Beyond the BS1070 Supreme Court Ruling:
“Not even the highest court can turn back a determined people!”
By Raúl Alcaraz Ochoa / 25 June 2012
This can’t be said any other way. Our migrant/Latino community is getting crushed. In fact, we are getting stomped on and beaten like a colorful piñata. The piñata is electoral and the more they hit, the more political points are scored—at our expense.
On the surface, the political class wants to make us think they are at war with each other over immigration. When in reality we have a US Supreme Court ruling over BS1070 that is in complete alignment with Republican and Democrat immigration policies of exclusion, exploitation, and police and ICE collaborations.
In the wake of the US Supreme Court ruling, injustice and oppression are upheld once again. The “papers please” section of BS1070 has been upheld. In effect standing in the tradition of white supremacist historical Supreme Court decisions such as Dred Scott v. Sanford of 1857 in which the court ruled that slaves and their descendants were not protected by the Constitution and were not US citizens...
Read more...
Showing posts with label sb1070. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sb1070. Show all posts
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Thursday, December 1, 2011
ALEC Protests: Any more radical than Bush protests?
Considering that ALEC has not been shut down (yet?), I'm concerned that some of the message has been lost in the interest of gaining numbers and exposure. I do think it's important to expose ALEC, and that has been accomplished on a large scale over the last year, with this protest in Scottsdale being the largest and most militant yet.
I've been concerned about ALEC being the new public enemy #1 when in fact they are just a good example of the larger system(s) at work that affect laws to the benefit of the rich and powerful. So we're talking colonization, capitalism, slavery and the continued criminalization of people of color, which included borders and prisons, etc. There certainly are benefits to the exposure of the World Trade Organization (WTO) culminating 12 years ago, but in a sense, it focused on neo-liberalism/globalization at the expense of a focus on capitalism.
While ALEC came to be exposed to us in AZ because of its links to SB1070 and private prisons, I was concerned that the private-ness of prisons would be the focus, rather than the history of criminalization people, primarily people of color, which has also benefited the rich and powerful. But while I don't know a lot about the messages coming out of the liberal/progressive/democrat groups that are also opposing ALEC, it seems that even the private prison connection is not the main focus. And with the occupy rhetoric, ALEC can just be understood as representing the 1%.
Today I asked myself what made these ALEC protests different than the old Bush protests where democrats and anarchists gathered together to oppose a common enemy. Not to say we shouldn't oppose a common enemy, but it is clear to anarchists (for the most part) that democrats can be just as bad if not worse in their slimy deceptive ways. Or they don't have to be deceptive, it's that those who would oppose Obama's higher rates of raids and deportations are more isolated because the left is too afraid or enamored to oppose Obama. It's similar to how Arpaio has been the face of evil anti-immigrant schemes, while the Phoenix PD has made more arrests than MCSO and with hardly a peep from the immigrants' rights movement.
All this is intended as constructive criticism and self-criticism. What is it that we'll wish we had done differently, and is it to late? The indigenous gathering was very encouraging. There will be more media releases that address the wider context. It was great that the "SHUTDOWN ALEC" message did not alienate many people, even if it hasn't resulted in the achievement of that goal. I hope that now that ALEC has been further exposed, we can bring the bigger issues into the forefront. Because if ALEC didn't exist, there would still be prisons, borders, colonization...
It's the never-ending conundrum: say what only anarchists will say at the risk of total isolation, or compromise a bit in hopes that people will slowly be drawn towards being open to what only anarchists will say. I honestly fall somewhere in the middle of these, but sometimes more towards the former.
See also: ALEC protest Wednesday
ALEC in context...
Private Prisons in a Wider Context: Video
I've been concerned about ALEC being the new public enemy #1 when in fact they are just a good example of the larger system(s) at work that affect laws to the benefit of the rich and powerful. So we're talking colonization, capitalism, slavery and the continued criminalization of people of color, which included borders and prisons, etc. There certainly are benefits to the exposure of the World Trade Organization (WTO) culminating 12 years ago, but in a sense, it focused on neo-liberalism/globalization at the expense of a focus on capitalism.
While ALEC came to be exposed to us in AZ because of its links to SB1070 and private prisons, I was concerned that the private-ness of prisons would be the focus, rather than the history of criminalization people, primarily people of color, which has also benefited the rich and powerful. But while I don't know a lot about the messages coming out of the liberal/progressive/democrat groups that are also opposing ALEC, it seems that even the private prison connection is not the main focus. And with the occupy rhetoric, ALEC can just be understood as representing the 1%.
Today I asked myself what made these ALEC protests different than the old Bush protests where democrats and anarchists gathered together to oppose a common enemy. Not to say we shouldn't oppose a common enemy, but it is clear to anarchists (for the most part) that democrats can be just as bad if not worse in their slimy deceptive ways. Or they don't have to be deceptive, it's that those who would oppose Obama's higher rates of raids and deportations are more isolated because the left is too afraid or enamored to oppose Obama. It's similar to how Arpaio has been the face of evil anti-immigrant schemes, while the Phoenix PD has made more arrests than MCSO and with hardly a peep from the immigrants' rights movement.
All this is intended as constructive criticism and self-criticism. What is it that we'll wish we had done differently, and is it to late? The indigenous gathering was very encouraging. There will be more media releases that address the wider context. It was great that the "SHUTDOWN ALEC" message did not alienate many people, even if it hasn't resulted in the achievement of that goal. I hope that now that ALEC has been further exposed, we can bring the bigger issues into the forefront. Because if ALEC didn't exist, there would still be prisons, borders, colonization...
It's the never-ending conundrum: say what only anarchists will say at the risk of total isolation, or compromise a bit in hopes that people will slowly be drawn towards being open to what only anarchists will say. I honestly fall somewhere in the middle of these, but sometimes more towards the former.
See also: ALEC protest Wednesday
ALEC in context...
Private Prisons in a Wider Context: Video
Monday, November 21, 2011
ALEC in context...
This is the text of a flier, which can be viewed or printed, here.
What!? Politicians and private companies get together to create laws that benefit those companies? AZ Senator Russell Pearce and other legislators from around the U.S. meet in a group called ALEC*.
You never thought it would be so blatant as private prison companies** having a say in laws that can create more demand for their facilities and services. How could people be criminalized so companies can profit from imprisoning them?!?! Not only is ALEC behind mandatory minimums and three strikes laws, they also had a hand in SB1070. When they see immigrants, they see dollar signs, and so they participate with other racists to paint immigrants as a problem--deserving of imprisonment. This is nothing new...
The deviousness that occurs within ALEC is just an example of how people are criminalized for profit. But it does not have to be as directly profitable as this. Colonization has of course provided settlers with land and other resources at the expense of those who are native.
Slave codes & convict leasing created crimes that made it easier to exploit the labor of people of color. Criminalizing unauthorized migration did the same thing, specifically affecting the Chinese and Mexicans for many decades. More recently, the drug war also criminalizes people of color more disproportionately to maintain racist policies without them appearing race-based.
* American Legislative Exchange Council ** Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) and Geo Group are the largest private prison companies.
More info: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDtTK1uxrg
What!? Politicians and private companies get together to create laws that benefit those companies? AZ Senator Russell Pearce and other legislators from around the U.S. meet in a group called ALEC*.
You never thought it would be so blatant as private prison companies** having a say in laws that can create more demand for their facilities and services. How could people be criminalized so companies can profit from imprisoning them?!?! Not only is ALEC behind mandatory minimums and three strikes laws, they also had a hand in SB1070. When they see immigrants, they see dollar signs, and so they participate with other racists to paint immigrants as a problem--deserving of imprisonment. This is nothing new...
The deviousness that occurs within ALEC is just an example of how people are criminalized for profit. But it does not have to be as directly profitable as this. Colonization has of course provided settlers with land and other resources at the expense of those who are native.
Slave codes & convict leasing created crimes that made it easier to exploit the labor of people of color. Criminalizing unauthorized migration did the same thing, specifically affecting the Chinese and Mexicans for many decades. More recently, the drug war also criminalizes people of color more disproportionately to maintain racist policies without them appearing race-based.
* American Legislative Exchange Council ** Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) and Geo Group are the largest private prison companies.
More info: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDtTK1uxrg
Sunday, August 14, 2011
ALEC thinks they're meeting in Scottsdale, AZ this November...
ALEC thinks they're meeting in Scottsdale, AZ this November...
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a massive non-profit body that brings corporations and legislators together to draft "model" legislation. For example, AZ Senator Russell Pearce and Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), the nation's largest private prison firm, have been members for years. ALEC finalized the model legislation which became, almost word for word, Arizona's SB1070, aka "Support Our Law Enforcement." It's the latest in the historical pattern of colonization, slave codes, convict leasing, and the drug war, that CREATES crimes and therefore criminals, for profit.
With British Petroleum (BP) and the Koch brothers as some of their funders, ALEC has pushed for Three Strikes and Mandatory Minimum sentencing, as well as the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. More than 200 of ALEC's model bills became actual laws throughout the country over the past year.
