Arizona: An alternate perspective

"What treaty have the white man ever made with us that they have kept? Not one. When I was a boy the Sioux owned the world; the sun rose and set on their land; they sent ten thousand men to battle. Where are the warriors today? Who slew them? Where are our lands? Who owns them?....What law have I broken? Is it wrong for me to love my own? Is it wicked for me because my skin is red? Because I am a Sioux; because I was born where my father lived; because I would die for my people and my country?”
Sitting Bull

Peace Out,
Rev J

 

It also feels good to know that the federal government is stepping in on this. It seems like under this law if you are hispanic and forget your wallet you are headed south.

Peace Out,
Rev J

 

Hmmm... I don't know about that video.

I'm a huge sympatizer with Native American causes and I recognize that America was basically built on the dead bodies of Native Americans, but while I can't condone genocide in any form, I also can't really say that I feel they should have been left alone to keep North America in the way they were accustomed. For better or worse, the whole world will be inexorably dragged, by one means or another, maybe kicking and screaming, into the future. To sit on vast and needed resources, simply because they didn't recognize the value of said resources, wasn't going to be allowed back then and I doubt that it would be allowed for very long now.

Regarding the view of Europeans as "illegal immigrants", there was no imigration law in North America when the first Europeans came here, so there was no such thing as an illegal immigrant. Had the Natives some form of government with laws that were being broken, there might be a case to be made. The Natives also could have easily forced the Europeans off the land at that time, but for whatever reason, they chose not to - not that it would have halted the influx of European civilization. I think it was tragic that the Europeans felt they had to kill Natives in order to expand, but that's what they did. I think it would have been much better if they had managed to live in peace, together and blended. In fact, that was the way things were for a while, sort of, back around the time of the pilgrims. However, cultures will inevitable clash and trouble will escalate.

So, the Europeans (now Americans) eventually came as conquerers, rather than immigrants, and the inexorable push westward (and eastward from California) began. The Natives got pinched in the middle.
The big mistake that America made was in setting up sovereign Indian land, wherein Natives would have a sort of autonomy. I could be wrong, but I think this might be an unprecidented action on the part of a conquering nation toward a conquered nation. In the past, the conquered people were either assimilated or killed outright. (Please, I'm not advocating genocide, here. I think it was horrible that there had to be any conquering at all.) America made treaties with the Natives that any fool would have realized would only be broken as resources were found on what was once thought of as worthless land. America is undeniably guilty of breaking treaties, one after another, with Native Americans. I don't really understand why a conquering nation would make those treaties in the first place, but I feel that the American government should be held accountable for each and every one of them, starting with giving back the Black Hills. Of course, this will never happen, because it would be economic suicide, now.

The real issue here is, America is now a recognized nation with recognized laws. We may not agree with those laws, but they are still the laws. We have laws concerning immigration and how it may be done, legally. There have been immigration laws in the United States since the Naturalization Act of 1790. The laws have been challenged and changed many times, and I'm sure they will be again, but they've been on the books for over 200 years. In all that time, there have been legal ways to obtain immigrant status. This included the Irish, the Italians, the Germans, the Spanish (from Spain, not Mexico), the Chinese, the middle eastern, the Hmong, the Somolis, etc. They all were welcomed to enter the country, as long as they did it legally. Of course, it was much more difficult for one of those groups to enter illegally, since they pretty much had to come by boat and the boats docked at Ellis Island. Anyone entering the US outside of the law has been classified as an illegal immigrant.

We DO have a problem with Mexicans crossing the border illegally to enter this country - not just to visit, but to stay. Permanantly. Why should this be allowed? Why should Mexicans, out of all the various immigrants (of all racial backgrounds) over the past 200+ years, get privaleged status to skirt the law and come here illegally? Damn near every immigrant that ever set foot on this shore came because they didn't like the conditions where they were. Many of them were poor, hungry, or persecuted. They did not get to skirt the law, simply because they had need, and neither should the Mexicans.

Arizona's action is simply a REaction (albeit misguided) to the fact that the Mexican border is so porous and our government seems to be turning a blind eye to that fact.

