Sections of Arizona Immigration Law Blocked

[Gavin]

[font="Tahoma"][size="2"]Having been to Spain several times I must admit I'm rather surprised at your experience there as I've never once heard any sincere racist ideology spoken by the people I've encountered, that said not I've never attended a Spanish football match so perhaps that's why I've never heard it. I'd actually have expected something like that in France but not Spain.

The French are pretty well known for their superior attitude towards pretty much everyone but directed more specifically at their North African descended members of society so that doesn't surprise me in the least, though the bottle-throwing did shock me. Honestly I'm amazed sometimes given all the strife at all levels in society that goes on in France the country is able to continue working. I will say that the fear of influence by Islamic extremists is common on the continent, and to a lesser degree across Europe as a whole and one of the reasons why people are quite divided on the idea of Turkey being allowed into the E.U. in addition to the human rights issues they've been confronted with.

Regarding the told to be careful around Nigerian cabbies, there's a two-fold reason there, one is the perception of fraud, particularly identity-theft, perpetuated by Nigerian asylum seekers which you read about in the newspapers or hear on the news not infrequently and the second is that they have a tendency to overcharge patrons and can become quite unpleasant if confronted in this regard. [/size][/font]

[eleanor]

[quote name='Gavin' date='31 July 2010 - 05:30 PM' timestamp='1280611820' post='698367']
[font="Tahoma"][size="2"]

Regarding the told to be careful around Nigerian cabbies, there's a two-fold reason there, one is the perception of fraud, particularly identity-theft, perpetuated by Nigerian asylum seekers which you read about in the newspapers or hear on the news not infrequently and the second is that they have a tendency to overcharge patrons and can become quite unpleasant if confronted in this regard. [/size][/font]
[/quote]

therein lie the seeds of racism

and more support for my economy breeds racism argument

that reply wasn't directed at you btw, it was a general statement Edited July 31, 2010 by eleanor

[CaNz]

[quote name='eleanor' date='31 July 2010 - 02:24 PM' timestamp='1280611488' post='698366']

My problem is when people insist that racism either doesn't exist/has nothing to do with a situation (when it does, in one way or another). And I find that that issue itself is deeply affected by race. Ask a group of minorities, and most of them will say the Arizona law is tainted with racism. Ask a group of white people, and a fair share of them will say it has nothing to do with racism.
[/quote]
i disagree with this. most of my family, (people living in northern CA, NY, WA, and NV believe its just another ploy to trump Hispanics. they dont really livenext to the problem though... so i figure they get that from the media... which i think is a huge factor in making this a race issue as well. Also I have a few Hispanic(i am not that popular but i do make some) friends. all of them are legal citizens by birth or green card, they all seem to think the law is more of a preventative measure.though they do point out how this is always going to be a racial issue, and that they would dislike being pulled over and questioned... but since they have proof of being a citizen they don't mind showing it.

the issue spans farther than just white people ignoring it and Mexicans reminding them of the racial tension that exists.

i think it is people who constantly inject racism into the equation that we are forced to take extraordinary measures in order to seem impartial. If that is the case... i say lets play your rules. we treat everyone like an illegal immigrant.

[James]

[quote name='eleanor' date='01 August 2010 - 08:42 AM' timestamp='1280612529' post='698369']
therein lie the seeds of racism

and more support for my economy breeds racism argument

that reply wasn't directed at you btw, it was a general statement
[/quote]

[font="Palatino Linotype"]The only question I'd ask, though, is that if Gavin's example is an indicator of what breeds racism...then who do you blame for that? Nigerian scammers or non-Nigerian people who try to avoid Nigerian scammers? (And who, in doing so, probably end up avoiding many perfectly innocent, above-board taxi drivers).

It is probably true to say that the "blame" may initially be caused by Nigerian scammers, but then perpetuated by those who decide to judge an entire nationality (or, worse, [i]ethnicity[/i]) on the fear that they might become a victim of scamming.

The difficulty I have with this whole discussion, though, is that the definition of the word "racism" is being gradually expanded by various groups in an effort to either stifle certain kinds of debate, or in an effort to provide cover for certain kinds of apologists.

To go back to the fear of Islam in Europe: this is often cited (especially by the usual ambassadors of extreme political correctness) as "Islamophobia", which itself now seems to have become intrinsically tied in with racism. The attempt to link these two very different points of view is very deliberate, but also very misleading.