We're a group of people in occupied Indigenous lands, now called Arizona, who demand the end of SB1070 and 287g, the criminalization—and then the incarceration—of migrants, and the militarization of the border. We oppose private prisons, detention centers, and security companies, not simply because they are private, but because we are sickened by profiteering on human misery. ALEC desires "free markets" and "limited government," which means they use the state to support profit-making, the continuance of colonization, and neo-liberal policies (NAFTA, CANAMEX, etc.) that draw lines, make laws, and build freeways and prisons to exploit labor and the earth.
Whether maintained by the state or corporations, we're against all systems of control. We are for freedom of movement for all people.
ALEC should know there are a million better things to do with their time than plotting mass incarceration. But there’s nowhere we’d rather be than confronting their meeting. We're calling for four days of action here in occupied Onk Akimel O’odham lands from November 29th - December 3rd, 2011, with an emphasis for action on November 30th (N30!). We encourage a creative diversity of tactics on N30, the 12th anniversary of the Seattle uprising against the WTO. No matter the acronym, ALEC is no different than all the other gangs of businessmen, politicians, and bureaucrats that we’ve been resisting for over 500 years.
In solidarity with everyone locked up and locked down in AZ, and all O’odham, Yaqui, Lipan Apache separated by the border, and anyone dispossessed by the wealthy and powerful…
Project Baldwin
projectbaldwin@riseup.net
see also: azresistsalec.wordpress.com
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a massive non-profit body that brings corporations and legislators together to draft "model" legislation. For example, AZ Senator Russell Pearce and Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), the nation's largest private prison firm, have been members for years. ALEC finalized the model legislation which became, almost word for word, Arizona's SB1070, aka "Support Our Law Enforcement." It's the latest in the historical pattern of colonization, slave codes, convict leasing, and the drug war, that CREATES crimes and therefore criminals, for profit.
With British Petroleum (BP) and the Koch brothers as some of their funders, ALEC has pushed for Three Strikes and Mandatory Minimum sentencing, as well as the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. More than 200 of ALEC's model bills became actual laws throughout the country over the past year.
We're a group of people in occupied Indigenous lands, now called Arizona, who demand the end of SB1070 and 287g, the criminalization—and then the incarceration—of migrants, and the militarization of the border. We oppose private prisons, detention centers, and security companies, not simply because they are private, but because we are sickened by profiteering on human misery. ALEC desires "free markets" and "limited government," which means they use the state to support profit-making, the continuance of colonization, and neo-liberal policies (NAFTA, CANAMEX, etc.) that draw lines, make laws, and build freeways and prisons to exploit labor and the earth.
Whether maintained by the state or corporations, we're against all systems of control. We are for freedom of movement for all people.
ALEC should know there are a million better things to do with their time than plotting mass incarceration. But there’s nowhere we’d rather be than confronting their meeting. We're calling for four days of action here in occupied Onk Akimel O’odham lands from November 29th - December 3rd, 2011, with an emphasis for action on November 30th (N30!). We encourage a creative diversity of tactics on N30, the 12th anniversary of the Seattle uprising against the WTO. No matter the acronym, ALEC is no different than all the other gangs of businessmen, politicians, and bureaucrats that we’ve been resisting for over 500 years.
In solidarity with everyone locked up and locked down in AZ, and all O’odham, Yaqui, Lipan Apache separated by the border, and anyone dispossessed by the wealthy and powerful…
Project Baldwin
projectbaldwin@riseup.net
see also: azresistsalec.wordpress.com
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Lulzsec/Antisec Hackers Fight SB1070, Police
Chinga la Migra! Here are some recent articles on the hacked websites and information that targeted Arizona police agencies in response to racism.
Hackers slam Arizona police for third time
Minuteman group talked of shutting down Arizona freeway
Leaked memo shows Border Patrol found roadside bomb along smuggling route
Tucson: Hackers reveal data targeting ethnic studies
Hackers slam Arizona cops again to expose racism and corruption
I know various people are making suggestions as to who could be targeted next. In my humble opinion, Arpaio might be on the top of the list, Arizona Legislative Exchange Council, Geo Group, Corrections Corporation of America, Arizona-Mexico Commission...
See also: http://firesneverextinguished.blogspot.com/2011/07/hazy-shade-of-criminal-antisec-police.html
Hackers slam Arizona police for third time
Minuteman group talked of shutting down Arizona freeway
Leaked memo shows Border Patrol found roadside bomb along smuggling route
Tucson: Hackers reveal data targeting ethnic studies
Hackers slam Arizona cops again to expose racism and corruption
I know various people are making suggestions as to who could be targeted next. In my humble opinion, Arpaio might be on the top of the list, Arizona Legislative Exchange Council, Geo Group, Corrections Corporation of America, Arizona-Mexico Commission...
See also: http://firesneverextinguished.blogspot.com/2011/07/hazy-shade-of-criminal-antisec-police.html
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Monday, July 5, 2010
SB1070: Will Be Stopped, but Worse Will Come from Feds
Here's my prediction about SB1070. It may or may not go into effect on July 29th, but I think it will be stopped in some way, probably by the federal government. Then the federal government will come up with some Comprehensive Immigration Reform that is as bad or worse than SB1070, but not as blatantly horrible. It will provide a few crumbs for certain folks- perhaps to buy off the some of ones with the most capacity to build resistance, but it will involve more border security and attrition through enforcement (with a new gentler formula). We are also possibly going to see a guest worker program and perhaps some sort of id that involves biometrics.
After Prop 187 in California passed it was found to be unconstitutional. Yet it was important historically because it set things in motion. In particular, the federal government passed welfare reform that instituted restrictions on welfare to immigrants that mirrored some of prop 187.
The excerpts at the end of this post, from Border lines blog discuss the reasons the federal approach to immigration is not likely to be much different from AZ's.
This is why I say This is bigger than SB1070. We have people coming to Arizona from out of town, doing this Arizona Freedom Summer (beware the RCP) and thirty actions in thirty days sorts of things, but need to be clear that SB 1070 is not the main issue here. People keep voting for Sheriff Joe and racist legislation- there need to be some efforts to change minds and/or undermine the strength of racism here. As I've mentioned before, if we don't look beyond the pieces of legislation and the bad sheriffs and the raids, the economic situation that so many face is overlooked. We also have a criminal "justice" system that seeks to criminalize people they see as a problem- particularly people of color, whether immigrants or not. In seeking to move immigration reform along, some folks think it's okay to further militarize the border even when it already harms the communities such as the O'odham down at the border.
For more reading on these topics (especially if you're new to these issues in AZ), see This is Bigger than SB 1070. Whether or not my prediction comes true, this is still bigger than the latest law. It was too big before.
From Border Lines blog:
After Prop 187 in California passed it was found to be unconstitutional. Yet it was important historically because it set things in motion. In particular, the federal government passed welfare reform that instituted restrictions on welfare to immigrants that mirrored some of prop 187.
The excerpts at the end of this post, from Border lines blog discuss the reasons the federal approach to immigration is not likely to be much different from AZ's.
This is why I say This is bigger than SB1070. We have people coming to Arizona from out of town, doing this Arizona Freedom Summer (beware the RCP) and thirty actions in thirty days sorts of things, but need to be clear that SB 1070 is not the main issue here. People keep voting for Sheriff Joe and racist legislation- there need to be some efforts to change minds and/or undermine the strength of racism here. As I've mentioned before, if we don't look beyond the pieces of legislation and the bad sheriffs and the raids, the economic situation that so many face is overlooked. We also have a criminal "justice" system that seeks to criminalize people they see as a problem- particularly people of color, whether immigrants or not. In seeking to move immigration reform along, some folks think it's okay to further militarize the border even when it already harms the communities such as the O'odham down at the border.
For more reading on these topics (especially if you're new to these issues in AZ), see This is Bigger than SB 1070. Whether or not my prediction comes true, this is still bigger than the latest law. It was too big before.
From Border Lines blog:
It’s likely that SB 1070 will be judged, in whole or in part, as unconstitutional and will never be fully implemented. Even so the Arizona law marks another step forward in the consolidation of the attrition through enforcement strategy, just as its Legal Workers Act of 2008, which the courts have upheld, signaled the deepening dimensions of immigration law enforcement...
The Arizona law highlights a deepening conundrum for the federal government. By no means is DHS opposed on principle to having local law enforcement join in immigration enforcement. But it does insist that such cooperation be on the terms it sets. Having opened the door to federal-local cooperation, DHS is finding it hard to control the eagerness of localities to join in the immigrant crackdown...
With its Support Local Law Enforcement Act, Arizona not only adopted the “attrition through enforcement’ framework of the restrictionist institutes. It also adapted parts of the federal playbook for immigration enforcement: identifying new ways to increase what DHS calls “law enforcement partnerships” and extending the federal government’s own focus on the expanding category of “criminal aliens.”
