by Peter Beinart
The right’s anxiety about African-Americans has been replaced by anxiety about immigrants. Peter Beinart on how Arizona’s new law has ignited the civil-rights struggle for a new century.
Why are large chunks of the American right so freaked out by illegal immigrants? Because they are no longer so freaked out by African-Americans.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
The PFP supports the new Arizona law. The problem of illegal immigration is getting out of hand and actions must be taken to prevent the problem from spreading. The Arizona government has the right to question people that look suspicious of the crime of illegal immigration, just as a cop can check anyone for suspicious actions. Any form of identification will suffice as proof of legal immigration. Easy steps of checking people for proof of citizenship can prevent many illegal immigration problems, no different than setting up drunk driving checkpoints along the road. It is an easy and harmless step to insuring justice from illegal immigration.
The LAP believes that Arizona has clearly gone too far. Americans expanded citizenship to blacks when the fourteenth amendment was added to the constitution,and we have even gotten to the point that we now have a African American president. But with the new Arizona laws passed on immigration, America has clearly taken two steps backwards.
THe LAP thinks that people should not be asked to see identification and receive as cruel of a punishment and treated unjust just for the color of their skin, as Arizona is doing now.
We believe that people in America, need to be legal American citizens, but we also do feel that the stipulations to becoming americans are almost impossible (having to live here for approx. nine years before getting citizenship). We are also aware that green cards are not being accepted as much as the need to be for proof of citizenship so we would reinforce the fact that they are "working" towards their citizenship, and would not send them back to their own country for having a green card.
To compare the struggle of African Americans to gain their rights and to fight off discrimination, to the Latino Americans and how they are effected by the new Arizona immigration law is absurd. The new immigration law is created to aid america, not discriminate. According to StateMaster.com, a poll conducted by the 2000 census showed Arizona having the sixth largest population of illegal immigrants (statemaster.com). This law was passed to cut down on the number of immigrants who are in Arizona illegally. Critics of the bill feel it will cause social profiling of people of Latino decent. Though, this may be true, according to the Pew Hispanics Center report, 57% of illegal immigrants in america are from Mexico, and 24% are from other Latin American countries (pewresearch.org). This is the main reason why majority of random stops taken to ask for proof of citizenry will probably be people of what look like Latino decent. This may not necessarily be right, but it's what is necessary.
The PFP (soon to be renamed) refuses to acknowledge the credibility of the Author. Mr. Beinhart conviently leaves out one key fact when comparing what is taking place in Arizona, as we speak, to the civil rights movement of the 1950s/60s. Afican Americans suffering persecution and forced to attend ill equiped and sorely inadequate educational facilities were citizens of the United states. That is, Blacks had the right guaranteed to citizens of the U.S. under the 1st amendment of their constitution to protest the way they were being treated as a race. Illegal immigrants are not citizens of the U.S., hitherto they have no such right. The PFP supports the State of Arizona and hopes the anti-illegal immigration sentiment will spread to the other 47 mainland states as well as to all the states of the FSA.
- Garrett Teets, Policy Chief, PFP
The FAP and PFP clearly fail to see the issue. The issue at hand is not the law's treatment of illegal aliens but rather the effects on citizens. Citizens should not be stopped simply because of their ethnic background. To even suggest that being Latino makes one "suspicious" is insulting. This nation needs leaders willing to defend civil liberties not deny them to minorities. But can we really expect more from a party that can't even decide on a name?
The CLC
The FAP is willing to defend civil liberties. Simply having "suspicion" that a person may be here illegally is not denying civil liberties. The FAP does not support the fact that the bill may cause social profiling, the bill does not state that the suspicious character must be of Latino decent either. The FAP simply supports the bill because it helps fight a growing problem in the U.S., illegal aliens. This is no different than a swerving driver being pulled over for suspicion of intoxication. The driver could simply be a bad driver and nothing more, does it violate the drivers civil liberties if the officer believes he is breaking the law? We do not believe so. We believe the bill should help cut down on illegal immigrants in Arizona, not create social profiling in the justice system.
The mass hysteria of the citizens due to the issue of illegal immigrants is just to some extent. Since there is less fear of African Americans, American people have found something else to fear. The PLP believes that, although the fear of immigration is somewhat just, the bill recently passed should not be open to every person who may have a multi-racial background. The PLP believes that there should be a just cause to suspect that the person questioned is here illegally. Also, we believe that the panic and riots against the immigrants is somewhat unjust, but not entirely.
Garrett,
That law is directed to anyone who may appear to be an illegal immigrant. Therefore, they would be taking rights away from the legal citizens of the United States.
I disagree. They are taking rights away from no one. The law states that police officers must ask to see proper identification if they have reason to suspect that they may be an illegal immigrant. You forget that if they are in fact illegally residing in America they have no protections under Americas bill of rights
Blacks were given their rights to citizenship in the fourteenth amendment, not the first amendment PFP.
This can compare to African American rights because this is racial profiling! Blacks were being treated unjust, segregated, etc. because of their race, which is what is going on with the hispanics and Americans now, regardless of race.
Savannah Miller LAP
TUPP is in support of stricter laws against illegal immigration. It is obvious that something needs to be done about the immigrants coming into our country illegally and taking advantage of our education and social security programs, essentially taking our tax payers money. However, legal immigrants are vital to our nation’s economy and the new law that was passed in Arizona alienates legal Hispanic Americans. TUPP believes that we must stop illegal immigration but not at the cost of Hispanic Americans right to privacy. This new law can only lead to one thing, racial profiling; which goes against the ideal of equality present in the Franklin States of America.
The CRP believes that it is not right to arrest immigrants just because they look "suspicious" by being Latino. Although the CRP does believe in stricter border control to prevent illegal immigration; our party does not believe in racial profiling just to get rid of illegal immigrants. What about the legal immigrants, they should not be arrested just because they are Latino. The legal immigrants should be equal because they are citizens just like those individuals of the Franklin States of America.
How does somebody look "suspicious" of being an illegal immigrant? Is there a certain look that legal immigrants or citizens have that these people don't? How can you hope to tell just by looking at someone wether or not they are in the country legally? The answer is simple. There is no way, by simply looking at someone, to say that they are "suspicious" of illegal immigration. Therefore, police officers, knowing that most illegal immigrants are of latino descent, will assume that latino or mexican people are "suspicious" of illegal immigration, simply based on their race. This is racial profiling, which is illegal. The PLP does not support the present wording of the bill in Arizona, and we do not suggest that Hampton should pass a similar bill until the bugs are worked out of the wording and the Hampton bill prevents the racial profiling that the bill in Arizona will inevitably cause. We understand the people's concern about illegal immigration, but targeting an entire group of people based on their skin color is not the answer.
Post a Comment