It's Time to Boycott Arizona

[dreadgeek]

[quote=DomnNC;238618]

Good for you that you were able to keep your computer and internet access while unemployed, some people can't, for some people that's the first thing that goes because it's NOT a necessity in order to live or to put food on their table, or keep a roof over their kids heads. They can check out classifieds thru their local paper or word of mouth if need be. [ /quote]

The same local paper they can't afford and thus do not have when said paper has information about, oh, a bill that invites to racial profiling.

Lastly, you don't know me so don't presume to accuse me of anything, goal post moving indeed. I'm just speaking up about people who seem to think they are so much better than others because they have an education and choose to be more politically aware than others. I don't go for blanket statements or putting a group of people down because they don't choose to participate in something. Not everyone is an activist and that's OK. You seem to think that those who don't choose to be an activist are less than you or anyone else who chooses to be so. If you don't think that way then perhaps you should read back over some of your postings because it sure does come off that way.

Fascinating. I say that you are goal post moving--something I think can be demonstrated and you accuse me of knowing you. Yet, you believe you can get in my head and tell me what I think about people who are not activists? Well, not even wrong on that score. I have said not a word about being activists. I have said quite a bit about being informed and voting neither of which I would consider activism--I would consider those citizenship. I don't think everyone has to be an activist. I have been an activist and I have had my periods where I was burnt out and didn't do activism.

However, through that time I have tried to be a citizen. We get the government and, by extension, the political structure we deserve. This isn't Iraq under Saddam Hussein nor is it Saudi Arabia under the House of Saud. Until demonstrated otherwise, this is a democratic republic and if it is screwed up then that is because we have allowed it to become so. This country does not belong to Wall Street. It doesn't belong to hedge fund managers. It belongs to ALL of the American people.

Yet pitifully few of the American people vote and thus bail out on the civic life of their nation. Is unemployment high in your area? Does it appear that it's not getting any better? That is, in no small part, because of decisions made by state, local and national governments. Are there homeless people sleeping under bridges? Why? Because, again, decisions made--largely in the area of budget priority--that create the conditions where people cannot afford housing and there are no services that can keep them off the streets. If people don't vote or if they vote in an uninformed fashion then they are as responsible for the condition of the country as every member of Congress, every mayor, every state representative, every governor, every President. If that is not true, then this isn't any kind of free society. As long as we can vote people out of office and they are compelled to relinquish power when we do so, then we have the government we deserve. If we have a government we cannot influence at all then whatever this is, it is not a democratic republic and we must then ask ourselves a different set of questions.

I like to believe that this country is still subject to the rule of law and the will of the voters enough that we can still save our country from, well, us. I would prefer people be informed voters and also give a damn enough about their country and the world they are leaving for their children to be informed about it--and by informed I mean something more substantive than the latest antics of the Kardashians or who is on American Idol.

To be honest, I don't read much of what you say because you interlace so many other things with what you are trying to say, blurring the lines, writing a book and can't seem to get to the point of the matter without losing the audience. Brevity can be your friend.

I want to make it clear here that you made this personal and I'm going to let this slide. I didn't ask for your critique although I always find writing critiques helpful. But you made this personal, not I. You'll probably keep making it personal but to the best of my ability I won't.

You have a point, I understand the point you are making but disagree with it. I don't think citizenship is activism and I think that citizenship involves trying to be informed about what is going on in your city, state, and nation. I think it has consequences whether one does or not. I think that the state of the polity reflects something about the people--if the people run the polity. Look around you, how good of a job do you think We the People have done in the last, oh, quarter century?

Cheers
Aj

[dreadgeek]

One other point (I'll try to be brief) and then I'm off to take a bath and soak with a book before diving into homework.

