Think Pete Turner Didn't Keep the Name "Illegal Pete's" to Make a Profit Off Bigotry? Think Again

The grand opening of the restaurant "Illegal Pete's," a restaurant chain started by Pete Turner of Colorado has caused quite a stir. Here in the state of Arizona, the word illegal has been used to dehumanize and degrade brown people and treat them like lesser human beings. I say brown people because I know of several undocumented white people from Canada who have been spared the wrath of such a label. I know of several Tohono O'odham people, including myself, who have been accused of being "illegal" simply because we are not white. Which is pretty ironic, because we have been here since time immemorial.

Pete Turner defends the name of his restaurant by claiming that the "illegal" part was not intended as a derogatory connotation towards undocumented people. However, it is clear that he is aware the name attracts a certain type of white supremacist. After Colorado residents protested the name, a similar outcry of xenophobic support occurred. After complaints were made, Turner was flooded with support from racists.

Business owners can be pretty savvy when it comes to public relations. Turner may claim the name of this restaurant does not evoke a derogatory connotation all day, but that doesn't change the racist face of a sizable amount of his customers. There is no doubt that Turner was aware of this phenomena. He doesn't need to make a statement on his intentions. The response is visible in his receipt returns in addition to his vocal supporters/commentators on social media. He certainly wasn't oblivious that he would receive such an outpouring of support by racists when he chose to open up his restaurant in Tucson, where books have been banned, ethnic studies outlawed, and children are torn apart from their parents through mass roundups and daily Streamline deportations. No, this move was quite calculated, no matter what the man claims.

The following are screenshots of people supporting "Illegal Pete's." Pete Turner is making a pretty sizable profit from their patronage, and doesn't seem to have the slightest problem doing it.

"Illegal Pete's" has become the new gathering spot for SB 1070 supporters, white supremacists, neo-Nazi's, and Minutemen. Is that the type of establishment our community should support?

More comments added by readers:

Appropriation vs. Militarization: What makes an Indian more furious?

I think it is great when indigenous people find solidarity on certain issues. Having said that, I spend a lot of time wondering what makes a certain issue sexy, while another one is completely ignored.

Appropriation is one of those issues I can totally vibe with, but I guess I’m feeling a little envious that it is just so damn sexy and that trying to bring attention to militarization isn’t. At all. In fact, I have had indigenous folks often try and “check” me on my anger towards militarization. This is where I get really confused. I wonder if they think that I'm making things up? Why are they so dismissive? Don't they see that what we are experiencing is a product of colonization also? Why does the real lived experience of militarization, at a crisis level, not matter?

I’ll see those same folks in a flying fit of rage over indigenous appropriation. I’ll see them furiously defend their anger, and their right to be angry. And I don't disagree with them! I mean, we are talking centuries of oppression, assimilation, and subjugation. Indigenous history has been lied about, in everything, and that has consequences. Movies, books, and popular culture have helped to condition the masses to remain incredibly ignorant towards indigenous people.

I feel that rage too. I didn’t really get it until I went to college and actually felt the weight of the ignorance. Before that though, I was a product of my surroundings. Many people back home don't view appropriations as an important issue, and probably wouldn't understand why so much time and energy is spent fighting it. To me, it makes complete sense why they don’t get it. They aren't reading case law that demonstrates what can happen when a bunch of white people write stereotypes and ignorance into law. People back home would probably be surprised to find out that there are masses (mostly on the East Coast) who think that Indians are extinct!

A lot of people back home just don’t want to worry about what white people who appropriate are doing. Appropriations doesn’t concern them, because they are doing their own thing. I get that too. I even envy it! Academia can be full of itself. While being exposed to the academic realm did change my perspective, it also skewed it. I long to live my life in a more traditional sense, away from the pasty walls of academia. Being immersed in academia can be short-sighted and it doesn't have all the answers either.

The “academic Indian” doesn’t get my rage over militarization, I think for the same reason a lot of my “rez Indian” friends don’t see the big deal about appropriation. They don’t see it because they aren't having the experiences that would lead them to make the connections. They haven’t had a family member abused by a border patrol agent. They don’t have to go through checkpoints to visit home. They haven’t been surrounded by seven vehicles, armed agents, and a helicopter while just trying to go about their day. They haven’t lived it.

As a consequence, the “academic Indian” often will treat my rage like it is my own problem. They don’t connect the experience of militarization to the history of colonization in the same way they connect appropriations to colonization. They see me as someone who is getting mad over something trivial, and treat me very similarly to how people respond when they defend appropriation.

The Art of Anti Indigenous and Anti Immigrant Deception: The Pope and Sophie Cruz

I feel like people are going to throw tomatoes at me for the blog I am about to write.

I can’t stop thinking about Sophie Cruz. An amazing little girl, so smart, so brave, and yet so misled by the nonprofits set up to lie and deceive. 

Did it bother you that I said that? Did it seem like I’m saying not nice things about a beautiful little girl who only wants the best for her parents and her family? I really, really hope not. The truth is I have a lot of admiration for Sophie Cruz. I feel for her parents and want them to be together and live and work in peace. I want to be fighting along side her to make that happen. But I can’t, because I know the truth about comprehensive immigration reform and exactly what is happening.

We don’t exactly live in a philosophical era where truth is highly prioritized. I don’t see a lot of critical discussion surrounding indigenous people and how they are affected by comprehensive immigration reform. And it seems like many people I know and love also fall for the theatrics that tell them that it is a good thing. I don’t know how to tell them what I know. I don’t know how to tell them that this has been done before.

There are patterns in colonialism, and there are tactics that have been used since the dawn of the colonial era to subjugate indigenous people. The divide and conquer tactic is the most prevalent and effective. The dream of manifest destiny paved the way for deception. When settlers set out to take land, many indigenous people were lied to in order to get them to make concessions. Early settlers repeatedly and continually made false promises in the form of treaties and other agreements. On numerous occasions, colonists would pick specific community members to con into accepting deceptive promises. These selected persons would in turn bring the lies back to the community. They often did this thinking they were helping their people, not knowing that the settlers intended a more sinister plan of action.

It breaks my heart to see this tactic used today, and to see so many fall for it. Sophie Cruz doesn’t know that the reform proposed serves to harm indigenous people. She doesn’t know that its passage would make immigrants go through a very complex process that could result in deportation. She doesn’t know the truth—that comprehensive immigration reform is anti immigrant and anti indigenous.

The powers behind the theatrics knew exactly what they were doing. They knew that many indigenous people were protesting Junipero Serra that day. They know that a big part of CIR is militarization, and that increases migrant deaths. They know that it is a bad policy solution for indigenous people and migrants, but they don’t want us to know that. They intentionally chose a bright, amazing, adorable little girl to carry on their message of deception, and she has no idea. 

Junipero Serra is the Perfect Spokeperson for Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Divide and Conquer Policy

Junipero Serra is not the type of immigrant anyone should strive to be, but it is fitting that he is used to promote the colonial policy of comprehensive immigration reform. His tactics to convert, assimilate, and train indigenous people to become like settlers can be compared to modern day policies intending to assimilate the immigrant. Nowadays, the parameters for CIR have included an overwhelming push for assimilation. The legal environment is ripe with anti immigrant furor. That environment is composed of English-only battle cries, bans on ethnic studies, show me your papers SB 1070, 100 mile waiver of rights SB 750, countless laws waiving laws in the name of national security, and many CIR provisions that mandate assimilation in exchange for citizenship. Militarization is a part of CIR, and it is probably the most in-your-face form of colonization that we see coming out of it. In the Southwest, it started with missions. It continues with proposed spy towers on the Tohono O'odham reservation.

Back in the day, Serra wrote about his troubles converting the Indians to Christianity. He was feeling pretty down because they didn't want to convert willingly, so his solutions to their unresponsiveness was forced coercion. If they would not readily assimilate, they were whipped, beaten, forced into labor and not allowed to leave the missions. They had to adopt the ways of the dominant society or face the consequences. If they resisted, they were beaten into submission. Indians were not permitted to leave. Once they were in, they were trapped. Families, trapped behind the mission walls, were not even permitted to carry on relationships. Serra would purposely separate children from their parents so that they wouldn't learn their culture. (View Serra's testimonies here)

The conquest of Serra and others had devastating impacts on indigenous populations. Many did not survive the mission system. It wasn’t just because of diseases, as the settlers like to argue time and again. The settlers knew they were killing the Indians. Indians were viewed as savage and inferior, and therefore the decimation in population was not a concern to the colonizer.

It is fitting that Serra's canonization is being used to continue a similar policy. The push for comprehensive immigration reform says to indigenous people on the border, “We don’t have to consult you on anything. We’re going to take your lands and militarize them and you won’t have any voice in anything. You don't matter to us.”

In today's day and age, I have to give credit to the PR people in charge. They've given Serra an image of a saint, as one who gave indigenous people the wondrous gift of Christianity and away from their so-called heathen ways. They've managed to frame Comprehensive Immigration Reform as human rights necessity, when in reality the provisions it contains are human rights atrocities.  It's a giant set up. NGOs have been used to perpetuate the policy of divide and conquer.

Comprehensive immigration reform equals militarization. It means more border patrol, more harassment, guns, drones, tanks, towers, helicopters flying overhead, trespassing on Tohono O’odham land, and more migrants dying in desert.

