Thursday, May 4, 2006

Enforcing The Law

Once again, it's up to a small group of people to enforce the law that the federal government won't.
A posse of 100 volunteers and sheriff's deputies will patrol the Phoenix area and arrest any illegal immigrants, the county sheriff said.

Volunteers will be drawn from the department's 3,000-member posse, whose members are trained and are often former deputies.
Filed under US/Mexico Border

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

6 comments:

Za said...

Just a thought, but I'm going to take a few ideas that have been floating around your... blog... and try to bring them together.

Last month you said two very interesting things.

You said:
I'm only half Indian. But believe me, if I had the chance to be full blood I'd do it in a heartbeat.
At the end of a post explaining why white people piss you off.

But at the same time you had posted earlier:
It seems President Roosevelt was against political correctness even in 1907. It's not African American. It's American. It's not Native American, it's American. It's not Mexican American, it's American.

Now I understand that the latter somewhat alters your view on the immigration thing, but don't you find it irreconcilable with the former?

And furthermore, if we combine the former with the quote currently at the top of your... blog:
Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States, ask any Indian.
Doesn't that quote refer to the white people who currently DEFINE what "American" is?
By that I mean, aren't the majority of the people you're calling "legal Americans" actually the sort of people you're against? And the laws you so strongly advocate FOR were created by those invaders.

In which case, how do you define what IS and what ISN'T American? As the "illegal immigrants" themselves have pointed out, they're the descendents of the original land owners. The Mexica/Aztecs roamed into North America quite a bit and considered it a part of their land.

So where exactly do these two worlds of the original Americans and the modern Americans meet in your opinion? Have you considered that angle?

Indian Chris said...

If you're born in America, you're American. If you're born in Mexico, England, Canada, China or where ever, and sneak across the border or overstay your visa, you're illegal.

Greta said...

Are you signing up? Chris was born an American - period! He can celebrate his heritage by calling himself anything he wants!

Za said...

You didn't answer the question Chris.
The point is that the "legality" of these people staying is defined by the same group of people who turfed the Native Americans out of their lands in the first place. Can you really consider it legitimate?

And at the same time, you've stated that you can't have "split loyalties" (which is the bit Greta just completely ignored). Remember? Roosevelt?
Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all.
So then how can you fit in your "Native American" heritage, and still hold to that kind of immigration-related platitude?

Indian Chris said...

The same group? I didn't know they were still alive today. Damn, they're old.

And what do you want me to do, wipe my race away? I'm Indian. I live in America. I'm not Native American. I'm not Native Indian. I'm an Indian, well half, who lives in America. My race doesn't define my nationality, or vise versa. My heritage has nothing to do with me being an American. I don't combine the two.

Za said...

It's not just a nationality thing, the Roosevelt quote was talking culture. If you claim Indian heritage, then you are saying that you are not solely of American culture. He was talking about assimilating in - something you do not do, if you want to say "but yes, I'm Indian as well".

...this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American... Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all.

So you can't divide the two. And the statement "I'm an Indian, well half, who lives in America" would have had Roosevelt tell you that you are not an American, but merely someone within the borders of America.

As to the point I was making about it being the same people is rather simpler - the natives didn't see the land as having border demarcations. That's an Anglo thing that got brought in by the whities, and runs directly contrary to the philosophies of the original inhabitants. So if you want to hold onto the Indian heritage, then you've got to see that it contradicts the current paradigm about the way the land is owned.

It IS an either/or situation. Either you're an Indian, and you run with what that entails, or you're just someone who was descended from them, but they don't matter. Holding onto both will just earn you criticism on both sides because you wind up being of neither.