A few weeks ago, right-wingers in Arizona passed an anti-immigrant law that many believe is unconstitutional. The law would force the state's policemen to engage is racial profiling and would make it a requirement for citizens to carry identification (especially Hispanic citizens) or face up to six months in jail.
Since the law was passed there has been a storm of protest and even a boycott of the state. At least $10 million in convention money has been lost and it looks like that will climb. Many blogs (including this one) have made an analogy between Arizona right-wingers and the Nazi Party in Germany under Hitler. The right-wingers are horrified by the comparison and say it is unfair -- but is it?
A couple of days ago Arizona blogger cpmaz at Random Musings (a friend of this blog) wrote a post that looked at the comparison and whether it was fair. It is a well-written post and I urge everyone to go to his blog and read it. Here is part of what cpmaz had to say:
"Many of the more vocal opponents of Russell Pearce's SB1070 (the "show me your papers" law) have likened him, Governor Jan Brewer, and the other supporters of the law to the Nazis.
Brewer finds this analogy so offensive that it caused her to stick herfoot in her mouth, inflating her father's record of service during WW2 in order to bask in some reflected Nazi-fighting glow.
The analogy is such a powerful one that even Pearce himself has taken to "disavowing" any connections to white supremacists or Neo-Nazis.
Brewer finds this analogy so offensive that it caused her to stick herfoot in her mouth, inflating her father's record of service during WW2 in order to bask in some reflected Nazi-fighting glow.
The analogy is such a powerful one that even Pearce himself has taken to "disavowing" any connections to white supremacists or Neo-Nazis.
While I understand the commentators' reluctance to give credence to the analogy (and also why Pearce and Brewer don't want to be equated to the greatest evil of the 20th, and perhaps any other, Century), it fits.
The Nazis started slowly, and legislatively, enacting a series of laws meant to demonize and isolate Jews and other "non-Aryans" from German society, economically, legally, and socially.
To whip up public support for the ever-stronger anti-semitic laws, the Nazis ratcheted up their rhetoric, blaming Jews for all that ailed Germany in the post-WWI era, economically, socially, and intellectually.
There were laws to remove Jews from Germany's civil service, restrict the number of "non-Aryans" in schools (both as students and as professors), forbid Jewish physicians from treating non-Jewish patients, and more, culminating in laws revoking the citizenship of Jews.
And that was just the start, when the Nazis were still attempting to put a civil face (of sorts) on their pogrom.
Here in 21st Century Arizona, the state's nativists, led by Russell Pearce and Jan Brewer (and Joe Arpaio and Tom Horne and Colette Rosati and Ron Gould and so many others), have trod a similar path, starting with laws restricting, underfunding, or even defunding English Language Learner classes in AZ's public schools, blocking the poor from taking advantage of public services and benefits unless they prove their U.S. citizenship first, banning ethnic studies courses,removing teachers with accents from classes, and the now-infamous SB1070 "show me your papers" law.
Now Pearce wants to follow up his recent successes with moves to deny citizenship to babies born to undocumented immigrant parents and to force the children of non-citizen parents to pay tuition to attend Arizona's public schools.
The Nazis started slowly, and legislatively, enacting a series of laws meant to demonize and isolate Jews and other "non-Aryans" from German society, economically, legally, and socially.
To whip up public support for the ever-stronger anti-semitic laws, the Nazis ratcheted up their rhetoric, blaming Jews for all that ailed Germany in the post-WWI era, economically, socially, and intellectually.
There were laws to remove Jews from Germany's civil service, restrict the number of "non-Aryans" in schools (both as students and as professors), forbid Jewish physicians from treating non-Jewish patients, and more, culminating in laws revoking the citizenship of Jews.
And that was just the start, when the Nazis were still attempting to put a civil face (of sorts) on their pogrom.
Here in 21st Century Arizona, the state's nativists, led by Russell Pearce and Jan Brewer (and Joe Arpaio and Tom Horne and Colette Rosati and Ron Gould and so many others), have trod a similar path, starting with laws restricting, underfunding, or even defunding English Language Learner classes in AZ's public schools, blocking the poor from taking advantage of public services and benefits unless they prove their U.S. citizenship first, banning ethnic studies courses,removing teachers with accents from classes, and the now-infamous SB1070 "show me your papers" law.
Now Pearce wants to follow up his recent successes with moves to deny citizenship to babies born to undocumented immigrant parents and to force the children of non-citizen parents to pay tuition to attend Arizona's public schools.
The laws, proposed and enacted, and the rhetoric both demonize and isolate Arizona's immigrant community, just as the Nazis' Nuremburg and eugenics laws did more than seven decades ago.
I understand the reluctance of many observers to accept the Nazi/SB1070 analogy - no one wants to believe that their friends and neighbors (or even themselves) are capable of great evil.