I say this because it should seem obvious to say that "Islam" has absolutely nothing to do with ethnicity. The worst you could say is that Islam is bound up with nationality - but even then, you would be betraying significant ignorance about Islam. To be against Islam is not to be against the Middle East or to be against a particular ethnicity - it is, rather, to be opposed to a [i]religion[/i] and a set of [i]religious ideas[/i] or even cultural ideas.

To go further, it is true to say that I am personally opposed to pretty much all religions, at least on the most fundamental basis. So if you wanted to insult me by calling me, say, a "Mormonophobe", then you may very well be making a legitimate observation. But being a Mormonophobe has everything to do with opposing a particular religion, rather than actually believing that a certain group of people are inherently inferior for hereditary reasons.

I say this because it is just valuable to remember what racism actually is and what it really means. To be racist, you have to essentially believe that races have distinctive cultural characteristics that are based on heredity, therefore demonstrating that one race is intrinsically superior to another.

Actually believing something that absurd is very different than trying to have a pragmatic discussion about something like illegal immigration. As I said earlier, those who simply label everything as racist are sometimes guilty of perpetrating a kind of "reverse racism" themselves. If we're to actually achieve any kind of genuine equality, I think we do have to step back from that and try to take a more pragmatic attitude in general.[/font]

[Korey]

[quote=Eleanor]Except that the consequences of this law will certainly include racial issues and more prejudices, so yes, racism is a big part of this law. Anyone who says otherwise isn't thinking very broadly.[/quote]

[font="Garamond"]But those who single out racism as the single most issue regarding this law would be thinking rather laser-focused, wouldn't they?

As James said, using Racism as a basis for arguement really does nothing. Any sort of discrimination towards a people has been happening for centuries upon centuries. Even within the Caucasian people, there have been predjudices using religion as a base. People will find something to use as some sort of superior trait that separates them from other people. It's human nature to try and do so.

But getting back to the immigration issue, as many others have said, the law makes no specific mention towards the Latin-American people as being the only ones needing to show their papers. Now, looking at the demographics within the Southwest region, of course Latin Americans would be the primary group of people that would be targets of "random citizenship checks." But does this constitute racism? No. Now....pulling a Latin American person over for speeding and telling them to show their papers or you will deport their *insert hispanic racial slur here* asses back to wherever they came from is quite racist.[/font]

[Gavin]

[font="Tahoma"][size="2"]James covered pretty much how I was going to respond, albeit considerably more eloquently, I can't and won't defend the ideology that has sprung up in the last few years regarding Nigerian asylum seekers in Western Europe because it does lead to honest, law-abiding individuals who are here to earn a living being treated with contempt and distrust because of the actions of their countrymen. Hell as an Irish person I'm more than well aware of the stereotypes my own people were forced to deal with when the mass emigration from Ireland began after the Famine and would be justifiably perturbed if someone was to treat me with wariness or distrust due to the fact some Irish people commit criminal acts abroad.[/size][/font]

[eleanor]

[quote name='CaNz' date='31 July 2010 - 06:47 PM' timestamp='1280616479' post='698372']
i disagree with this. most of my family, (people living in northern CA, NY, WA, and NV believe its just another ploy to trump Hispanics. they dont really livenext to the problem though... so i figure they get that from the media... which i think is a huge factor in making this a race issue as well. Also I have a few Hispanic(i am not that popular but i do make some) friends. all of them are legal citizens by birth or green card, they all seem to think the law is more of a preventative measure.though they do point out how this is always going to be a racial issue, and that they would dislike being pulled over and questioned... but since they have proof of being a citizen they don't mind showing it.

the issue spans farther than just white people ignoring it and Mexicans reminding them of the racial tension that exists.

i think it is people who constantly inject racism into the equation that we are forced to take extraordinary measures in order to seem impartial. If that is the case... i say lets play your rules. we treat everyone like an illegal immigrant.
[/quote]

We are both sort of arguing from personal knowledge, so no one can really "win" this argument, although I'm more inclined to believe that more minorities would see racism/discrimination in the law than whites. People who "constantly inject racism into the equation" oftentimes have good bits of truth in their argument, imo. Which is my point. I know many of you might think I'm trying to make racism the biggest issue, but living in a southern mostly-white area where people refuse to believe racism even plays a part in the law has annoyed me and I'm just trying to say that in this case there are issues of racism involved, not that it's the biggest factor or element.

