Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Brief comment

Okay, just something I need to get off my chest because it's really bugging me. SB1070 is a vaguely-written, short-sighted, and, frankly, unconstitutional measure that deserves to be challenged and removed from the books. But I don't think the way to react to this is to shake your fist at or boycott the entire state of Arizona. Because there are a lot of good people here who are very angry about it and already grouping to fight it. And they don't deserve to get thrown under a bus for what the legislators have done. This wasn't some public referendum that was passed by a majority of voters (and now that I recall, no one I know blamed the entire state of California for Proposition 8, which was a public referendum, nor suggested boycotting the Golden State because of it).

I am not going to say absurd things such as "those suggesting a boycott of the entire state are as guilty of 'profiling' as this law seems to be," because I know they are angry and their hearts are in the right place. But the only people who are going to suffer from a boycott are the people whose livelihoods depend on tourist dollars, which includes, at many of our state parks, a large number of indigenous folks, who may also find themselves nuisanced by this law.

Any loss of tourism dollars that occurs as a result of a boycott will blamed by the legislators on the economy, and will be utterly lost on them. And it will give the dishonorable governor an excuse to put through a budget-cutting measure she's been pushing for, which is the closure of our state parks.

I believe the best way to deal with this is through supporting the legal challenges that are already in the works. You will each have to do as your conscience dictates.


( 14 comments — Leave a comment )
Apr. 26th, 2010 02:27 am (UTC)
Well, as a person who runs a tourist enterprise in SC, object of another well-deserved boycott over the Confederate Flag, it would be hypocritical for me to boycott another state. And yet.

Apr. 26th, 2010 02:35 am (UTC)
Some of us don't have the luxury of boycotting it. We own property here, have loved ones here. And so it becomes our job to make it a good place for everyone to live, or visit.
Apr. 26th, 2010 02:28 am (UTC)
I really didn't mean to attack on FB all the good people in Arizona. And there are a lot of them. I know folks who are putting water in the desert risking imprisonment and being cut off from their tribe.

I don't understand the anti immigrant sentiment. All of us came here from somewhere else. Even Native Americans migrated here. Only African slaves came here under duress. The rest of us came looking for something, most of us were looking for economic opportunities, the same as immigrants who come today.

If we had had the same standards for immigration we do now in most of our history, most of the white Europeans wouldn't have been able to make the standards. Whites are here because immigration has been easy for us.
Apr. 26th, 2010 02:39 am (UTC)
I didn't mean to snap at you, either. It was just one more in a line of well-meaning statements that seemed to color me in the same red paint as the misguided folks who think this is a nifty idea. Where their hysteria of illegals comes from, I have no idea. Those people are disenfranchised, poverty-stricken, and do the crap work the rest of us are "too good" to do.

I guess they need a scapegoat for things, and the weak can't fight back. Why do I think this law is actually going to show there aren't all that many hiding under the bushes like they fear?

Edited at 2010-04-26 02:40 am (UTC)
Apr. 26th, 2010 04:28 am (UTC)
I'd be much happier if SB1070 was the *only* really stupid thing our legislature passed this year. (sigh) At least SB1070 has a good chance of being thrown out before it ever goes into effect.
Apr. 26th, 2010 12:53 pm (UTC)
Oh yeah, the birthers. Where do they grow these people? No one gets to be president unless they already showed proof of citizenship. No one's that dumb.
Apr. 26th, 2010 05:58 pm (UTC)
Do tourists have a choice not to boycott Arizona? If the law passes would non-US tourists have to have their passports with them constantly? Would non-white American tourists fear harrassement during their entire visit? These are pretty valid questions that could be used to mobilize the local tourist/retirement industry to lobby the state.
Apr. 26th, 2010 06:21 pm (UTC)
I *am* curious how this will effect the retirement industry here. Most Canadians don't cross the border without a passport because they can't, period, anyway. But I think the people who drafted this law are a bit naive about the bad PR situation it could create.

At any rate, the legal challenges to this have already started, because, as written, it's flat out unconstitutional.
Apr. 26th, 2010 07:22 pm (UTC)
I usually put my passport in a hotel safe or somesuch, I don't like to carry it around with me once I'm through the airport. Of course a passport doesn't prove I'm not in the country illegally - it's not like they stamp 'em anymore.

Hopefully the courts will strike this down quickly.
Apr. 26th, 2010 07:42 pm (UTC)
Apr. 27th, 2010 07:14 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I suspect that might just backfire on them.
Apr. 29th, 2010 09:18 pm (UTC)
This law created a bizzaro alternative universe situation for me, relative to my father and my husband.

I was like, well whats so wrong with this? Whats the matter with looking at licences to make sure people are following the law?.....

When I said that to the both of them, they both came back with how much of an invasion of privacy it is, how that is just the government trying to take away more of our rights....etc...etc...etc....

When I rethought the issue, I saw that they, and you are completely correct. Its just wierd when my polar opposite husband and father have the same opinion which is different from mine....

Sad world now, Sad USA now, isnt it.

Apr. 29th, 2010 09:21 pm (UTC)
People have likened it to Nazi Germany and the USSR, where it was a matter of course to "demand your papers," but people are always making comparisons to at least the first of those two societies, so I tread with caution on embracing those two comparisons.
( 14 comments — Leave a comment )