better place *despite* American-financed guerillas (the contras) and death squads making life in that nation a living hell is to actually ascribe to these immigrants superhuman powers. My reading of history--which may be wrong--is that the assassination of national leaders who are popularly elected has a dampening effect on the prospects of a nation. This is particularly true if it happens repeatedly whenever that popularly elected leader proposes some kind of reforms to make the nation in question better and more amenable to the locals instead of some US corporation or another. Your reading of history may, of course, vary.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

It seems, actually, that you do adhere to the rhetoric on one side. You're correct, there is always another explanation or interpretation but that doesn't mean that this other explanation and/or interpretation is correct. There was another explanation and interpretation for segregation in America---that interpretation was that blacks were *inherently* inferior and Jim Crow was no worse treatment than what we deserved. I see no reason why I should give any credence to that interpretation but it IS another interpretation and explanation for why segregation lasted until the last third of the 20th century. There were studies done to support segregation that showed that blacks were inferior. One needn't do any studies, in fact, one could point to, for instance, elite schools and say "well, no black has ever gone to this or that university and therefore blacks are not capable of getting into that university". As a statement of evidence that would hold up well-enough. Let's say the university is a tier-1 school and getting into a tier-1 school as a non-legacy admit is a pretty good sign that someone has enough brain cells to rub together and generate high-quality heat. No blacks were enrolled at said school in some year. Therefore, blacks were not mentally capable of handling the work at that university. QED. Now, is that a legitimate viewpoint? No. Is it a reasonable interpretation of the data? No. But it WAS an alternative explanation to the idea that certain universities would not admit blacks.

We've gotten to a place in this country that just because someone CAN argue a contrary point we think both contrary points are legitimate and valid. I refuse to buy into this idea any longer and I also refuse to pretend to buy into it. If you argue that the dogs are fish and I argue that dogs are mammals one of us is wrong--is your argument a different point of view? Yes, but that doesn't mean it is a correct point of view.

Just having diverse ideas does not make a country great or strong. The ability to sift through diverse ideas and separate the good ideas from the bad ideas does but not merely the presence of different ideas.