Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes inceased, the weaker an economy becomes. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.

Sometimes, people argue about one thing, when they really mean something else.

A father tells his daughter not to date John, because John has poor manners, or because John doesn’t have a job, or because John gets poor grades in school, or because John is too fat, or too old or too young, or because John dresses funny.

But what the father really means and doesn’t say is, “Don’t date John because he’s black and we’re white.” That’s personal bigotry. His daughter understands the message.

Now, long after Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus sent the Arkansas National Guard to block school integration, and Alabama’s Governor George Wallace stood in the schoolhouse door, institutionalized bigotry has become somewhat more subtle.

Our Supreme Court’s hearing on Arizona’s disingenuous immigration law is an example. You will hear many comments, explanations and excuses for this law, all of which skirt the central issue: Arizona’s bigots don’t like Mexicans. Period.

Think of the words used to describe illegal immigrants. “Rapid population growth and demographic transformation, downward pressure on wages, the burgeoning crime wave, deteriorating public services and increasing tax-payer burden.” I cut and pasted from a “reasonable,” anti-immigrant web site. The South knows these deceptive words well. They were used to describe the “nigras” of yesteryear.

What is the difference between a legal immigrant and an illegal immigrant? A piece of paper. Nothing more. Otherwise, they look the same. They act the same. They have the same traditions and mores. Undocumented aliens are no more likely to commit a crime than documented, in fact, less likely. They pay taxes, just like the legals, and they aren’t stealing jobs. They create jobs by being consumers. They came here to create a better life — just as your parents did.

There simply is no meaningful difference between an illegal immigrant and a legal immigrant. The lives of Arizona citizens are not affected by the legality or illegality of any immigrant.

The laws on immigration are not like other laws. They are not based on real harm to other people. They are an exclusionary effort by xenophobes, who were lucky enough to have their citizenship, and now invent excuses for why others shouldn’t enjoy the same benefits. It’s what the British term, ‘I’m all right, Jack.”

The legality of an immigrant is just an arbitrary definition that has no effect on you, me or on any other citizen. A change in the law could make all those illegal immigrants, legal tomorrow. How would that change the life of any Arizona citizen? Not at all. Our archaic immigration laws require years and years of jumping through hoops, but serve no useful function for our society. There is no valid reason why a person cannot become a citizen in just a few months.

And, now comes Supreme Court Justice Scalia with the rest of his notorious band. You remember, Justice Scalia, he of the strictly interpreted Constitution (i.e. “I don’t care about people. I only care about 18th century law.”) This is the strict interpreter who presumably would vote for slavery, because our founders had slaves.

During the hearing, he asked sarcastically:

“The state has no power to close its borders to people who have no right to be there?” And, “What does ‘sovereignty’ mean if it does not include the ability to defend your borders?” And, “Are you objecting to harassing the people who have no business being here? Surely you’re not concerned about harassing them.” And, “We have to enforce our laws in a manner that will please Mexico?”

Ah, the innocence of his “reasonable” questions. Why of course a state can close and defend its borders. We see it all the time — those gates and guards on every road between states — don’t we? And no, we don’t have to please Mexico; we can act like the boorish, bullying gringos the rest of the Americas thinks we are.

His “reasonable” comments remind one of another reasonable idea from yesterday: “separate-but-equal.” Bigotry gets its power from “reasonable” people.

This 2nd worst Justice, on one of the truly inferior Supreme Courts in history, tells us he is oh-so-concerned about Arizona’s ability to defend itself and it’s borders. Indiana, in the center of our country, has a similar law. Do they also need to “defend” their borders? Perhaps from Tennessee?

While Scalia is our 2nd worst Justice, he is not alone in his exercise in bigotry and truculence. I predict many on the Supreme Court will assume police have sufficient clairvoyance to determine just by looking, whether a person is illegal, so that without evidence or warrant, they can demand proof of citizenship.

Of course, none blonde and blue-eyed will be interrogated.

This court that gave us Citizens United (because money doesn’t buy elections) and Bush v. Gore (because states’ rights, which suddenly have become important, were meaningless, then) now aches to besmirch its already shameful legacy with yet another outrageous decision.

I predict this Court, with its young, activist (yes, activist) justices, will continue eroding our human and civil rights, and in the future, the Lazarlus poem on Statue of Liberty America will be lost to memory.

Apparently, it already is.

I award Justice Scalia two traitor images.
Unpatriotic flagUnpatriotic flag

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption + Net exports