I think that some of what is going on here is that some of the people of color are letting slip our very justifiable frustration, fear and anger. it's bloody 2010. The kind of law that is SB 1070, the kind of regulations that are represented by the no teaching ethnic studies in Arizona, are supposed to be relics of the past. This argument is supposed to have been settled. Not in the sense that there was no racism and no institutional racism. But there is the force of a culture that was born with racism in its ideological DNA and there is racism as the *LAW*. I will probably always worry--with good reason--about driving while black. But it isn't *legal* for a cop to pull me over because I'm black. If there's nothing wrong with my car, if I can prove that I was pulled over unjustly, I can make my complaint and perhaps, depending, I might get somewhere with it. But when it is the law, there is no complaint coming.

Corkey, Snow any other POC here I'm not trying to speak for you but I think that is some of the frustration that comes out. I know that for me, there were other issues I thought we should be working on now and here it is looks like we are seeing the beginnings of Jim Crow Part II. Like I said, I was under no illusion that this was paradise but at least this kind of crap was not passed into law. I thought we were done with legalized, state-mandated, racism.

Maybe I'm wrong if I am, Corkey, Snowy et. al. let me know but when I heard the statements "this is what they deserve in Arizona" I'm hearing frustration and a sense of "no, this doesn't get to happen with no negative consequences. A price has to be paid for racism this blatant."

Cheers
Aj

[Julie]

Originally Posted by DomnNC

Homeless people can most certainly vote! They use the address of the homeless shelter they are staying at or where they collect their checks if they are getting any!

Actually, this is a fallacy. Homeless people must show they have a permanent mailing address. A homeless shelter is a transient place and often times only used for a few days. Perhaps you are thinking of a Half Way House - Half Way Houses are considered permanent residences.

At least this is how it is in New York.

[Corkey]

You hit the nail on the head again AJ. We should have been past this long ago, but we're not. Partly due to lack of education and partly due to willful ignorance we still have that damnable Jim Crow crap to deal with. It is 2010 for another month, and in that month I am hoping with all my might that we will stop this stealing of our democracy by the plutocrats. Fascism is alive and well and it is in this country. It is up to each one of us to speak out, and yes boycott, because if we don't who will?

[The_Lady_Snow]

My frustration comes from the blatant underlined comments that are excused after they are called upon. My frustration comes from asking repeatedly to not have the term illegal thrown out there as well. My frustration comes from the ridiculous excuses for not being up to date when it comes to what is going on in your state. My frustration comes from the colorful adjectives that are chosen to describe my people. ( I bet I would get my ass reamed for using cr%$#@r if refering to a white person)

These arguments get old, but I hang on hoping that when we come in and points the obvious truths out and how they are *affecting* us it is dismissed with accusations of pile ons and *popular cliques*.

I would like for once, maybe once when a white person comes and says something that is not ok, that they listen, and not use that whole deflection of

"but that is not what I said"

"stop picking on me"

"stop pointing me out the light the light it burnsssssssssss"

I would like that A LOT!

Do I think it will happen?

Gosh damn it I hope so.

So when I say Arizona is a racist state, I can, I have family there, I could share some stories (why though they fall on deaf ears) now, do I think every single person is?

No, but the ones who aren't and stay silent and use colorfol racial descriptors well then it's no different than standing by, letting a kid get hit by a car. Why should you help, not your kid, not your car, so *shrug*

[katsarecool]

A friend of mine on FB was at the big protest a few months back a few days after the judge put a hold on SB 1070. She is encouraging everyone to please use the term Undocumented and I agree. She was arrested that day and will be the first one to go on trial. She is such a strong woman!!!! And I am very proud of her.

[Novelafemme]

I will adamantly admit that Arizona is a racist state. I do not live here by choice and would happily move if I could and it really stinks to be "stuck" here. I have a lot of poop in my pants over it.

[QueenofSmirks]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

...That pretty much leaves the mass exodus of Hispanics which I still hold would probably be the *most* effective form of protest....

I'm actually reading post by post, oldest to newest of today's post, so I may have a lot more to say on this later, but for now I want to say that I actually agree with this. To me, this puts the power in the hands of the people who are being discriminated against and allows them to make their own choices, and by doing so, effectively hurts the people trying to cause them harm. I'm all for this type of action.

[QueenofSmirks]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

...My frustration comes from the ridiculous excuses for not being up to date when it comes to what is going on in your state.

Why are you frustrated about what someone else knows or doesn't know that lives in a state you don't live in? It's their life; they have different priorities than you do. Why does that frustrate you? Do you believe everyone should have the same priorties as yours and think the same way you do and have your same opinions?

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

...So when I say Arizona is a racist state, I can, I have family there, I could share some stories (why though they fall on deaf ears) now, do I think every single person is?

Well, I think that's where some of the miscommunication is then... because when you say "Arizona" is a racist state, you do imply that it is all citizens of Arizona that are racist, as so many others in this thread have also done. By not using the term "most" or "some" or just "voters who voted in Jan Brewer & Co", you do imply "all".

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

...No, but the ones who aren't and stay silent

Ok,sure, but it's been said over and over that some of the posters voted AGAINST, so they weren't "silent", they just weren't part of the majority voters.

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

....and use colorfol racial descriptors ...

I understand you are upset by this and I'm not going to try to argue against that. My mother is Caucasian, my father is Hispanic; maybe that doesn't qualify me to have an opinion, but my Hispanic side wasn't offended by the words "that look", because taken in context, I completely understood what was being said, and it was NOT an attempt to be hateful or discriminatory or racist. The very discussion we are having is about racial profiling which does use a "look" to determine who falls under its grasp.

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

...well then it's no different than standing by, letting a kid get hit by a car. Why should you help, not your kid, not your car, so *shrug*

It absolutely IS different, because this analogy implies that people sat by and didn't vote and let Jan Brewer get into office. That isn't the case for some of the posters in this thread. They DID vote, they didn't however win the majority vote!

[The_Lady_Snow]

Wow

I don't have to live in Az to be affected. I'm affected because I am a daughter ofan illegal"
I am affected because this law targets my people.

So in a thread that is ABOUT a boycott I thought I could express that and I will wether you or anyfucking else like it or not.

Now if you aren't offended by Cody's colorful descriptors goody for you I am so I said it, like keeping it real.

It's really not all that hard to figure out why I reacted the way I did, I'm pretty clear, shrug it off if you'd like, that's on you.

[QueenofSmirks]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

Wow

I don't have to live in Az to be affected. I'm affected because I am a daughter ofan illegal"
I am affected because this law targets my people.

So in a thread that is ABOUT a boycott I thought I could express that and I will wether you or anyfucking else like it or not.

Now if you aren't offended by Cody's colorful descriptors goody for you I am so I said it, like keeping it real.

It's really not all that hard to figure out why I reacted the way I did, I'm pretty clear, shrug it off if you'd like, that's on you.

Did you actually read my post, or did you hit reply by accident? Because nothing you just said above has anything to do with anything I said.

So, I won't bother to try to understand you since you have no interest in helping me to.

Carry on....

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by QueenofSmirks

Did you actually read my post, or did you hit reply by accident? Because nothing you just said above has anything to do with anything I said.

So, I won't bother to try to understand you since you have no interest in helping me to.

Carry on....

Sometimes I post for the sheer sadistic heck of it and hit submit

I get bored this late at night

[Thinker]

Final Warning

The admin team is having a tough time with what is going on in this thread. We are sympathetic to the importance and sensitivity of the topic; we're also sympathetic to the feelings of the members here.

Flat out... Some of you have made this entirely too personal *against* other members, and that's just not okay.

If you have a beef you'd like to discuss in private, then please do so. Other than that, the "going at other members" must stop; failure to do so will result in a timeout.

If you choose to participate in a discussion of this nature, then you must also accept that others will disagree with you. That doesn't always feel good, but you need to be a big enough person to accept that as reality. That said, disagreeing with someone does NOT look like insult, criticism, or berating. It can be done in a respectful manner.