And to be sure, Arizona's nativists haven't racked up the body count the way that Germany's Nazis did.
Yet.
One should remember that the Nazis were in power for more than a decade before their "Final Solution" of assembly-line efficient genocide was fully up to speed; Jan Brewer ascended to the Governor's office less than a year-and-a-half ago.
And one should not confuse 'lack of time' with 'lack of desire.'"
I understand the reluctance of many observers to accept the Nazi/SB1070 analogy - no one wants to believe that their friends and neighbors (or even themselves) are capable of great evil.
And to be sure, Arizona's nativists haven't racked up the body count the way that Germany's Nazis did.
Yet.
One should remember that the Nazis were in power for more than a decade before their "Final Solution" of assembly-line efficient genocide was fully up to speed; Jan Brewer ascended to the Governor's office less than a year-and-a-half ago.
And one should not confuse 'lack of time' with 'lack of desire.'"
I completely agree with what cpmaz had to say. Fascism does not come to a country instantly. It uses lies and fear to creep in. Let's stop this nonsense now before it gets worse.
I enjoyed your post and fully agree but the term "natavist" perplexes me. Not to bring other issues in here but the South Western states have more of an obligation than any other to be accepting of the illegal immigrants if anything aren't the "natavists" encroaching on land once belonging to to Mexico and tribal groups? Hey I'm just saying, I'm full blooded scot-irish.
ReplyDeleteI hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.
ReplyDeleteI know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!
Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.
Well said Benito.
ReplyDeleteAnd John, you are right. Hispanics were in Arizona (and Texas, New Mexico and California) hundreds of years before whites. cpmaz is using the term "nativist" as the right-wing racists use it to describe themselves, and they are largely ignorant of real history.
"I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents."
ReplyDeleteAnd I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine the actual law in question.
Here's a link to the original SB-1070.
And here's a link to HB-2162, which amended the original bill.
What part of "A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution" do you not understand?
But then again, this is the blog where Muslim honor killings and Christian male-only clergy were judged, not as similar or analogous, but "exactly the same thing" (your words, not mine, Ted).
Come on CT, you can't really expect the police to be demanding citizenship papers of whites. You know this law was aimed at Hispanics and only Hispanics will be required to show their identity papers and prove their citizenship.
ReplyDeleteAs for your last paragraph, misogyny has many faces and comes in many forms but it is still misogyny no matter what form it takes.
Ted,
ReplyDeleteDid you ever hear of the acronym "OTM"? It stands for "Other Than Mexican" and includes all of the non-Hispanics that cross the border.
Here's a link to an interesting, albeit somewhat dated (September 2005), report on the subject entitled "Border Security: Apprehensions of 'Other Than Mexican' Aliens".
The number of OTM's apprehended nationwide between 2002 and 2005 more than tripled. In short, it's not just an Hispanic problem anymore.
"The law would force the state's policemen to engage is racial profiling and would make it a requirement for citizens to carry identification (especially Hispanic citizens) or face up to six months in jail."
I've given you a link to SB-1070 and its amendments. Why don't you find the section of the law that says this and quote it for us, citing where you found it.
By the way, the quote I gave earlier is from Section 3 of HB-2162, (amending Section 11‑1051, Arizona Revised Statutes, as added by Senate Bill 1070, section 2, forty-ninth legislature, second regular session, as transmitted to the governor).
"As for your last paragraph, misogyny has many faces and comes in many forms but it is still misogyny no matter what form it takes."
"Exactly" the same thing, Ted? "Exactly" the same thing??
Your moral equivalence is stunning.
As is your failure to face reality.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how to respond to that, Ted.
ReplyDeleteIt would seem, at least on the topic of the Arizona law, my reality is based on facts, whereas yours is based on emotions.
You made a couple of claims - that the Arizona law 1) "would force the state's policemen to engage is racial profiling"; and 2) "would make it a requirement for citizens to carry identification (especially Hispanic citizens) or face up to six months in jail." Each of these claims is either true or false.
If they were true, you should be able to quote the specific language in the law (as amended) that mandates each of your claims.
Show me where the Arizona law 1) mandates racial profiling by police officers; and 2) requires citizens to carry identification or face six months in jail, and I'll gladly accept that reality.
Regarding your absolute moral equivalence of the premeditated taking of a human life and barring someone from a particular profession, I don't know how you can objectively prove that. If you can think of a way, I'm willing to entertain it. Perhaps you know of a convict sitting on death row or serving a life sentence for rejecting someone's application for a professional license.
In the meantime, I guess I'll just have to accept the fact that your reality is very different than mine.
the best blog post .... it is amazing and outstanding.....Thank you !!
ReplyDelete