Maybe we should simply annex Mexico and be done with it.

 

I find it ironic that so many who are otherwise so contemptuous of the government invoke the tired old argument that "it's the law" when it comes to immigration.

By the way, it's also "the law" that you are not to traffic in or use various drugs. Or do you only abide by those laws that don't personally inconvenience you?

And anyway, I'd like to know exactly who is it that is claiming that we DO have such a problem? Exactly who are the winners and losers here? Who is it that is making the claim that a feeble trickle of poor people wanting only a better life threatens the sovereignty of the mightiest nation on earth?

Who are these people harming? And please don't mindlessly parrot the oft-repeated xenophobic baloney that they "take American jobs", or that they're all criminals, as someone said earlier. Those claims have long been proven to be false.

Of all the problems we face in the United States, illegal immigration is a drop in the bucket.

 

A lot of the things that are wrong with this country are just "drops in the bucket." A drop here and a drop there, and pretty soon you're talking about an ocean - kind of like, an illegal immigrant here and there and pretty soon you're talking about 15 million.

Your suggestion that respecting laws is simply "a tired old argument" is maybe a tad disingenuous. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of laws that you find useful. At least when I was of a mind to do so, I knew the risk of breaking the law and accepted the consequences for my actions.

A while earlier you said that you were not suggesting that we just "open the floodgates" and allow everyone and anyone in. So, either we control it, or we don't. I'm arguing that if there are going to be laws in place governing the control of immigration, we should probably exercise those laws. If the laws are unfair or otherwise flawed, then we should fix the flaws, as we have done many times in the past.

Are you literally in favor of absolutely no immigration controls? I mean, do you agree with the idea that anyone, from anywhere, wishing to come to America and take up residence should be allowed to do so, without question?

If you don't agree with that, what is your reason for not agreeing with it? Is it because you are xenophobic? Do you fear the loss of American jobs? Do you fear for the sovereignty of the mightiest nation on earth? Or, do you simply feel that there should be some protocol for immigration, regardless of what kind of ugly face people might try to put on your concern.

I don't know who the "winners and losers" are. There's probably a follow-the-money solution to that one, but I'm not really concerned with winners and losers. I'm concerned with what our policy will be. You can't have it both ways, either we have legal immigration, or we have open borders. Which would you choose?

 

Let's just face the fact that the concept of borders between countries is an artificial construct of European thinking. Borders that the natives walked across before there was any such thing as Mexico. Most of the tribes that were already here didn't understand the concept until we taught them (they didn't get alot of these concepts like scalping but I digress). Just like our backwards thinking forefathers who decided "Hey now that we have our little piece we should make laws that insure we get to choose who else gets a piece."

Here's another conceptual problem what about Canada? Every time I hear an arguement about illegal immigration from Mexico I hear about "Terrorists" coming in from Mexico. It's funny that 2 of the September 11th terrorists took the ferry from Newfoundland to Mount Desert Island in Maine drove down to Portland International Jetport took a small plane to Boston (my father has a friend that was sitting across the aisle from them). Then Hijacked a bigger plane from there.

I honestly think that it is a racist policy that we go after the brown Spanish speakers since we don't go after the white people from the north that speak English. What about those Canucks in Northern Maine who are coming down to pick Potatos and Blueberries. Do you think that anybody checks their papers? What about the American Jobs that they are stealing? Should we send them all back? Should we make them prove their citizenship? Nobody in Canada said shit when our escaped slaves went up there to find their freedom. It really destroyed their economy. What about the Canadian Jobs that got lost to those illegal blacks that stormed their country? Man they should've deported them all back to the United States where they would've gotten a fair trial by a jury of their peers. At least they should've had a law that required them to show citizenship papers lest they get sent back. Men in glass houses should throw no stones.

Peace Out,
Rev J

 

I don't think there's any doubt that it's racist. Anyone here in Arizona can tell you that. Persons of Hispanic descent have been persecuted in the Southwest since pioneer days.

 

Once again, that's not what I said. You have quite a facility for misquoting and twisting words to your own purposes.