[quote name='James' date='01 August 2010 - 02:36 AM' timestamp='1280644586' post='698418']
[font="Palatino Linotype"]The only question I'd ask, though, is that if Gavin's example is an indicator of what breeds racism...then who do you blame for that? Nigerian scammers or non-Nigerian people who try to avoid Nigerian scammers? (And who, in doing so, probably end up avoiding many perfectly innocent, above-board taxi drivers).[/font]
[/quote]

Well I'm not trying to lay blame on anyone, I'm simply pointing out the problem, which obviously is not the most intelligent thing for me to do without offering more follow-up opinions/insights but hey

[quote name='James' date='01 August 2010 - 02:36 AM' timestamp='1280644586' post='698418']
[font="Palatino Linotype"]The difficulty I have with this whole discussion, though, is that the definition of the word "racism" is being gradually expanded by various groups in an effort to either stifle certain kinds of debate, or in an effort to provide cover for certain kinds of apologists.

To go back to the fear of Islam in Europe: this is often cited (especially by the usual ambassadors of extreme political correctness) as "Islamophobia", which itself now seems to have become intrinsically tied in with racism. The attempt to link these two very different points of view is very deliberate, but also very misleading.

I say this because it should seem obvious to say that "Islam" has absolutely nothing to do with ethnicity. The worst you could say is that Islam is bound up with nationality - but even then, you would be betraying significant ignorance about Islam. To be against Islam is not to be against the Middle East or to be against a particular ethnicity - it is, rather, to be opposed to a [i]religion[/i] and a set of [i]religious ideas[/i] or even cultural ideas.[/font]
[/quote]

Yes, of course race and religion are two different things. But when they happen to be highly correlative, people tend to lump the two together and it creates prejudice towards the race. It's not very rational or true, but it's how groups of people operate. The problem is that racism is the obvious results of such things such as classism or phobia of certain religions, cultures etc. etc. And in the end, that racism is still racism. It may be born from some other prejudice or phobia but the end result is the same. There is small window of opportunity for people who are becoming prejudiced to act according to the knowledge that religion/etc. =/= race, and most people miss it. And even if they do acknowledge it, it's hard for them to act according to it. It becomes easier for them to tie everything to race. Bad? Wrong? Stupid? Unrational? Yes, but I'm not going to believe it's not true.


[quote name='AvalonAngel' date='01 August 2010 - 09:45 AM' timestamp='1280670348' post='698440']
[font="Garamond"]But those who single out racism as the single most issue regarding this law would be thinking rather laser-focused, wouldn't they?

As James said, using Racism as a basis for arguement really does nothing. Any sort of discrimination towards a people has been happening for centuries upon centuries. Even within the Caucasian people, there have been predjudices using religion as a base. People will find something to use as some sort of superior trait that separates them from other people. It's human nature to try and do so.

But getting back to the immigration issue, as many others have said, the law makes no specific mention towards the Latin-American people as being the only ones needing to show their papers. Now, looking at the demographics within the Southwest region, of course Latin Americans would be the primary group of people that would be targets of "random citizenship checks." But does this constitute racism? No. Now....pulling a Latin American person over for speeding and telling them to show their papers or you will deport their *insert hispanic racial slur here* asses back to wherever they came from is quite racist.[/font]
[/quote]

I feel like everyone in this thread thinks I'm against this law because I think it's blatantly racist. I don't think that. I'm mainly saying that will exacerbate racial problems, and so I think the federal government should step in and do something about the immigration process as a whole. (And do I think a fair share of the law's supporters are racist? yes. But that has nothing to do with the literature of the law itself.)

And just because something has been a certain way for a long time doesn't mean it's OK, or that it's inevitable and we shouldn't fight it. haha... I am guessing that was not what you meant though

I already know the law doesn't make specific mentions towards hispanics, but obviously, as I said, problems will get worse. And like I said, I don't think the law itself is racist.

edit: HAHA. I wrote this while reading it to myself in a spanish accent.... I need to stop watching spanish footballer youtube interviews... o god Edited August 2, 2010 by eleanor

[CaNz]

[quote name='eleanor' date='02 August 2010 - 12:15 AM' timestamp='1280733319' post='698536']
I feel like everyone in this thread thinks I'm against this law because I think it's blatantly racist. I don't think that. I'm mainly saying that will exacerbate racial problems, and so I think the federal government should step in and do something about the immigration process as a whole. (And do I think a fair share of the law's supporters are racist? yes. But that has nothing to do with the literature of the law itself.)