If someone apologizes for something they said or chooses to leave the conversation, then accept that and move on. Quit beating dead horses. It's a waste of energy, and it does nothing to further productive discussion.

Finally, have *this* discussion *here*. Take private matters private. Do NOT take hurt feelings from this thread and sprinkle poop dust around the site. It's childish, and it's not fair to the rest of the community.

Again, this is a final moderation warning. Keep it clean and about the original topic, or just move on.

As always, contact me via PM with legitimate questions or concerns regarding this moderation.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by QueenofSmirks

I'm actually reading post by post, oldest to newest of today's post, so I may have a lot more to say on this later, but for now I want to say that I actually agree with this. To me, this puts the power in the hands of the people who are being discriminated against and allows them to make their own choices, and by doing so, effectively hurts the people trying to cause them harm. I'm all for this type of action.

To me this is just a boycott by another name. As I said before, I do not think you or Cody or any other person posting on this thread supports SB 1070 or thinks that racial profiling is a great idea. That said, SB 1070 exists, the law in question puts a big 'racial profiling welcome here' sign at the border of Arizona and I do not think that it helps if there are NO consequences to be paid. If Arizona gets away with this and banning, for all practical purposes, the teaching of any form of ethnic studies then other states will be emboldened to do something similar.

As far as voting, only 46.49% of Arizonans who were eligible voted a month ago. What that means is that 53.51% of Arizonans, by not voting, voted for Brewer by default. Not voting is always a tacit vote for whomever ends up winning the election. Again, I want to make it clear that I'm not talking about you or Cody I'm talking about Arizona as a polity and the results of the choices that Arizona has made. A majority of eligible voters were comfortable enough with the prospect of Ms Brewer as governor to not vote.

That doesn't mean that I look down on Arizonans, I don't. It doesn't mean that I think that all Arizonans are racists or think that racial profiling is the best thing to happen since oxygen. It means simply that more than half of all eligible Arizona voters failed to exercise their right to vote and are thus responsible for what happens.

It is sad that you and other Arizonans of goodwill will be caught up in this.

Cheers
Aj

[DomnNC]

FYI - Voters Rights - Straight from the website of the National Coalition for the Homeless.

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/proj...galissues.html

Some states had previously required registrants to live in a “traditional dwelling” in order to register to vote. Judicial decisions in court cases and the enactment of state and federal laws have eliminated that requirement. Today, homeless individuals in all states--including those people who are living on the streets--have the right to register and vote. When registering to vote, homeless voters only need to designate their place of residence, which can be a street corner, a park, a shelter, or any other location where an individual stays at night.

Concerning mailing addresses: The address provided may be that of a local advocacy organization, shelter, outreach center, or anywhere else willing to accept mail on behalf of a person registering to vote. Some states, like Arizona or Nebraska, allow homeless people to use county courthouses or county clerks’ offices as their mailing address. Some states will not allow registrants to use a P.O. Box as a mailing address. A registrant’s mailing address does not have to be the person’s residential address.

Concerning lack of ID: If a registrant has neither a current driver’s license number nor Social Security Number, then the registrant will be assigned a voter ID number once her or his registration is approved.

You can read the rest at the website. Every American has the right to vote, homeless or not.

[Nat]

As a person who doesn't live in Arizona, SB1070 is concerning to me because

1. I live in Texas and if Arizona gets away with this sort of blatant, threatening and harmful discrimination, it's likely to spread.

2. I'm invested in this country's purported protection of civil rights, and Arizona's violation of those rights threatens the future of this country.

3. I am a human being and I care about human beings who are being violated, threatened and harmed by the government. It's not okay with me, and I don't know why it would be okay with anybody else either.

I understand why Latinos would be leaving Arizona, and I do hope Arizona suffers for the loss. I think I would leave too, because I would feel threatened, isolated, afraid and at risk.

