WHO'S BOYCOTTING WHO?

I was thumbing through this week’s Rolling Stone…

I know that the above-typed phrase is probably not what you would expect, on this, the first post of my political blog. Surely you must be on the DiscConnected music blog by mistake?

No need to check the URL. Read on, and all shall be made clear. I think.

In the very left-leaning music magazine, there was a story about the state of the concert industry, how acts were cancelling shows this summer due to lack of ticket sales.

The very next story spoke about the Arizona Senate bill 1070, and the brave crusade (that’s sarcasm folks!) by musical acts like Cypress Hill, Kanye West, Sonic Youth, Joe Satriani and others who have signed onto the Sound Strike, a commitment to boycott performances in Arizona, organized by Rage Against the Machine frontman Zack de la Rocha.

"Fans of our music, our stories, our films and our words can be pulled over and harassed every day because they are brown or black, or for the way they speak, or for the music they listen to," de la Rocha wrote in a press release announcing the strike. "We are asking artists the world over to stand with us, and not allow our collective economic power to be used to aid and abet civil and human rights violations that will be caused by Arizona's odious law."

Sorry, Zack-if you’d read the law, you’d know that that is not what it says.

Now, in light of the previous story, and considering that many of the acts named are somewhat past their peak popularity (that’s PC for has-beens), I found the threat to punish Arizona by not performing for money to be amusing, but more on that later.

What really gets to me, and what prompted this post, is the fact that everyone opposed to the bill is obviously reacting to the soundbytes. They have not read the bill. Based on what they are saying, they can’t possibly have. You can find Senate Bill 1070 here. It’s about sixteen pages but most of what is relevant is in the first few pages. But read it before you make a decision to call everyone in Arizona a Klansman.

Here’s the first provision:

A. NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.

Get it? That means the state is adopting the Federal law as the state law. Now Emperor Obama and the US Attorney General have both called this bill unconstitutional. See a problem there?

Let’s review- Arizona is adopting the Federal law as the state law. So if the Arizona law is unconstitutional, then would not the Federal law also have to be? Yet we don’t see King Obama’s panties in a bunch over that one.

Wanna read some more? Here we go!

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Again we’re following Federal guidelines. Yet, there’s all that bile comparing Arizona to Nazi Germany. Well if you’re gonna compare someone to Nazi’s, shouldn’t it be the Feds. They’re their laws.

I have two problems with that, though. One, the Nazis, albeit evil, almost conquered the world. The Federal government can’t even conquer Iraq, nor can it make headway in cleaning up an oil spill, nor could it provide relief to Katrina victims. In short, the Federal government may not be as evil as Nazis, but they are idiots.

Two, the Nazis were fascicsts*. The Federal government is socialist. How else do you explain them actively pursuing a policy of wealth distribution (under every regime…pardon me, administration, regardless of party rhetoric) and being the majority owner of General Motors?

But I digress…plenty of time to get into that in future posts.

Now I suspect that what many of the people who have read the law (all five of us) and still object to is the possibility for abuse under section B. A police officer with an axe to grind against Latinos could abuse his power with this law.

Anyone can already be pulled over and harassed every day. If you are naïve enough to think that a police officer cannot come up with a reason to pull you over anytime, you’re kidding yourself.

Under Arizona’s Motor Vehicle code, section 28-1595, a police officer already has the right to ask anyone in a vehicle (passengers included) to produce identification.

I do feel sorry for Mexican-Americans, and Mexican nationals here legally who will be inconvienced by this law. The southern part of Arizona is more rural than I could imagine, having lived half of my life in Philadelphia. Residents of these remote areas near the border report repeated burglaries and recently a rancher was murdered (although I do not know for sure if it has been established he was killed by an illegal alient).

The United States Constitution (remember that one?) does not charge the Federal government with much. Their operation of schools, automobile manufacturers, food and drug administrations, health care, social security, unemployment and welfare (to name but a few) are power grabs-there is no authority in the Constitution for this, and any power not expressly given to the Feds by the Constitution is either reserved for the states or the people.

The Constitution does grant the Prez the power to call forth the Militia to repel invasions; That, my friends, is the whole point of Arizona Senate Bill 1070:

The President (and many who came before the incumbent) is not doing his job. So the Arizona governor decided to step up and make sure it got done, because it needs to be done.

So to Tom Morello, no, Arizona is not the second coming of Apartheid, and nor is this just like lynching (he actually says this in the RS article).

Tom, I want you to know that I am happy to recommend to anyone who will listen to refuse to buy your music at retail unless it is a used copy (promotional copies are plentiful in used CD stores), and to make copies of it available to anyone for free. I’ll even reimburse them for the blank CD’s.

As for the whole boycotting concerts idea in a summer where the live performance industry joins the recorded music industry in the toilet? Well I’m a little suspicious that maybe these shows are being cancelled because you guys aren’t selling tickets. And maybe the whole boycott thing is a means to some free publicity.

After all, Los Lobos and Hall & Oates aren’t exactly household names anymore. Neither is Rage Against The Machine. And are Morello’s Nightwatchman albums topping the charts?

I have news for you gentlemen-if you’re not able to sell tickets, you’re not boycotting Arizona, Arizona is boycotting YOU!


*as Stephen McCarthy points out, yes the Nazis were socialists, but the paragraph reads better my way...