|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 15 2025 08:20 KwarK wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 15 2025 07:54 BlackJack wrote:
Are you using nazi and fascist interchangeably? I have no problem admitting Trump is fascist though while all nazis are fascists not all fascists are nazis. Unwavering support for Israel is a pretty big "but" in labeling him the brand of fascism infamous for their antisemitism. My view is that Trump is a fascist. Nazi is a very specific (and when you get into it, very weird) subtype of fascism that has loads of bad biology and Darwinism mashed into it. Whereas Trump is just classic “there was a glorious past but then the enemy within took it away from us and only by ceding all power to the great leader can the enemy be destroyed and the national birthright be restored”. Super fascist but without the crazy “violence is the only real truth and so the only way of telling which scientific theory is correct is to make the competing scientists fight to the death” shit that Nazis do. Honestly on the Nazi thing you got me with your classic trap. The correct response to you ought not to have been “okay but Nazis totally do that”, even though your point was laughably false and Nazis do totally do that. It ought to have been “why are you talking about Nazis”. That said, there's absolutely a racial element to Trump's brand of fascism. He's made it very clear that the other which is infecting the blood of the nation and must be destroyed is foreign and nonwhite. This is kind of like how grandmas call all consoles Nintendos. If you know a bunch about the subject you can chime in and say "actually this is a Playstation which is made by Sony which is a Japanese company whereas Nintendos are made by Nintendo which is also a Japanese company but not the same one". But you don't have to do that, you know what grandma means. "Nazi" is functionally true enough for people who aren't particularly informed about Nazism. It gets you 90% of the way there.
I do think there's value in getting it right. I think fascism is a much more convincing accusation, and convincing people is pretty important right now.
Yes, it's not helpful to hit grandma with the ackshually, but you're not always talking to grandma and it's important to be clear in your own message. If you're instead trying to convince your console gamer friend to buy a PC, but you keep honestly referring to his playstation as a nintendo, that's not good for your credibility at all.
Trump is not a convincing Nazi in the way that the popular imagination maps Nazis. For one thing, the holocaust is pretty much Nazism 101 for the average guy on the street, and that association is a bit of an anchor when Israel itself is flirting with fascism while chunks of the blue coalition wave Palestinian flags. Cletus isn't going to sit through a summary of mein kampf and listen to you draw the parallels, he's just going to tell you that trump loves the jews and walk off. There's just no value in setting that trap for yourself.
No Kings is the right line, imo. There's no need to reach for Hitler when King George III is right there. Put Walz on stage, open carry, rock up in your dodge ram with George Washington's face on the rear gate. Opposing dictators is the founding myth of the entire damn country. Make sure every single newsreel has no choice but to show the cops tackling dudes dressed like uncle sam, teargassing people waving signs with founding fathers quotes, handcuffing girls in old glory capes. You don't need to convince people that Trump is a nazi, you just need them to understand that he wants a crown.
|
What lead to people being able to put children into gaschambers and make their parents throw them into a crematory before the next train arrives started with weak people accepting a unquestionable unchallenged authority (hoping some might rub off onto them).
People really need to understand this dynamic.
People rooting for Gaza tend to "overhear" the Hamas/Hezbollah/Teheran rhetoric, propaganda and of "burning all jews alive" .. because they use the objective inablity of Hamas/Hezbollah/Teheran as a collective excuse.
Trump is basicly the Mullah of his own religion. You know they are dumb as they come, their Schäferhund will be poodles, Their goebbels will be a Mar-a-Lago faced Blonde, and their Dr. Mengele literally has a brain worm from eating roadkill who is trying his hardest to revert medicine to kill american kids again, with the only solution being that americans need to have more kids.
Just because they are so stupid about what they do, doesn't mean they aren't running on Nazi-OS 2.0.
And just because they are stupid, doesn't mean they ruin people's life.. e.g. letting tons of relief goods go to waste, over a petty revenge against USAID.
|
Trump’s pathetic failure of a parade and the relative success of the No Kings protest offer a glimmer of hope
|
More people showed up in Boise, Idaho to protest him than attend his own birthday parade in the nation's capital.
|
Not sure if relevant for you guys or not, but there was a small protest in my city yesterday against trump.
I would say some 50 people, they had some US flags and several signs with messages. The general message being that trump does not stand for democracy and that with the current leadership in the US, peace is at risk.
The ones i heard talking had US accents so it looked like US people here that gathered.
|
United States24784 Posts
I think that's noteworthy. Even far away in Portugal, there are people invested enough and caring enough to oppose what is happening the USA. Without reports like yours, we probably wouldn't even hear of it.
|
On June 15 2025 22:25 farvacola wrote:
Trump’s pathetic failure of a parade and the relative success of the No Kings protest offer a glimmer of hope
I was happy to confirm it wasn't a permanent militarized take over of the capital.
The "No Kings" protests are something, but they come off more as controlled opposition than any genuine effort rooted in a historical understanding of how protests work to me.
It's a bit double edged in that it also brought a bunch of "normies" out to protests/events that were functionally organized by people to the left of the "No Kings" crowd generally.
The lib "No Kings" protests are on the sidewalks and in the parks whereas the ones with less centrist control are in the streets.
|
On June 15 2025 18:56 BlackJack wrote:
I was going to ask the same question as oBlade. