"The Lives of Others" in Arizona? (Part B)

Okay, so did you get to see the film?


If not, or even if you did, here's a link to a pretty good synopsis: The Lives of Others (Das Leben der Anderen), plus a Roger Ebert review, and an interesting albeit wordy review entitled, The Stasi on Our Minds. Finally, a bit of history about the German Democratic Republic, aka East Germany, and its Ministry of State Security, commonly known as The Stasi. I provide these links because I am no expert on any of these subjects. Therefore I must share my sources for independent perusal and interpretation by anyone who reads this post.


This is all a set up for discussion about the implications of Arizona's new immigration law. A couple of readers privately voiced to me similar concerns to those reflected in the more vociferous public demonstrations by frijole-wielding swastika painters in the Arizona capitol. Opponents claim that the stringent provisions of the law predispose America to become a totalitarian, racial profiling, freedom robbing society like the GDR, USSR, or even Nazi Germany.  Supporters, on the other hand, argue that the new law simply provides legitimate enforcement teeth to protect law abiding citizens against the threats posed by an emboldened, nefarious invasion force of bandits. Both sides share a common emotion: fear itself, as in "All we have to fear is...".


How many of the emotional proponents on either side of this debate have actually read the new Arizona law, and the Federal code to which it refers, and figured out for themselves what it says or doesn't say? How many simply rely on the biased characterizations of pundits and media who can spin the truth in either direction to support their own agendas? How many mindlessly align themselves with those whose views validate their own intrinsic fears...fears that may have little or no relationship to the substance of this debate?


How does this one law enable a Stasi-like violation and manipulation of American citizens as depicted in the German film? How exactly does this law enable the transformation of Arizona's governor into a modern Erich Honecker? What about it makes honest law enforcement officers like my nephew - who currently serves the U.S. Border Patrol - into Stasi, KGB, Gestapo, or even Khmer Rouge?  Frankly, only fear itself -- fear that politicians and police will wantonly abuse the law's protective provisions to their own benefit or to serve their own biases.


On the other hand, earlier today a colleague cogently asked me what provision in this new law would have prevented the tragedy that befell my cousin? Again, only fear itself -- fear of righteous recrimination by an outraged people who have finally had enough and are willing to fight back, armed with the legal means by which to do so. Are we to believe that legal enforcement of this law alone will stem the tide of criminal activity across our borders? Not likely. But it might be a good start, and at least takes some action instead of the incessant do-nothing talk of the last decade or so.


Can we compare our American society and way of life to that of the GDR or other totalitarian states of the former eastern block? Do we find similarities in our histories? Any common weakness upon which abusive politicians or law enforcement officers could wantonly tread without fear of accountability? Unlike those former totalitarian countries, America was founded and strengthened by immigrants, many of whom came here to escape discrimination and repression in their native lands. In so doing, they established a system of government designed to protect the inalienable rights of all human beings. The repressive East German government, and others like it, operated on a far different premise. The state-sponsored widespread incursions into and trampling of human rights by the Stasi existed for the protection of the regime and its leaders, not for the citizens. To assure their own survival, these politicians had to vigorously supress the enemy within, their own people, rather than invaders from outside their borders. Could the same happen in America?


Perhaps it could. Perhaps, even as a free American citizen, I might be compelled to stand quietly docile in a long line, careful not to utter even a critical joke about the process unfolding in front of me or my ultimate intent for being in that place. Once I reach the head of the line, I might have to silently show my papers, several times, to the guards and inspectors. Then upon demand I might meekly remove certain articles of my clothing prior to subjecting myself to electronic and/or physical search. Maybe I would also surrender my personal belongings for additional inspection. Perhaps, without any resistance whatsoever, I might have to allow a total stranger - in full view of other total strangers - to grope into my most personal possessions and to remove any item that he or she believes could possibly assist me in harming my fellow citizens.


Totalitarian state? Racial profiling? Violation of personal freedom? No. Just federally mandated airport security. I remember when no such thing existed. You simply drove to the airport, parked your car, found your gate, showed your ticket, and walked onto the plane. Yet now millions of American citizens subject themselves to this intrusive process  every day. Why? Fear itself. We don't want another 9/11. We already know that we are not terrorists. We do nothing illegal. We hold no malice toward any of our fellow travelers. Yet we submit. Why? We don't want another 9/11. Fear itself drives us to willingly suspend a few of our basic American rights in the interest of protecting the greater good. No one objects. No one paints swastikas on the x-ray machines. No one protests. Fear itself dictates otherwise. And because we do submit, because we allow the state to do this, then only legitimate terrorists, drug traffickers, or smugglers need feel the least bit threatened by this process. As well they should. Because we as a society freely choose not to tolerate their criminal presence in our midst.


Is the fear of honest ranchers and citizens of Arizona, recently shaken by the heinous murder of one of their own, any less founded in reality? Any less reasonable? Any less worthy of state protection? Was not the unprovoked attack on an upstanding citizen on his own land, presumably by someone who entered the country illegally, similar in substance if not numbers to 9/11? Is it any wonder that an outraged society seeks not recrimination, but protection against another such despicable event?


Sadly, even with all our constitutional protections, our system really is subject to abuse, ironically in part due to the very freedoms it protects. As citizens of this nation we share a very painful history of unconscionable abuses of our own citizens, deplorably often along lines of racial and ethnic bias. I am not naive. I know that racism targeting Hispanics exists in my home state. I witnessed it all too often as I grew up there. It appalled me then and it infuriates me now. I fully understand why many of our citizens would mistrust a law that puts so much potentially abusive power into the hands of law enforcers. But the operative word there is "potentially." It need not be actual. As a society we can and should vigorously defend the rights of all Americans against discrimination. We must continue to eradicate intolerance and racism from our society. I sincerely believe that men and women of good will, as aggressively as they wish to stem the tide of criminal invasion, will equaly rise to protect the lives and rights of all fellow law abiding citizens, regardless of race or ethnicity.


By the end of the movie, the former Stasi captain, Gerd Wiesler, becomes a "good man." Really, he always was. As Ash reflects in his review, no Stasi were ever really evil men. They were good men who did bad things, manipulated by their government and the tenets to which they were compelled to subscribe. The proponents and opponents of the new Arizona law are all good men and women. Not an evil one among them. We can only hope that the final outcome of this sometimes bitter debate will be based not on the will of those who stand to gain or lose materially in the solution, but in the hearts and minds of those men and women of good will, regardless of race or family history, who hold this truth to be inalienable...that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Legally, of course.