Rather than waiting for DHS to reach out and expand its own federal-local collaborative programs, Arizona politicians have asserted the state’s right to enforce existing federal immigration laws. In the view of the supporters of the new law, the main problem they are attempting to address is not some inadequacy in federal immigration law. Rather it’s the failure of the federal agencies to adequately enforce the law...
The federal government has not explicitly endorsed ["attrition through enforcement"], but its actions are closely attuned with this restrictionist agenda.
Even as the White House and DHS continued to insist that only a CIR strategy will fix the broken immigration system, it has systematically moved to make it increasingly difficult for unauthorized immigrants (illegal border crossers and those overstaying their visas) and for legal immigrants who have violated criminal laws (mostly drug use) to live and work in the country. At the same time, DHS has steadily strengthened border control through increased checkpoints, increased agents, and increased border-control infrastructure...
The Obama administration has also proved an ardent advocate of increased federal-local cooperation in immigration enforcement. Among other things, it has strongly supported collaborative programs initiated by the Bush administration such as Operation Community Shield, Criminal Alien Program, Fugitive Operation Teams, Operation Stonegarden, Border Enforcement Security Taskforces (BEST), and the 287(g) program – all of which involve local police and sheriff deputies in the enforcement of immigration law.
In addition, the Obama administration has consolidated and promoted the Secure Communities program, which was developed under DHS Secretary Chertoff as a pilot project to encourage and facilitate the checking of the immigration status of all those arrested by local law enforcement. Secure Communities is advancing rapidly under Secretary Napolitano, who has prioritized the detention and removal of all those DHS and the Justice Department identity as “criminal aliens.”
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the DHS agency responsible for immigration investigations and interior enforcement, has a special program to promote what its calls “law enforcement partnerships.” ICE Access (Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security) “provides local law enforcement agencies an opportunity to team up with ICE to combat specific challenges in their communities.”
Established in 2007, ICE Access underscores the increasing outreach of DHS to local law enforcement officials in immigration and other homeland security matters. The program supports “a multi-agency/multi/authority approach that encompasses federal, state, and local resources, skills, and expertise.”
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Welfare for the Rich: Criminalized Migrants
I'm interested in this birth right issue: the anti-immigrant folks want to change the interpretation of the 14th amendment to keep children of undocumented immigrants from becoming citizens. There are some interesting parallels and overlaps with the rallying cries around overpopulation and welfare abuse. Much attention is put on immigrants' reproduction and the "jackpot" they would receive. (While reading Russell Pearce's website, I learned that another derogatory name for those called "anchor babies" is "jackpot babies").
While I don't believe that as many people are taking advantage of welfare as many claim are, I believe it is currently necessary to people's survival. That said, I don't believe it is the answer to the root problems (and was designed to avoid dealing with root problems), and so I look to other answers other than to fight for access to welfare, especially since, if I understand correctly, welfare isn't intended for or available to undocumented immigrants even if the democrats had more sway.
In the course of my reading and thinking about this issue- the counter-argument to the anti-immigrant folks' that welfare is an incentive for migrants to have children in this country, I realized that the criminalization of migrants (which costs money in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches) is, in effect, welfare, hand-outs, or subsidization for the wealthier classes so they can make even more money. Criminalized migrants (those who automatically break the law by not being in the country through the mostly unattainable official/legal channels) are immensely exploitable. Because of the threat of arrest and/or deportation, they can be coerced into working in dangerous, low-paying jobs, with long hours and limited breaks, no overtime pay, kept from organizing for better conditions and wages, and in many cases, even held against their will to labor.
While racists are crying that too many women of color are having babies and living off welfare, many mostly-white upper middle class and rich women have undocumented women taking care of their kids for them, at very low costs. In the book Disposable Domestics, Grace Chang discusses how white women have been unwilling to organize with others for fair wages for household workers (maids, nannies, etc.), because if they did, they and their constituents would have a harder time being able to afford their own help so they can continue to be liberated working women. Such are the limitations of mainstream feminism.
In effect, the government subsidizes reproductive labor (other than actual childbirth) for the wealthier classes, while withholding it from many women of color (despite what many say, in reality even citizens have a hard time getting adequate welfare), especially undocumented women. This subsidy, which could be called welfare, applies to nearly any situation in which an undocumented migrant is working, since they are rarely paid and treated adequately. It is a little silly to call it "welfare" because these folks don't have to worry about their personal welfare, but because of the rhetoric surrounding welfare as hand-outs, as socialism in some ways, the rich certainly get welfare in different forms. For example, the book Take the Rich Off Welfare, sites a number of subsidies, tax breaks, and more. As far as I recall, the book does not discuss criminalized migrants as welfare, although I think it covers prison labor, which is very much related, as is the slave labor of the past.
Criminalizing migrants is tricky, since the consequence to the migrants is supposed to be that they would be arrested, deported, and/or they would choose to leave- thereby leaving no exploitable labor for the businesses. The businesses (as well as private entities) don't like that! This is an interesting clash between the racists and those who employ migrants (not that the two are mutually exclusive). I believe that SB1070, although motivated by racism, is not totally meant to render Arizona free of undocumented workers. Overall, criminalization functions to render them exploitable, not absent. Remember the Sensenbrenner bill? I don't know where Sensenbrenner stood as far as his personal dislike for undocumented immigrants, but he was behind a very harsh federal immigration reform and it turns out he profits off the criminalization of migrants. Russell Pearce, the legislator who pushed the bill, and Kris Kobach, the lawyer who actually wrote the bill, seem to mostly be motivated by racism.
I believe that racism is spread in the interest of keeping workers divided so that businesses can continue to exploit them all (some more so). I don't think racists like Pearce are conscious actors in this scheme, so he probably won't give up until Arizona is truly free of undocumented immigrants (and their kids). Nevertheless, in the meantime (and hopefully he won't be successful), the criminalization of migrants continues to benefit businesses overall. Let's keep in mind here too, that we as average people also benefit from the cheap labor that keeps the cost down on most of the items we buy. If those items are imported, it's usually cheaper again because the labor has somehow been coerced through criminalization or threat of criminalization.
Billions of dollars are being spent on immigration enforcement. The border wall alone will cost billions. Locally SB1070 will cost so much money, yet somehow it is justified too keep down the cost that immigrants supposedly have on society. While many of us understand that this is just a way to maintain the US as a mostly white country that can exploit the labor of all workers (white or not) by dividing and criminalizing many of them, it does not occur even to most of us that this criminalization is not just an act of hate or politics, but is subsidizing US business.
While I don't believe that as many people are taking advantage of welfare as many claim are, I believe it is currently necessary to people's survival. That said, I don't believe it is the answer to the root problems (and was designed to avoid dealing with root problems), and so I look to other answers other than to fight for access to welfare, especially since, if I understand correctly, welfare isn't intended for or available to undocumented immigrants even if the democrats had more sway.
In the course of my reading and thinking about this issue- the counter-argument to the anti-immigrant folks' that welfare is an incentive for migrants to have children in this country, I realized that the criminalization of migrants (which costs money in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches) is, in effect, welfare, hand-outs, or subsidization for the wealthier classes so they can make even more money. Criminalized migrants (those who automatically break the law by not being in the country through the mostly unattainable official/legal channels) are immensely exploitable. Because of the threat of arrest and/or deportation, they can be coerced into working in dangerous, low-paying jobs, with long hours and limited breaks, no overtime pay, kept from organizing for better conditions and wages, and in many cases, even held against their will to labor.
While racists are crying that too many women of color are having babies and living off welfare, many mostly-white upper middle class and rich women have undocumented women taking care of their kids for them, at very low costs. In the book Disposable Domestics, Grace Chang discusses how white women have been unwilling to organize with others for fair wages for household workers (maids, nannies, etc.), because if they did, they and their constituents would have a harder time being able to afford their own help so they can continue to be liberated working women. Such are the limitations of mainstream feminism.
In effect, the government subsidizes reproductive labor (other than actual childbirth) for the wealthier classes, while withholding it from many women of color (despite what many say, in reality even citizens have a hard time getting adequate welfare), especially undocumented women. This subsidy, which could be called welfare, applies to nearly any situation in which an undocumented migrant is working, since they are rarely paid and treated adequately. It is a little silly to call it "welfare" because these folks don't have to worry about their personal welfare, but because of the rhetoric surrounding welfare as hand-outs, as socialism in some ways, the rich certainly get welfare in different forms. For example, the book Take the Rich Off Welfare, sites a number of subsidies, tax breaks, and more. As far as I recall, the book does not discuss criminalized migrants as welfare, although I think it covers prison labor, which is very much related, as is the slave labor of the past.
Criminalizing migrants is tricky, since the consequence to the migrants is supposed to be that they would be arrested, deported, and/or they would choose to leave- thereby leaving no exploitable labor for the businesses. The businesses (as well as private entities) don't like that! This is an interesting clash between the racists and those who employ migrants (not that the two are mutually exclusive). I believe that SB1070, although motivated by racism, is not totally meant to render Arizona free of undocumented workers. Overall, criminalization functions to render them exploitable, not absent. Remember the Sensenbrenner bill? I don't know where Sensenbrenner stood as far as his personal dislike for undocumented immigrants, but he was behind a very harsh federal immigration reform and it turns out he profits off the criminalization of migrants. Russell Pearce, the legislator who pushed the bill, and Kris Kobach, the lawyer who actually wrote the bill, seem to mostly be motivated by racism.
I believe that racism is spread in the interest of keeping workers divided so that businesses can continue to exploit them all (some more so). I don't think racists like Pearce are conscious actors in this scheme, so he probably won't give up until Arizona is truly free of undocumented immigrants (and their kids). Nevertheless, in the meantime (and hopefully he won't be successful), the criminalization of migrants continues to benefit businesses overall. Let's keep in mind here too, that we as average people also benefit from the cheap labor that keeps the cost down on most of the items we buy. If those items are imported, it's usually cheaper again because the labor has somehow been coerced through criminalization or threat of criminalization.
Billions of dollars are being spent on immigration enforcement. The border wall alone will cost billions. Locally SB1070 will cost so much money, yet somehow it is justified too keep down the cost that immigrants supposedly have on society. While many of us understand that this is just a way to maintain the US as a mostly white country that can exploit the labor of all workers (white or not) by dividing and criminalizing many of them, it does not occur even to most of us that this criminalization is not just an act of hate or politics, but is subsidizing US business.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Ending criminalization of people of color must be priority
The protesters who locked down said that as they were being booked, they saw the people standing, waiting in the "cage" to be processed and then sent off to a detention center or possibly deported, transported on these very buses we saw. A powerful moment was after the protesters had been released and had joined us on the corner, when a bus drove by and we all raised our fists, gave peace signs, and/or waved, knowing to some extent the fate of the prisoners, and wanting to show our solidarity, though limited by gestures.
Tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants, like those whose faces I could barely see, are held in detention centers and jails. SB 1070 has not yet gone into effect. This has been going on for so long and will only continue to do so as long as activists only insist upon ending racial profiling and stopping SB 1070 or even all racist bills/laws if it stops before calling for an end to the border and criminalization of people of color. There are so many undocumented immigrants who are living in our cities whose voices are overpowered by those who want to maintain the status quo. There are so many indigenous people near the border or even throughout this state whose voices are not heard, who are also impacted by the border and will also be impacted by SB1070 and so much more.
While racial profiling seems to be discussed in the media and by certain so-called spokespeople as a problem because it catches innocent/"legal" people up in it, it will be a problem because not only will SB 1070 make it easier and more justifiable to catch undocumented immigrants, it also allows the police to do what they have been doing for so long: treating all people of color as criminals. What tends to be overlooked is that people of color have been criminalized, in different ways in different contexts. The criminalization, whose enforcement is steadily increasing in the case of migrants, is used to paint people as law-breakers and justify their imprisonment and/or disenfranchisement (and here I don't just mean voting, but also any sort of means to make changes in their lives). Not only are certain acts of people of color criminalized or treated as worse crimes (such as the treatment of crack users vs. cocaine users), but the police are given a special position to deem people criminals even if they haven't done anything wrong.
Whiteness has made room for certain people of color to be model citizens (even cops or border patrol agents) to blur the line, but it is clear where the line is. If we don't question this criminalization, there will always be hundreds of thousands of people of color imprisoned in this country, or in constant fear of being ripped from their everyday life, if not even murdered by the state on occasion (even once is far too often). Racial profiling is part of this racial criminalization, and to be clear, perhaps we should use the latter term, unless we buy into this idea that those who have been convicted of crimes or those who we know have crossed the border illegally are being justifyably punished. When you hear or read the arguments for deporting or imprisoning undocumented immigrants it all comes down to the law for them, even though their racism often comes clearly through. There's no effort to examine the purpose of the (immigration) law among those who seem to have convinced themselves that race plays no part.
This criminalization not only puts people in jail but attempts to make it more justifiable to treat people of color inhumanely. The press release for yesterday's Border Patrol protest states, "Indigenous people along the border have been forced by border patrol to carry and provide proof of tribal membership when moving across their traditional lands that have been bisected by this imposed border; a border that has been extremely damaging to the cultural and spiritual practices of these communities. Many people are not able to journey to sacred sites because the communities where people live are on the opposite side of the border from these sites. Since the creation of the current U.S./Mexico border, 45 O’odham villages on or near the border have been completely depopulated." In addition, they state, "The impacts of border militarization are constantly made invisible in the media, the popular culture of this country and even the mainstream immigrants rights movement which has often pushed for 'reform' that means further militarization of the border, which means increased suffering for our communities."
It is important that we carefully remain critical of the elements of any social movement that are are more embraced by the mainstream media and politicians. The folks who did this protest did it in such a way as to risk federal charges to get national media attention, which they hardly got. In the meantime, messages about Comprehensive Immigration Reform and against racial profiling are more successful even when no arrests are involved. Of course calls to end criminalization of people and to stop border militarization are going to be marginalized! This is why they must at least be demarginalized within the social justice movements.
A friend of mine told me that her mother cried when listening to Al Sharpton speak against SB1070. I wonder if what he's been saying in the media is different from what he said at the public event (see First They Came for the "Illegals" but I only care about Racial Profiling). Either way, I will remain weary of anyone marginalizes undocumented immigrants to oppose laws that target them.
See also No Borders or Prison Walls for a longer essay on some of these issues.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
First They Came for the "Illegals" But I Only Care about Racial Profiling
You know that poem that starts off with "THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist." Well, I had always interpreted it as meaning that you should care not because one day it will be you they go after, but you should care because it is happening to someone else who could easily be you. What does it mean if those who make themselves out to be spokespeople for a movement are not fully behind the ones most affected?
It's inspiring that so many different kinds of people are coming out against Arizona's SB1070 immigration bill, due to go into effect in a few months. However, it may not be obvious to all, but there are major discrepancies between politicians and so-called leadership, and the people. For example, while you have undocumented immigrants and their allies at these demonstrations wearing things like t-shirts or signs that say "I'm an illegal", others are focused on racial profiling. This is particularly telling:
The quote above is from an article about Al Sharpton coming to town to participate in a church service and a march to the capitol. From the same article, this quote exemplifies the presence and position of some undocumented immigrants,
For example, here is a common argument:
This is why so many of us have to pick this up where they leave off. Push the debate further by opposing the criminalization of people. How do we take this resistance to racial profiling which is so popular right now and expand it to address criminalization?
It's inspiring that so many different kinds of people are coming out against Arizona's SB1070 immigration bill, due to go into effect in a few months. However, it may not be obvious to all, but there are major discrepancies between politicians and so-called leadership, and the people. For example, while you have undocumented immigrants and their allies at these demonstrations wearing things like t-shirts or signs that say "I'm an illegal", others are focused on racial profiling. This is particularly telling:
“This is not about immigrants taken out of the streets. This is about who is next,” said Phoenix City Council Member Michael Johnson. The former police officer recently alleged he was the victim of racial profiling. (Source)(My emphasis).Michael Johnson has openly supported Arpaio and his law enforcement efforts against undocumented immigrants. How many people coming out against this bill feel this way is unclear, though as I mentioned, Phil Gordon (Phil Gordon: Foe to Undocumented Immigrants) and Kirsten Sinema (Racial Profiling Focus is Still a Distraction) have said that they oppose the racial profiling part of the bill but have not openly opposed the targeting of undocumented immigrants by law enforcement (particularly federal).
The quote above is from an article about Al Sharpton coming to town to participate in a church service and a march to the capitol. From the same article, this quote exemplifies the presence and position of some undocumented immigrants,
Despite the increased fear caused by the new law several undocumented immigrants decided to join the march. Among them was Catalina Vargas, 67, a former farm worker.About a year ago, Al Sharpton appeared on Lou Dobb's show regarding racial profiling and Arpaio's sweeps, and I discussed his emphasis on racial profiling in Racial Profiling Discussion Undermines Solidarity with Immigrants. Yesterday he made similar statements:
“I’m going to fight as much as I can for legalization,” said Vargas, who marched out front holding an American flag.
"There is no way this law could be enforced," said Sharpton, "without profiling people based on whether they are Latino or appear to be Mexican...You can amend it. You can bend it. You can do everything you want to with it.If you read how right-wingers have vilified Al Sharpton, you might tend to think he's on the correct path. I would argue, however, that his focus on racial profiling is the wrong way to go.
"To say that based on reasonable suspicion, state law enforcement can go after people based on Mexican immigration is to say that it is reasonable to look at anyone that appears Latino and subject them to a harassment and a scrutiny that other citizens in Arizona would not be subjected to."
For example, here is a common argument:
"Nowhere in the bill does it say (police can stop or question people about their immigration status) because of race. It just says illegal immigrants," said Whitney Pew, 20. (Source).Russell Pearce himself has repeated that "Illegal is not a race, it is a crime" (discussed further here). Sharpton, Gordon, Michael Johnson, etc. could easily be saying the same goddamn thing, just in different words. "Illegal is not a race, which is why we're going after illegals but finding every way possible to do it besides based on their race." So many people keep saying that it is the job of the federal government, not local police to enforce immigration. To not oppose the criminalization itself, rather than just the racial consequences of law enforcement of this crime, is no way to be an ally to undocumented immigrants, and perhaps this is the point. Perhaps some folks want to continue to support the rule of law and only oppose what they understand to be racism, instead of seeing how the rule of law in many ways is intertwined with racism.
This is why so many of us have to pick this up where they leave off. Push the debate further by opposing the criminalization of people. How do we take this resistance to racial profiling which is so popular right now and expand it to address criminalization?
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Phil Gordon: Foe to Undocumented Immigrants
Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon is at it again, trying to make himself out to be the good guy opposing SB 1070. He tried to get the city council to oppose the law and bring a lawsuit against it, but failed. He spoke at one of the big rallies at the capitol talking about how unconstitutional it is.
It was about two years ago that I was involved in strategizing about how to oppose Phil Gordon's idea to change the immigration policy of the Phoenix Police Department. He initiated a change to Operations Order 1.4.3 which had previously not allowed police to ask about immigration status for serious crimes, but now allows the Phoenix PD to ask anyone arrested. Those stopped for traffic violations would normally not be arrested, and therefore were not asked about status.
Although this change in policy, again, initiated by Gordon, led to an increased number of undocumented immigrants arrested, the Mayor was able to justify to himself that this was okay because he wasn't as bad as Arpaio, whose officers were asking about immigration status to anyone they stopped--mostly for traffic violations, some of which were bogus.
SB1070 is different enough from Operations Order 1.4.3, but isn't really all that much worse, especially considering that Pearce claimed that the current policy meant Phoenix was a sanctuary city and that he needed to "take the handcuffs off the police".
This is the kind of thing that these democrats do. The Phoenix Police department has arrested more undocumented immigrants than Arpaio has, yet because of the Mayor's vocal opposition to the extreme actions and publicity show that Arpaio (and now SB1070) are involved in, he makes himself out to be the good guy.
Let us not be blind to the fact that not only did he initiate the change to Operations Order 1.4.3, he's not exactly being a hypocrite. He is not advocating for the rights of undocumented immigrants. He is only opposing racial profiling (and hate). As discussed in Racial Profiling Focus is Still a Distraction this creates a hierarchy of importance with citizens being more important, and undocumented immigrants not being important. Racial profiling is a legal term which cannot address the unjust situation of the "illegal" person. Therefore, Phil Gordon is a foe, not a friend, of undocumented immigrants.
See also: Mayor Gordon Criticizes Anti-Immigrant Racists and Phoenix Mayor Supports Change In Phx PD Immigration Policy
It was about two years ago that I was involved in strategizing about how to oppose Phil Gordon's idea to change the immigration policy of the Phoenix Police Department. He initiated a change to Operations Order 1.4.3 which had previously not allowed police to ask about immigration status for serious crimes, but now allows the Phoenix PD to ask anyone arrested. Those stopped for traffic violations would normally not be arrested, and therefore were not asked about status.
Although this change in policy, again, initiated by Gordon, led to an increased number of undocumented immigrants arrested, the Mayor was able to justify to himself that this was okay because he wasn't as bad as Arpaio, whose officers were asking about immigration status to anyone they stopped--mostly for traffic violations, some of which were bogus.
SB1070 is different enough from Operations Order 1.4.3, but isn't really all that much worse, especially considering that Pearce claimed that the current policy meant Phoenix was a sanctuary city and that he needed to "take the handcuffs off the police".
Arizona is not a state seething with hatred, eager to trample the civil rights of its citizens in haphazard pursuit of illegal immigrants. Nor are most Arizonans bigots anxious to drag our state back to the 1980s, when Gov. Evan Mecham’s absurd behavior made our home a national laughingstock....that we cannot rule with a velvet glove, seemingly fair but hiding the injustices brought against people everyday in the form of police brutality, bad working conditions, etc. When bills like this pass with such blatant hatred and targeting of people most do not agree are criminals, it makes it harder for us to keep the people blind and in line.
Instead, our state, which has become Ground Zero on illegal immigration because of years of lapsed federal border security, is frustrated...
This is the kind of thing that these democrats do. The Phoenix Police department has arrested more undocumented immigrants than Arpaio has, yet because of the Mayor's vocal opposition to the extreme actions and publicity show that Arpaio (and now SB1070) are involved in, he makes himself out to be the good guy.
Let us not be blind to the fact that not only did he initiate the change to Operations Order 1.4.3, he's not exactly being a hypocrite. He is not advocating for the rights of undocumented immigrants. He is only opposing racial profiling (and hate). As discussed in Racial Profiling Focus is Still a Distraction this creates a hierarchy of importance with citizens being more important, and undocumented immigrants not being important. Racial profiling is a legal term which cannot address the unjust situation of the "illegal" person. Therefore, Phil Gordon is a foe, not a friend, of undocumented immigrants.
See also: Mayor Gordon Criticizes Anti-Immigrant Racists and Phoenix Mayor Supports Change In Phx PD Immigration Policy
Friday, April 30, 2010
Racial Profiling Focus is Still a Distraction
(This is an updated version of a post I made a few months back).
I keep hearing people (such as at the last anti-SB1070 rally) repeating their concerns about racial profiling as if this is the main problem with the bill. Racial profiling is a legal term and is against the law. Unfortunately, "illegal" immigration is also against the law. So when people talk about racial profiling, it sounds like they are only concerned with "legal" people.
I have become convinced that the focus on racial profiling is a distraction to the detriment of migrants' freedom. I am not saying racial profiling is okay, but it implies that what is wrong is that people who are being stopped because of their skin color (or other physical cues) are innocent, implying that those who have broken immigration law are not those worth our concerns. Yet, i would hope that those who claim to be allies or advocates for undocumented immigrants would not allow this idea to be promoted.
We've been hearing about racial profiling for a while. Anti-Arpaio folks have been so focused on these sweeps and the racial profiling and all that, yet only 6% of the arrests of undocumented immigrants occur out in the community, whereas the other 94% of migrants are identified for deportation when they go through the jails (and the folks in the jails are those arrested by the various police departments in the valley) (Source). (This is partly why DHS is continuing the agreements of 287(g) that involve jail checks.) Other police departments are arresting more migrants than the MCSO without these hyped-up "crime supression sweeps", as i discussed further in If Phx and Mesa PD are arresting more immigrants, why is focus on Arpaio?
Clearly, if we are concerned about migrants, we would be focused on the various police departments' arrests, on the jail checks, and on opposing wholesale the legislation Pearce has passed and is trying to push, as well as on the federal laws. If it weren't for the federal laws, there wouldn't be arrests and deportations of migrants.
Representative Kirsten Sinema was heard on KFYI 550 (radio) that she doesn't have a problem with all of the anti-immigrant bill that just passed, just a few parts. In the paper she said, "This bill criminalizes people who appear to be Latino and puts them at risk for racial profiling and prosecution and harassment in the state."
Likewise, of Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, cheered on at the last rally, Fox News reported:
And yes, this is a problem. A Native American 16 year old was stopped by the police while he was walking and asked for ID. Because he didn't have it, if I got got the story right, he was ticketed or arrested (I just heard this story last night).
Overall, the lefty migrants' rights movement is unwilling to oppose the federal laws, and is therefore limited to using the available laws to advocate for migrants. When the justice department and the fbi announced their investigations of Arpaio, many activists jumped on the opportunity to bring Arpaio down. Yet they are obviously limited to what is already against the law. "The Civil Rights Division has an open and ongoing investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office into alleged patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures, and on allegations of national origin discrimination. As part of that investigation, we had observers on the ground in Arizona last week." (Source). Ignoring that the federal government is oppressing the migrants just as much, incidents of racial profiling and perhaps other things were reported to the feds.
When we look to the federal government to protect us (or others) from the local government (or anyone), we are confined to the law. If detaining migrants is legal, but racial profiling is illegal, then we document the racial profiling and hand over the videos to the feds, hoping something will come of it. The problem is, much of the injustices against migrants are perfectly legal.
And so while folks are still waiting for the federal government to save the day (maybe they've given up?), they mustn't question the immigration laws or the enforcers themselves. I discussed this back in April in Racial Profiling Discussion Undermines Solidarity with Immigrants when Al Sharpton and a representative of ACORN were on the Lou Dobbs show discussing racial profiling.
The problem is that the way it's being discussed constructs a hierarchy in which people who are not "illegal" are the unintended targets who do not deserve to be stopped, while undocumented migrants are the correct targets of the racial profiling sweeps. Unfortunately, it is difficult to characterize commentators' position on the issue, and to separate media interpretation from advocates' stances. Additionally, racial profiling is often not defined, nor is it explained why it is wrong.