The interests of white supremacy continue to condition immigrants, many with indigenous ancestry, to disrespect people indigenous to these lands. Not only have they been forced to leave everything they love because of colonial policies like NAFTA, but they are forced to take sides with the colonizer to survive. It is the same type of scenario indigenous peoples were forced into and why so many conceded to treaties and reservations. The system requires this assimilation in exchange for citizenship. 

Immigration is caused by colonization. Immigration also perpetuates colonialism through assimilation. The only way to break this cycle is through respect towards indigenous inhabitants. Given the fuss over the pope and the dismissal of indigenous people this week, we still have a long way to go in achieving that respect.

The simple logic of why militarization is bad, how it encourages crime, and how it harms our communities.

Say you are a little kid, playing innocently with friends. Say you are approached by a police officer who proceeds to tell you that you are worthless, your family is worthless, and that you are going to end up in jail. 

How would you feel? Would it incentivize you to respect authority and/or law enforcement? 

Lets pretend you love your mom and your whole family. They are the ones who feed you, clothe you, tend to your wounds, and provide a roof over your head. Now put yourself in the position of hearing the police constantly bashing your family, purposely, just to get a rise out of you.

How can you grow up respecting authority when continually faced with those kinds of encounters?

I didn’t just make up this scenario. I witnessed it, as a little kid. I saw my friends treated that way. It didn’t happen to me. I was lucky enough to have a family that police did not bother. That luck kept me from experiencing the direct harassment many of my friends experienced. But it didn’t prevent me from witnessing it. I remember much of it vividly. They say experiences from childhood shape a lot of your world view. I saw that kind of treatment A LOT. A few stick out in my mind over others. I was pretty young when I watched the procession for Tyrone Childs, an unarmed Hia-Ced O'odham man shot by a scared rookie police officer. I was introduced to the dynamics and implications of the politics of fear early on. Maybe that is why I can see the problem so clearly, and for others, it is not so obvious.

I don’t know, to me its a no brainer. Its fairly obvious that if positions of authority systematically treat people disrespectfully from a young age, those kids grow up mutually disrespecting that authority. 

The cops told my friends they’d end up in jail, and guess where they ended up? Unfortunately for some, they were born into a cycle of oppression. The cops incited anger in them, encouraged them to rebel, and it was not the least bit surprising when they did. The frustrating thing, though, is that society will congratulate the cop for caging someone that same cop incessantly and needlessly harassed as a child, and judge the person being locked up without a second thought. 

There are many factors that confound this issue. As a kid, we were often discouraged and put down by our own community. We’d hear old folks squawking about having to pay property taxes that went to schools when they didn’t have kids of their own. We were such a burden for those old folks and were so expensive, yet we had textbooks from our parents' day and sports uniforms from the 80s (in the late 90s). We’d have teachers tell us we were the worst behaved, that we were behind other kids, and that we wouldn’t amount to anything. We were told that we were a failing school, that we weren’t very smart, that it was all our fault. 

I'm thankful to have had experiences that showed me the power of encouragement. In some cases, particularly in certain sports, I do remember being singled out and discouraged. Even though I was a competitive type, there were some things that I just wasn't good at. I distinctly remember doing terrible, getting frustrated, and getting mad at myself. Because I already knew I wasn't great, the more others pointed out my flaws, the worse I did. Even though I tried to do better, the negativity really hurt me and I would repeatedly fail. But then there were those coaches that encouraged me and told me I could do it. Man, what a contrast. I did great! I didn't dread practice and I made improvements every day. I learned, I grew, and I got better. Those experiences really opened my mind to the “how” and the “why” some kids thrive and some do not. 

For the most part, I was lucky. I had people take me aside and tell me I had potential. I had encouragement. I had love. That is why I am able to sit here, write a blog, and express these thoughts. 

These experiences have helped me understand the bigger picture. I often wonder why politicians on the Tohono O’odham Nation, in Pima County, and elsewhere don’t get it. Maybe they were sheltered. Maybe some of them did see people getting treated badly by authority figures but viewed themselves as superior. Maybe they would also pass judgement and also view certain people as "worthless" and unworthy of encouragement. I don’t know. But it boggles my mind that they are unable to see the correlation. It boggles my mind that their only "solutions" are to increase law enforcement, border patrol, and the like with no attention paid to jobs and education. They cast blame and ignore those that are trying to do better for themselves but are continually discouraged. 

Nowadays, schools face budget cuts while billions are appropriated to border security. What message does that send to kids?

Have they noticed that the more militarized the border becomes, the worse the problems get? Do they not see that murders have risen? Do they not see that cartels have become more violent? Do they not see that drug use has increased? Do they not see that people increasingly live their lives in fear? And the more we are all put on lock down the worse the fear gets.

Yet, the only answers the politicians can come up with is to increase militarization. They fail to look at cold hard data and recognize that militarization was the problem to begin with. 

Militarization = Oppression

How do they not see the correlation?