And just because something has been a certain way for a long time doesn't mean it's OK, or that it's inevitable and we shouldn't fight it. That's the worst stance to take on the discrimination issue imo. haha... makes me laugh just to think about it

I already know the law doesn't make specific mentions towards hispanics, but obviously, as I said, problems will get worse. And like I said...I don't think the law itself is racist.
[/quote]

if you think the law is going to make racism worse, then i can partially agree with that, because like i said before it does give bad people what they want but what would you have us do about illegal immigration then? if we have a program for citizenship, the people who use it should be thought of. i will not defend anyone whoo comes into the country illegally. i feel bad for certain families with poor circumstances... Mexico is no utopia, but we cant solve all their problems, and either way someone suffers.

say a poor man is going to die but cant afford the medicine. if he goes to America he can be treated by a hospital before any payment is required. however when the government covers the bill we all pay for him. its a small amount spread amongst the people of this country, but it is kinda like stealing food to eat from a grocery store. i don't want to see anyone die, but he should be able to afford to keep himself alive... i don't mind my helping someone like that, but it is unfair to put us in this position.

[PiroMunkie]

[quote name='eleanor' date='28 July 2010 - 05:00 PM' timestamp='1280354434' post='698140']
tl;dr: an Arizona federal judge blocked sections of the new immigration law, namely the part that required police officers to check the immigration status of people caught for breaking other unrelated laws. Delayed sections include: requiring all immigrants to carry papers at all time, making it illegal for undocumented workers to look for jobs in public, and a section that would allow police to make warantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.[/quote]
[color="#A0522D"][font="Arial"]I've been following this topic, but never really took the time to read the first post, lol ...

So am I to understand that they're making it [i]easier[/i] for illegal immigrants to be illegal immigrants? Or trying to, anyway? Just not clear about what "blocking" or "delaying" actually means in legal terms, lol.[/font][/color]

[Heaven's Cloud]

[quote name='PiroMunkie' date='02 August 2010 - 06:49 AM' timestamp='1280746147' post='698547']
[color="#A0522D"][font="Arial"]I've been following this topic, but never really took the time to read the first post, lol ...

So am I to understand that they're making it [i]easier[/i] for illegal immigrants to be illegal immigrants? Or trying to, anyway? Just not clear about what "blocking" or "delaying" actually means in legal terms, lol.[/font][/color]
[/quote]

[color=indigo]Delaying just means that Arizona was blocked by federal courts from enforcing the laws in this bill. Below is a brief synopsis of the bill (along with a spattering of opinions that you can easily sift through).

[quote]Before I give my answer to that question, I want to write a little about Arizona's law and my opinions on it. While I think there are plenty of racist people that support the law, I don't believe that law Arizona purposed discriminates against US citizens. It requires that all immigrants carry immigration paper or have a current application in process (which an immigrant receives paperwork for), not just the brown ones. It also states that police must inquire the immigration status of anyone that they stop, detain or arrest. Again, this doesn't just apply to people of a certain race or skin color. Also, it is important to note that this means police can't just randomly ask a person for their papers, they can only ask once they are in the process of doing their duty (ie giving a speeding ticket, arresting someone for assault or theft, or being suspected of breaking the law in some other manner than being an illegal immigrant). The biggest issue of contention is that the law makes it possible for police to make a warrant-less arrest. Again, I really don't see the big deal in this issue. Police officers make warrant-less arrests all the time. If you are in the process of committing a crime, no warrant is needed for an arrest, therefore the very fact that illegal immigrants are in the act of committing a crime (being in the US illegally) should make it a non-issue. [/quote][/color]

[Korey]

[quote name='eleanor' date='02 August 2010 - 09:15 AM' timestamp='1280733319' post='698536']

I feel like everyone in this thread thinks I'm against this law because I think it's blatantly racist. I don't think that. I'm mainly saying that will exacerbate racial problems, and so I think the federal government should step in and do something about the immigration process as a whole. (And do I think a fair share of the law's supporters are racist? yes. But that has nothing to do with the literature of the law itself.) [/quote]