The ACLU defines racial profiling in this way:
While some may say that this racial profiling is only wrong when it catches legal residents and citizens up in its net, others may say that what is wrong is for officers to investigate someone's citizenship status just because of the way they look- that a person who is undocumented should have the benefit of the doubt like everyone else. Yet the immigration laws themselves are rarely questioned. Some might state that the offense is only a misdemeanor and therefore should not be treated like worse crimes, yet hardly anyone says that movement should not be a crime. Well, I'm saying it: Movement should not be a crime.
Okay, so say we stop the racial profiling. What then? Are we done or do we move on to the injustices that are sanctioned by the government?
Free movement for all!
I keep hearing people (such as at the last anti-SB1070 rally) repeating their concerns about racial profiling as if this is the main problem with the bill. Racial profiling is a legal term and is against the law. Unfortunately, "illegal" immigration is also against the law. So when people talk about racial profiling, it sounds like they are only concerned with "legal" people.
I have become convinced that the focus on racial profiling is a distraction to the detriment of migrants' freedom. I am not saying racial profiling is okay, but it implies that what is wrong is that people who are being stopped because of their skin color (or other physical cues) are innocent, implying that those who have broken immigration law are not those worth our concerns. Yet, i would hope that those who claim to be allies or advocates for undocumented immigrants would not allow this idea to be promoted.
We've been hearing about racial profiling for a while. Anti-Arpaio folks have been so focused on these sweeps and the racial profiling and all that, yet only 6% of the arrests of undocumented immigrants occur out in the community, whereas the other 94% of migrants are identified for deportation when they go through the jails (and the folks in the jails are those arrested by the various police departments in the valley) (Source). (This is partly why DHS is continuing the agreements of 287(g) that involve jail checks.) Other police departments are arresting more migrants than the MCSO without these hyped-up "crime supression sweeps", as i discussed further in If Phx and Mesa PD are arresting more immigrants, why is focus on Arpaio?
Clearly, if we are concerned about migrants, we would be focused on the various police departments' arrests, on the jail checks, and on opposing wholesale the legislation Pearce has passed and is trying to push, as well as on the federal laws. If it weren't for the federal laws, there wouldn't be arrests and deportations of migrants.
Representative Kirsten Sinema was heard on KFYI 550 (radio) that she doesn't have a problem with all of the anti-immigrant bill that just passed, just a few parts. In the paper she said, "This bill criminalizes people who appear to be Latino and puts them at risk for racial profiling and prosecution and harassment in the state."
Likewise, of Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, cheered on at the last rally, Fox News reported:
"Gordon, a staunch opponent of the state law, said that means anyone who doesn't carry an Arizona license -- children under 16, seniors who don't drive and people from out of state -- could be "at risk of being arrested and turned over to (Immigration and Customs Enforcement)."
"It tramples civil rights," Gordon told Fox News on Sunday. "Now everyone has to show and prove that they're a legal resident or citizen."
And yes, this is a problem. A Native American 16 year old was stopped by the police while he was walking and asked for ID. Because he didn't have it, if I got got the story right, he was ticketed or arrested (I just heard this story last night).
Overall, the lefty migrants' rights movement is unwilling to oppose the federal laws, and is therefore limited to using the available laws to advocate for migrants. When the justice department and the fbi announced their investigations of Arpaio, many activists jumped on the opportunity to bring Arpaio down. Yet they are obviously limited to what is already against the law. "The Civil Rights Division has an open and ongoing investigation of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office into alleged patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures, and on allegations of national origin discrimination. As part of that investigation, we had observers on the ground in Arizona last week." (Source). Ignoring that the federal government is oppressing the migrants just as much, incidents of racial profiling and perhaps other things were reported to the feds.
When we look to the federal government to protect us (or others) from the local government (or anyone), we are confined to the law. If detaining migrants is legal, but racial profiling is illegal, then we document the racial profiling and hand over the videos to the feds, hoping something will come of it. The problem is, much of the injustices against migrants are perfectly legal.
And so while folks are still waiting for the federal government to save the day (maybe they've given up?), they mustn't question the immigration laws or the enforcers themselves. I discussed this back in April in Racial Profiling Discussion Undermines Solidarity with Immigrants when Al Sharpton and a representative of ACORN were on the Lou Dobbs show discussing racial profiling.
The problem is that the way it's being discussed constructs a hierarchy in which people who are not "illegal" are the unintended targets who do not deserve to be stopped, while undocumented migrants are the correct targets of the racial profiling sweeps. Unfortunately, it is difficult to characterize commentators' position on the issue, and to separate media interpretation from advocates' stances. Additionally, racial profiling is often not defined, nor is it explained why it is wrong.
The ACLU defines racial profiling in this way:
"Racial Profiling" refers to the discriminatory practice by law enforcement officials of targeting individuals for suspicion of crime based on the individual's race, ethnicity, religion or national origin. Criminal profiling, generally, as practiced by police, is the reliance on a group of characteristics they believe to be associated with crime. Examples of racial profiling are the use of race to determine which drivers to stop for minor traffic violations (commonly referred to as "driving while black or brown"), or the use of race to determine which pedestrians to search for illegal contraband.The idea here is that one should not be suspected of a crime because of how they look, but if one has committed a crime, the way they are caught should not be by appearance. However, one could argue that those who are guilty of a crime should be caught no matter the means. Frankly, there are people who would make themselves out to be advocates for migrants when in fact they do not want to question the law, and therefore do not openly oppose the arrests of migrants under any conditions, involving racial profiling or not.
While some may say that this racial profiling is only wrong when it catches legal residents and citizens up in its net, others may say that what is wrong is for officers to investigate someone's citizenship status just because of the way they look- that a person who is undocumented should have the benefit of the doubt like everyone else. Yet the immigration laws themselves are rarely questioned. Some might state that the offense is only a misdemeanor and therefore should not be treated like worse crimes, yet hardly anyone says that movement should not be a crime. Well, I'm saying it: Movement should not be a crime.
Okay, so say we stop the racial profiling. What then? Are we done or do we move on to the injustices that are sanctioned by the government?
Free movement for all!
Thursday, April 29, 2010
OSAB: Movement Demands Autonomy: An O'odham Perspective on Border Controls and Immigration
from O'odham Solidarity Across Borders
This article has already been distributed in pamphlet form, the few paragraphs immediately below are a few notes on recent developments.
In light of the state's new attack of SB 1070 on migrant communities, OSABC would like to show a perspective and experience that is often overlooked in the immigration struggle, that being the indigenous impacts. Indigenous communities have, and still are being attack by the state (meaning the political entity, also called "government") since the first migrants, European settlers, arrived to this hemisphere. But that, we already know. What OSABC would like to express is, WE ARE STILL HERE. As O'odham, we have seen our lands occupied by three colonial states (Spain, Mexico, and now the United States), and STILL, we have endured in the face of colonization. The very land that this bill was passed on, is still O'odham land! From the Phoenix Valley, to Scukson (Tucson is from an O'odham word), to Rocky Point, to the Sierra Madres in Mexico, this is O'odham jewed.
The passing of SB1070 leads us to the police state, and does not just affect migrants, it affects us all! SB 1070 like policies already occur on the Tohono O'odham Nation since the mid-90's with the states push for immigration enforcement. Border Enforcement that would be a Berlin-like Wall through our lands to control movement. The current push for immigration reform by politicians and by reformist activists includes the push to secure “their” borders which would be the forced removal and relocations of all indigenous tribes that live in the border region (Yaqui, Lipan Apache, Mohawk to name a few). This dismissal not just shows the colonial attitude that both reformist activists and politicians have, but also the settler privilege that they evoke when constructing border policies.
More...
This article has already been distributed in pamphlet form, the few paragraphs immediately below are a few notes on recent developments.
In light of the state's new attack of SB 1070 on migrant communities, OSABC would like to show a perspective and experience that is often overlooked in the immigration struggle, that being the indigenous impacts. Indigenous communities have, and still are being attack by the state (meaning the political entity, also called "government") since the first migrants, European settlers, arrived to this hemisphere. But that, we already know. What OSABC would like to express is, WE ARE STILL HERE. As O'odham, we have seen our lands occupied by three colonial states (Spain, Mexico, and now the United States), and STILL, we have endured in the face of colonization. The very land that this bill was passed on, is still O'odham land! From the Phoenix Valley, to Scukson (Tucson is from an O'odham word), to Rocky Point, to the Sierra Madres in Mexico, this is O'odham jewed.
The passing of SB1070 leads us to the police state, and does not just affect migrants, it affects us all! SB 1070 like policies already occur on the Tohono O'odham Nation since the mid-90's with the states push for immigration enforcement. Border Enforcement that would be a Berlin-like Wall through our lands to control movement. The current push for immigration reform by politicians and by reformist activists includes the push to secure “their” borders which would be the forced removal and relocations of all indigenous tribes that live in the border region (Yaqui, Lipan Apache, Mohawk to name a few). This dismissal not just shows the colonial attitude that both reformist activists and politicians have, but also the settler privilege that they evoke when constructing border policies.
More...
Monday, April 26, 2010
SB 1070 and Homeland Security's Secure Communities
This is a post from last June when there was a similar bill to 1070 in the legislature and it didn't pass at the time. I bring up some points which I think are important regarding the wider strategy of the state. The federal government may attempt to justify their actions by distinguishing "criminal aliens" from others in order to ease migrants' allies' worries, but clearly any undocumented migrant in AZ could be considered a "criminal alien". We don't know yet how they will determine who gets this label.
Immigrants-as-Trespassers Law Closer to Passing
Seriously, this could be the most f-ed up thing that happens this year, as far as state legislation goes. A bill that Arizona Senator Russell Pearce wrote (SB1175) would make it so undocumented immigrants' existence in this state would be considered trespassing, and would also prevent any policy that restricts the police or other state agencies from enforcing federal immigration law. This bill just passed in the senate this week.
This means that undocumented immigrants' presence in the state would cause them to be breaking a state law. Although i think it's a stretch and might be unconstitutional, the idea is to override the federal immigration law, as far as enforcement goes. As long as police attempt to enforce federal law, they are on shaky ground, but they can much more easily enforce state law. This is what arpaio has been doing by enforcing the smuggling law, the employer sanctions law, and other such laws to go after undocumented immigrants). Although his actions are controversial and he does say that he is enforcing federal immigration law, his primary means of attacking the immigrant community is by enforcing (though many would say inappropriately) the state laws.
Pearce's bills aim to create more crimes out of the actions (or mere existence) of undocumented immigrants so they can more easily be arrested and removed. He wrote a bill (SB1337) that would make a class I misdemeanor out of not having a state-issued drivers' license (you have to be legal to get a legal one), which is in the legislature at the same time as various state police departments are discussing not recognizing the Matricula Consular, the ID issued by the Mexican government. Additionally, another bill (SB1177) would make it a crime to solicit for work.
The wider picture involves a new ICE program called "Secure Communities" which will target "criminal aliens" by linking up various law enforcement and immigration databases to be accessed when a person is in police custody. The new and existing laws and policies would give the police cause to arrest, detain, and check the databases on the suspect, and since undocumented immigrants would then have charges against them that they wouldn't otherwise have had, they will more likely be face the consequences of being labeled "criminal aliens".
Clearly "criminal alien" will mean nothing different from "illegal alien", or to us, "undocumented immigrant" because anyone without papers could be categorized as a "criminal alien". The criminal alien term will be used to make the general public feel that the right people are being deported. However, just as previous ICE raids have been purported to target dangerous criminals, they have in fact caught in their nets mostly people without criminal records. Now, creating more people with criminal records will justify various actions against the undocumented community.
If you like this post, you might also like Satire for Russell Pearce.
Immigrants-as-Trespassers Law Closer to Passing
Seriously, this could be the most f-ed up thing that happens this year, as far as state legislation goes. A bill that Arizona Senator Russell Pearce wrote (SB1175) would make it so undocumented immigrants' existence in this state would be considered trespassing, and would also prevent any policy that restricts the police or other state agencies from enforcing federal immigration law. This bill just passed in the senate this week.
This means that undocumented immigrants' presence in the state would cause them to be breaking a state law. Although i think it's a stretch and might be unconstitutional, the idea is to override the federal immigration law, as far as enforcement goes. As long as police attempt to enforce federal law, they are on shaky ground, but they can much more easily enforce state law. This is what arpaio has been doing by enforcing the smuggling law, the employer sanctions law, and other such laws to go after undocumented immigrants). Although his actions are controversial and he does say that he is enforcing federal immigration law, his primary means of attacking the immigrant community is by enforcing (though many would say inappropriately) the state laws.
Pearce's bills aim to create more crimes out of the actions (or mere existence) of undocumented immigrants so they can more easily be arrested and removed. He wrote a bill (SB1337) that would make a class I misdemeanor out of not having a state-issued drivers' license (you have to be legal to get a legal one), which is in the legislature at the same time as various state police departments are discussing not recognizing the Matricula Consular, the ID issued by the Mexican government. Additionally, another bill (SB1177) would make it a crime to solicit for work.
The wider picture involves a new ICE program called "Secure Communities" which will target "criminal aliens" by linking up various law enforcement and immigration databases to be accessed when a person is in police custody. The new and existing laws and policies would give the police cause to arrest, detain, and check the databases on the suspect, and since undocumented immigrants would then have charges against them that they wouldn't otherwise have had, they will more likely be face the consequences of being labeled "criminal aliens".
Clearly "criminal alien" will mean nothing different from "illegal alien", or to us, "undocumented immigrant" because anyone without papers could be categorized as a "criminal alien". The criminal alien term will be used to make the general public feel that the right people are being deported. However, just as previous ICE raids have been purported to target dangerous criminals, they have in fact caught in their nets mostly people without criminal records. Now, creating more people with criminal records will justify various actions against the undocumented community.
If you like this post, you might also like Satire for Russell Pearce.
Phoenix Anarchist Actions in Response to SB1070
From anarchistnews.org
It is now illegal for any person who cannot provide legal documentation to look for employment or to be employed in the state of Arizona.
On Friday morning, AZ governor Jan Brewer passed the newest and perhaps most violent in a succession of racist bills, 1070.
1070 means:
It is now illegal for any person to be on public or private land (meaning in any location within the state) without carrying verification proving citizenship or legal residency.
Every person must now carry proof of legal residency at all times in Arizona,and may legally be asked by any state employed to present documentation.
It is now illegal for any person to house or transport any person who cannot provide legal documentation within the United States.
1070 makes no bones about it: the bill is one of the most honest in demonstrating the progression of Arizona into the furthest depths of a Police State, and of the racism that necessitates it.
Phoenix area anarchists were quick to respond- in a matter of 2 days, a multitude of actions were organized around bringing the conflict more visibly to the streets of Phoenix (for the mainstream unaware of how issues of state racism and indigenous colonialism affect everyone).
With black flags, signs, and banners, a march of approximately 40 anarchists proceeded South on Central Avenue towards Van Buren. Pedestrians cheered as the group approached. The street, artistically peppered with messages of resistance- stickers, paintings and the like- became a ground for insurrectionary conflict as the loud cadre erected a border wall across Central Avenue: “DO NOT CROSS: VIOLATORS MIGHT GET FREE".
The business district was an obstacle course as drivers and passersby were forced to negotiate the obstruction of their space and the impediment of their movement- a burden placed daily on the shoulders of the indigenous whose land has been militarized and the undocumented- hunted daily.
As the public on Van Buren at Central were left to respond to the ruptures that their political complicity facilitated, the group rambunctiously proceeded along Van Buren to third street. “No Borders; No Nations; No Police Stations!” Chants rung about the cold concrete high rises as police suddenly and forcefully halted the march. Throwing marchers to the ground and threatening them with tasers and mace, the pigs detained the majority of march participants. The police demanded the names and birth dates of all detained at the threat of mass arrest. After approximately forty minutes all were released without charges or citation, except for one comrade who was arrested for “obstructing justice by not giving his true name”; a fabricated accusation.
Demonstrations this past week indicate an escalation in radical protest and dissent that will not be ameliorated by any form of legislation or representative polity. The popular resistance in Arizona thus identifies with anarchist principles, and Arizona anarchists locate themselves fittingly within a timely social war for total liberation.
Arizona: attack! Let’s get free.
Thoughts on SB1070 by Survival Solidarity
from Survival Solidarity:
Thoughts on SB1070….
April 23, 2010All of this without SB 1070 being passed…
“There was a massive show of force, with helicopters, dozens of agents, police vehicles and weapons, assaulting our community in a fashion never seen before…This action clearly demonstrates what we have predicted, that we would all be living in a police state here in Arizona. Kat Rodriguez, of Derechos Humanos, in response to the April 15, 2010 raids.
From October 2003 to October 2009 there have been at least 107 reported deaths within US detention centers. Since October 2009 there have been 87 deaths on the Arizona border. Most recently the Arizona Daily Star reported finding the body of a migrant along the Arizona-Mexico Border on April 19, 2010. The same report claimed that it was the third body found within a three-day period.
On April 15, 2010 “Operation In Plain Sight” the coordinated effort of more than 800 Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) officers and law enforcement officials from local to international levels resulted in the largest ICE raid of it’s [ICE] seven-year existence. Five shuttle bus locations, four in Tucson and one in Phoenix, were targeted in the raid. ICE officials claim that these bus services were narcotic-traffickers and human smugglers. 50 vehicles and seven vans were confiscated. At least 47 people were arrested. Some reports have reflected larger numbers of arrests and prolonged detentions.