To pick up and leave your home - it's a big deal. It's expensive, it's destabilizing. It means losing connections, support, friendships. For a person to feel the need to move, to uproot their family, to quit jobs in this terrible economy, in order to escape state-sanctioned racial discrimination - these people are making great sacrifices - not simply protesting something they disagree with. It's tragedy due to state-sponsored injustice, not simply protest.

If Texas experiences a mass exodus of Latinos due to a similar law, it won't be Texas anymore to me.

When people who have privilege stand by silently and shrug their shoulders when things like this happen to people with less privilege, they are lending their tacit agreement to these laws - which is all that's needed to turn this country into a much uglier place. I don't understand how any person could defend SB1070 or think it's okay that Latinos are leaving the state in droves because their safety is so threatened.

I think it's really ironic that the majority of Americans who talk about the threat of big government are largely the same people (mostly white people) who have no issues with government overstepping its bounds and violating the civil rights of people of color.

-------------------------------------------------

By the way, today's a great day to call your senators and voice your support of the DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) act to help young people at risk of deportation obtain temporary residency and have a chance for conditional permanent residency if they complete two years in the military or two years at a four year institution of higher learning. *

Http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

[BullDog]

I already posted this in another thread, but I will post it here because the connection is meaningful to me. Today is the 55th anniversary of the day that Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white person. I am 48 years old. That means people slightly older than me went through a time, particularly in the South, where people of color were supposed to sit in the back of the buses and be segregated on what they could do and where they could go based on race- there were laws on the books (Jim Crow) that supported some of those things. What is happening in Arizona (and elsewhere) reminds me of those times.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by BullDog

I already posted this in another thread, but I will post it here because the connection is meaningful to me. Today is the 55th anniversary of the day that Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white person. I am 48 years old. That means people slightly older than me went through a time, particularly in the South, where people of color were supposed to sit in the back of the buses and be segregated on what they could do and where they could go based on race- there were laws on the books (Jim Crow) that supported some of those things. What is happening in Arizona (and elsewhere) reminds me of those times.

Back when I lived in California, there was a ballot measure to eliminate affirmative action at both the level of state hiring, contracting and education. About a week before the vote, I was on the BART and listening to these two women going back and forth about how they couldn't understand why THEY had to be 'punished' because 'they never owned slaves' and all the other kinds of crap that white people feel justified to say when talking about civil rights and they're not talking about how much they admire Martin Luther King, Jr. When I could stand it no more I turned around, asked if they minded if I added some perspective and said the following:

"All of the following statements are true:

I am the first member of my immediate family to have never spent a day in segregated schooling.
I am the first member of my immediate family to have no memory of using a colored-only bathroom or water fountain (which doesn't mean I never did, just that I was too young to remember it ever happening).
I am the first member of my immediate family to have only lived in an integrated neighborhood.
I am the first member of my family to have never used a library or swimming pool on the 'coloreds-only' day.
I am not yet forty years old."

They were stopped in their tracks because I think they *genuinely* believed the picture of the history of black people in this country they were taught in high school which, more or less, goes like this:

1776 - America is founded. Black people are here but the less said about them the better. Except for Crispus Attucks.

Black people do nothing of much significance nor does anything of much significance happen to us until 1863.

1865 -- Slavery ends at the close of the Civil war
1865 - 1879 or so--Reconstruction. Not a whole lot of note happens here.

1955 -- For no adequately explored reason Rosa Parks refuses to move to the back of the bus.

1963 -- For no adequately explored reason, some preacher named King gives a speech on the Washington Mall. Every white person who will eventually run for public office after 1989 marches with him.

1964 -- Civil rights and voting rights acts pass. The reasons these laws are necessary is left somewhat vague leaving the impression that white people had simply failed to be nice to blacks.

1968 -- Martin Luther King, Jr. is assassinated.