[font="Garamond"]Well, if the objective of the law was to piss off a whole bunch of minorities and make a hullaballoo, then it did its job. However, this was the first legit attempt by a governing body to actually enforce the borders of its own state. Now, would Nebraska need this law? Probably not. But yes, the federal government is still skirting around the mesquite bush on this issue, which is disheartening. Yes, this is a very touchy subject. But I'd rather see the government take some action to enforce a policy that ends the abuse of government aid programs. The process for citizenship is simple enough, so I don't see why people wouldn't take advantage of it instead of trying to loopholing the system.[/font]

[quote]And just because something has been a certain way for a long time doesn't mean it's OK, or that it's inevitable and we shouldn't fight it. haha... I am guessing that was not what you meant though[/quote]

[font="Garamond"]Yup, you're right. I was basically asserting basic Darwinian theory. Species are always vying to see who will survive, discriminating and weeding out the undesirables in the process. Humans are no different. We try to be better than each other in many different ways. Whether it'd be at the workplace, doing recreational activities or what have you. Now....today's society asserts that equality for all people is what we want to achieve. I agree with this, to an extent. While I respect people of all races and creeds (religions, beliefs, etc etc), it won't stop me from trying to be better them in other facets. It's basic instinct that has been complicated by the evolution of the human race.[/font]

[James]

[quote name='eleanor' date='02 August 2010 - 06:15 PM' timestamp='1280733319' post='698536']
Yes, of course race and religion are two different things. But when they happen to be highly correlative, people tend to lump the two together and it creates prejudice towards the race. It's not very rational or true, but it's how groups of people operate. The problem is that racism is the obvious results of such things such as classism or phobia of certain religions, cultures etc. etc. And in the end, that racism is still racism. It may be born from some other prejudice or phobia but the end result is the same. There is small window of opportunity for people who are becoming prejudiced to act according to the knowledge that religion/etc. =/= race, and most people miss it. And even if they do acknowledge it, it's hard for them to act according to it. It becomes easier for them to tie everything to race. Bad? Wrong? Stupid? Unrational? Yes, but I'm not going to believe it's not true. [/quote]

[font=palatino linotype]I think your first point is right, but only in some circumstances. An example of this would be anti-Jewish prejudice, where this can be based on either religion or ethnicity. Although I think this is probably the only case in the world where ethnicity and religion can be described by the same word. It is, of course, entirely reasonable to criticise the Jewish religion - but it is an entirely different matter to be critical of somebody's ethnicity.

I agree that racism can be tied to other forms of "isms", but all too often racism is incorrectly identified. This not only has the effect of stifling legitimate criticisms (i.e. of religion or of a particular nation), but it also has the unfortunate side-effect of sometimes allowing us to ignore legitimate cases of racism.

I'm sure there are many people out there who [i]do[/i] confuse criticism of religion with criticism of ethnicity. In fact, I'm certain of it. We see many examples. [i]However[/i], it is important for people like you and me - people who understand the difference - to ensure that we don't cross wires when it is unwarranted to do so.

For the record, I don't think you've done that at all here. My comments are mostly general thoughts that were brought up when I read your thoughts on Arizona's laws. Rather than actually directing my comments at you, I guess I'm just making a statement about where some of these sentiments can lead. [/font]

[quote name='eleanor' date='02 August 2010 - 06:15 PM' timestamp='1280733319' post='698536']
I feel like everyone in this thread thinks I'm against this law because I think it's blatantly racist. I don't think that. I'm mainly saying that will exacerbate racial problems, and so I think the federal government should step in and do something about the immigration process as a whole. (And do I think a fair share of the law's supporters are racist? yes. But that has nothing to do with the literature of the law itself.) [/quote]

[font="Palatino Linotype"]I definitely don't think that. I can see what you're saying - the law itself may not be [i]intentionally[/i] racist, but some people who are racist may latch onto it as a vehicle for furthering their views. That makes a lot of sense and I'm sure there's definitely truth to it.

I guess my only comment there is that we should make sure that the fringe element doesn't distract us from the actual practical purpose of dealing with illegal immigration. It is unfortunate that extremists tend to hijack debates - but sometimes we allow them to do so, as well.[/font]