In communities where these raids have taken place many have experienced fear sweeping through their neighborhoods. The images from these raids have been very unsettling. Unfortunately gun totting, mask-wearing cops rampaging through neighborhoods raiding homes and businesses like car washes and Day Laborer sites is anything but new.
“…. We are concerned about the timing of an ICE operation that seems to be as much designed for media consumption as anything else,” Pablo Alvarado, executive director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said in a statement. “We are worried ICE Director Morton’s intense media campaign to publicize this action will only contribute to a climate of fear that is already sending shockwaves across the state and country.”
After a callout for emergency rallies in response to the raids, demonstrations erupted in both Phoenix and Tucson. The following week more demonstrations and walkouts happened with small escalations at certain points. In Phoenix nine students felt compelled to chain them selves to a door of the Arizona Capitol Building resulting in all of them being arrested. One of the student’s attorneys said that the action was taken to send a message to Gov. Jan Brewer and “block the bigotry that was emanating from the Legislature”.
One doesn’t need to look far to see why Arizona state officials would be grasping for straws. The AZ central Star’s (Main newspaper of Phoenix) number one story of 2009 was recounting the deficit that Brewer and legislature faced:
“The Legislature and Governor Jan Brewer spent 2009 thrashing around the deep end, looking for a way out. It didn’t happen.
Budget cuts were inevitable, and the public began to see the contours of a shrinking state government: Hundreds of state employees were laid off and thousands forced to take days off without pay. For the first time since the depression the state borrowed to pay the bills
The budget quagmire will continue in 2010, where a $3.3 billon deficit looms and most likely beyond.”
Another point of contention for Phoenix politics falling apart last year was another top story of 2009 recounting the US Department of Justice (DOJ) investigating Sherriff Joe Arpaio.
From that article:
March, the DOJ announced an investigation into alleged patterns of racial discrimination based on national origin. Although the DOJ has not been specific, the consensus among Arpaio’s critics is that the investigation relates primarily to racial profiling and illegal searches and seizures. In October, Arpaio complained publicly that DOJ investigators had posed as reporters to gain access to one of his press conferences.
When connecting to the DOJ’s Arpaio tip line, it says, “You have reached the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office investigation line.” Then it prompts the listener to choose between English and Spanish. By lunchtime Wednesday,[of the week the hotline was established] both the English and Spanish mailboxes were full. They have been full throughout the week and are still full as of Saturday morning. The toll free number for the tip line is 877-613-2137.
Taking these two weak points into context definitely sheds light on why Phoenix politicians would be looking for scapegoats and easy ways to pose as if they have things “under control”. The fact that SB 1070 has made it this far should most certainly be linked to the fact that we are in a state of literal crisis rapidly approaching a level of disparity similar to that of 1929’s great economic depression.
“Tucson today is the moral equivalent of Birmingham, Alabama in 1961,” said Mike Wilson, border rights activist and Tohono ‘O’odham tribal member, while attending a rally at the Tucson Federal Building April, 15.
Since the closing of 2009 and now well into 2010 Arizona has been sinking further and further into political unrest and deficit. In 2005 Arizona enacted a law making human smuggling a state crime and prohibited employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants with a law in 2007. What are some of the quotes coming from Arizona’s head political figures in 2010?
Republican Senator Russell Pearce of Mesa, who sponsored SB 1070, said”…. it will take handcuffs off police and put them on violent criminals. Enough is enough,”.
U.S. Sen. John McCain called the bill a “tool that I think needs to be used.” His office later said that wasn’t an endorsement.
“It will be extremely difficult to repair that chain (in reference to the shuttle bus service). It is the missing link that greatly disrupts the infrastructure of human smuggling organizations,” said Dennis Burke, U.S. attorney for Arizona.
Knowing all of this we need to ask ourselves a few important questions: knowing the US government just closed down a way for many people to safely travel from south of the US border to find work and be close to their families, what can we do to help recreate this safety net and lessen the blow that the government wishes to inflict upon those migrating to the U.S.? Knowing that large-scale fear is sweeping through neighborhoods of people that are subject to repression solely on race alone (that will only increase if SB1070 is passed), what can we do to first, reach out and provide safer ways for those affected to share their stories? Second, how can we improve the ways that we disseminate information about our current community projects (i.e. No More Deaths and Derechos Humanos in Tucson) and assure that we sustain them and use this chance to get new people involved in supporting migrants? We also need to develop community based actions to help alleviate the governments goal of further alienating people of color communities? One project that will surely need more help is the documentation of abuses on Tohono O’ odham land where abuse is already high and will only escalate if it becomes legalized through the passage of SB 1070.
Realistically speaking, what will you do the next time you see police pulling someone over in your neighbor hood? What can/will we do to strengthen some of the past efforts started to rally observers for ICE raids, and get serious about supporting those that will continue to feel less safe and unsupported in our communities after raids increase?
Some may see rallies and direct actions as the answer. The author of this piece definitely supports those actions. Looking at the situation strategically though some of the first steps should be stopping and listening to each other. Building community ties right now could be an empowering step one for the problem at hand. The government can easily cut the chain of a lock-down. But they truly fear a group of organized people. So at the next walk-out and rally be sure to actually connect with those around you. Remember to reflect on feelings and provide a space for more wide-scale communication to occur.
Regardless of SB 1070 passing we can expect things around the border to only get worse. Governor Jan Brewer requesting an additional 250 troops to increase militarization of the border definitely reflects that. As long as militarized borders exist and ICE detention centers continue to operate we can be sure that there will be fear and definite reason for it in our communities. Extreme cases of human rights violations and racial profiling will also continue to occur on Tohono O’ odham land and in our communities. The amount of humans dying on the border will also drastically increase. The question at hand that needs to be answered is how are we going to lessen that?
It’s like a powder keg and the fires lit, it’s about to explode! — A-Alikes Explode
At the time of this article being written SB 1070 has not been signed into law.
This piece is part of a larger group of short essays later to be released on the topic of response to the militarization on the border and racist repression in our community.
Another Crucial article for this discussion from friends:
Thoughts on our role in the emerging struggle against the racist state of Arizona
For more information on resistance to SB1070 visit AZ Indymedia
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Civil Disobedience and Walk-Outs Oppose Racist Bill
This week is an intense one, as Russell Pearce's bill SB1070 sits on the desk of the governor signed, vetoed, or let to pass. Meanwhile, on Tuesday, 9 students got arrested after chaining themselves to the doors of one of the capitol buildings. They were really stealth about it, and had a great statement they read during the action, which happened at the same time as the press conference at which various politicians spoke. I fully support them taking their action when they did even if it disturbed the order of things at the press conference- this was far bigger news. The students called for more non-violent civil disobedience because they've tried all the usual tactics like calling their legislators. If anything, many years ago was a time to escalate tactics because now we are at desperate times.
Today I got to witness hundreds of high-school students march to the capitol. They apparently had a walk-out. I'm reading accounts of thousands having marched there, but when I was there, many had left, but there were more on their way! These actions are quite inspiring and will hopefully inspire more actions, even if they don't stop this bill.
This is all reminiscent of the powerful time of the walk-outs and marches during the threat of the federal Sensenbrenner-sponsored immigration reform bill in 2006 and 2007. I am glad to know that this large-scale resistance is not dead. Yes, the Arpaio marches were big, but the walk-outs signify something different.
It will be interesting to see what happens next since the bill is likely to pass. I imagine that many migrants will feel the brunt of it, even if the bill gets caught up with lawsuits and issues with constitutionality. However, although it's difficult for many of us who live in the Phoenix area to imagine what's going on down at the border, we also must be aware of the increasing militarization that is looming. The governor and McCain and others are trying to get more troops down to the border. In addition, as comprehensive immigration reform comes closer to being seriously talked about in the US legislature, there will hopefully be more resistance to guest-worker programs, biometrics, increasing militarization of the border, etc.
See also: Civil Disobedience in Protest of SB1070
Today I got to witness hundreds of high-school students march to the capitol. They apparently had a walk-out. I'm reading accounts of thousands having marched there, but when I was there, many had left, but there were more on their way! These actions are quite inspiring and will hopefully inspire more actions, even if they don't stop this bill.
This is all reminiscent of the powerful time of the walk-outs and marches during the threat of the federal Sensenbrenner-sponsored immigration reform bill in 2006 and 2007. I am glad to know that this large-scale resistance is not dead. Yes, the Arpaio marches were big, but the walk-outs signify something different.
It will be interesting to see what happens next since the bill is likely to pass. I imagine that many migrants will feel the brunt of it, even if the bill gets caught up with lawsuits and issues with constitutionality. However, although it's difficult for many of us who live in the Phoenix area to imagine what's going on down at the border, we also must be aware of the increasing militarization that is looming. The governor and McCain and others are trying to get more troops down to the border. In addition, as comprehensive immigration reform comes closer to being seriously talked about in the US legislature, there will hopefully be more resistance to guest-worker programs, biometrics, increasing militarization of the border, etc.
See also: Civil Disobedience in Protest of SB1070
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