One thing I'd love to change in this country is to reset our sense of history. I'm only half-joking when I say that for Americans history is like this:

History--anything that happened more than 48 hours ago.
Ancient history -- anything that happened more than a year ago
Antiquity -- anything that happened more than 5 years ago
Lost to the mists of time what no living person can remember -- anything that happened more than 10 years ago
The dinosaurs are the only witnesses -- Anything that happened 20 or more years ago.
You mean there was an Earth then? -- Anything that happened prior to 1970
You mean the Universe existed? -- Anything that happened prior to 1960
The Big Bang -- 1950


We act as if 1960 is a year no living person could remember but that's only 50 years ago.


Cheers
Aj

[I'mOneToo]

Speaking as a (formerly) "real homeless person" (though i preferred the term "houseless")

because none have come forth, I'll give you a first person account

I *DID* have: (and still do have, it's not a "home address" that legitimizes a person)

A post office box

A voter registration card

A valid driver's license

A healthier diet than some "housed" folks (heck, even myself right now -- I could afford better food then!)

An up-to-date auto insurance policy

A bank account

A life without debt



I did *NOT* ever:

Stay in a shelter

Stay in a halfway house

Make national or global current events my first stop on the information highway when availing myself of internet access

NEVER NEVER NEVER bought alcohol

NEVER NEVER NEVER bought cigarettes

NEVER NEVER NEVER bought illicit drugs of any kind

NEVER NEVER NEVER made assumptions about how "real homeless people" feel -- i.e., for me it did not HURT ME to be homeless in any way. What hurt at times was people making incredible assumptions about me, my life, and my feelings. But no, MY TRUTH did NOT hurt.

I would not feel ashamed if any of my "nots" had been "yesses" on the list, however. Hope I've dispelled some of the myths abounding about what kind of rights homeless folks have. Not everyone has *ACCESS* but no one is denied the *RIGHT* to vote, to drive, or to live without fear of being judged for living in less than what some consider "a proper home."



I'll be back after I marinate on my thoughts about how so many of you have suggested that my family and friends in arizona should suffer dire economic consequences (in other words, that my friends and family deserve to die?) because "their state" has adopted racist policies.

When anyone says "boycott a state" they are recommending bankrupting all of the residents. 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.

hmm... but why *aren't* we ALL moving *TO* arizona to register to vote as arizonans to change things? 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.

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

http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/...s_sb_1070.html

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.

Originally Posted by DomnNC

FYI - Voters Rights - Straight from the website of the National Coalition for the Homeless.

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/proj...galissues.html

Some states had previously required registrants to live in a “traditional dwelling” in order to register to vote. Judicial decisions in court cases and the enactment of state and federal laws have eliminated that requirement. Today, homeless individuals in all states--including those people who are living on the streets--have the right to register and vote. When registering to vote, homeless voters only need to designate their place of residence, which can be a street corner, a park, a shelter, or any other location where an individual stays at night.

Concerning mailing addresses: The address provided may be that of a local advocacy organization, shelter, outreach center, or anywhere else willing to accept mail on behalf of a person registering to vote. Some states, like Arizona or Nebraska, allow homeless people to use county courthouses or county clerks’ offices as their mailing address. Some states will not allow registrants to use a P.O. Box as a mailing address. A registrant’s mailing address does not have to be the person’s residential address.

Concerning lack of ID: If a registrant has neither a current driver’s license number nor Social Security Number, then the registrant will be assigned a voter ID number once her or his registration is approved.

You can read the rest at the website. Every American has the right to vote, homeless or not.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by I'mOneToo

I'll be back after I marinate on my thoughts about how so many of you have suggested that my family and friends in arizona should suffer dire economic consequences (in other words, that my friends and family deserve to die?) because "their state" has adopted racist policies.

Actually no one has said or implied anything remotely like the idea that anyone should die. I will, however, reiterate that laws have consequences.

When anyone says "boycott a state" they are recommending bankrupting all of the residents.

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.

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.

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.

hmm... but why *aren't* we ALL moving *TO* arizona to register to vote as arizonans to change things?

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.

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.

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.

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'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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Cheers
Aj