FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Papers!

by RON JACOBS

The new anti-immigrant law in Arizona (SB 1070) is more than a racist law.  It is a device designed to divide and conquer.  It’s not designed to just divide white-hued folks from brown hued ones; nor is it designed to merely divide citizens from non-citizens.  It is also designed to divide Latinos.  If one looks to previous such laws, say in Nazi Germany or apartheid South Africa, they will find stories of Jews who turned in their fellow Jews and South African blacks who turned in their fellow Africans.  A common motivation for this behavior was the belief that by turning in a supposedly illegal person, the forces of the law would not turn their wrath on those who were doing the turning in.

This scenario rests on the very supposition that a person can or can not be illegal.  Illegality is a human construct.  It can be given and taken away at the whim of those in power.  Laws such as Arizona’s SB 1070 utilize  the suppositions inherent in this construct by labeling a certain type of person as illegal.    It then takes this supposition and applies it to everyone, no matter whether they are legal or not in the eyes of the state.  In Arizona, it works like this.  There are many Latinos in the state of Arizona that do not have the necessary documents that would make it legal for them to live in Arizona.  Most of these Latinos are brown-skinned.  There are also many Latinos who live in Arizona that are either native-born US citizens or have documents that state they are in Arizona legally.

SB 1070 mandates that the police in Arizona check the documents of everyone whom they suspect of being in their state illegally.  This means that either  the police are to develop a special sense to determine who is living there illegally before they ask for identification or they are to ask for the required documents at their whim.  Furthermore, if a citizen thinks someone is without documents stating their legal status and the police fail to investigate this citizen’s belief, those police will be in violation of the law.  Secondary violations of any part of the law by any party are considered to be felonies and will result in prison time for the offending party.

The response to this law from politicians, the media and other self-appointed societal guardians has been mixed at best.  Some have come out against it while others have come out strongly in favor.  Most, however, seem to be waiting to see which way the political winds blow.  We are told by many of the  politicians that are against SB 1070 that this law is  “un-American.”   This is categorically untrue.  The historical record of the United States is filled with laws whose only intention was to maintain a second class status for certain immigrants.  From the laws enforcing the slave status of Africans to the Chinese Exclusion Acts; from laws institutionalizing racial segregation in the US South to the various  employment schemes designed to control the flow of Latinos into the fields and other workplaces of corporate America, there is very little that is so profoundly “American” as legalized discrimination against immigrants, especially those labeled non-white.

Of course, most politicians speaking out against SB 1070 are unlikely to share this understanding of history.  This doesn’t render their opposition irrelevant.  Instead, it provides the more radical wing of the movement for a humane immigration policy with an opportunity to gain the ears of these politicians and their supporters.  The opportunity to challenge the idea that some people can be illegal merely by their presence has never been greater.  Indeed, Arizona’s attempt to codify that idea has the potential to expose anti-immigrant sentiment for the ultimately racist sentiment that it is.

Getting back to the point made earlier in this piece, this law is about creating division.  National borders are reinforced to control wages of workers of all nationalities and to create and maintain divisions. Laws like SB 1070 are merely internal extensions of those borders. Just like imperial war, immigration control is a tool of the imperial elites in their pursuit of domination and profit. If the immigrant rights movement wants to be truly successful, it must keep this perception as its basis. While opposing laws like SB 1070 is crucial, the movement’s essential demand must be the eradication of borders–especially those borders that restrict humans from crossing them.

RON JACOBS is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. His first novel, Short Order Frame Up, is published by Mainstay Press. He can be reached at: rjacobs3625@charter.net

 

WORDS THAT STICK

 

Ron Jacobs is the author of Daydream Sunset: Sixties Counterculture in the Seventies published by CounterPunch Books. He lives in Vermont. He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

January 23, 2017
John Wight
Trump’s Inauguration: Hail Caesar!
Patrick Cockburn
The Rise of Trump and Isis Have More in Common Than You Might Think
Binoy Kampmark
Ignored Ironies: Women, Protest and Donald Trump
Gregory Barrett
Flag, Cap and Screen: Hollywood’s Propaganda Machine
Gareth Porter
US Intervention in Syria? Not Under Trump
L. Ali Khan
Trump’s Holy War against Islam
Gary Leupp
An Al-Qaeda Attack in Mali:  Just Another Ripple of the Endless, Bogus “War on Terror”
Norman Pollack
America: Banana Republic? Far Worse
Bob Fitrakis - Harvey Wasserman
We Mourn, But We March!
Kim Nicolini
Trump Dump: One Woman March and Personal Shit as Political
William Hawes
We Are on Our Own Now
Martin Billheimer
Last Tango in Moscow
Colin Todhunter
Development and India: Why GM Mustard Really Matters
Mel Gurtov
Trump’s America—and Ours
David Mattson
Fog of Science II: Apples, Oranges and Grizzly Bear Numbers
Clancy Sigal
Who’s Up for This Long War?
Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
Dan Bacher
New CA Carbon Trading Legislation Answers Big Oil’s Call to Continue Business As Usual
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail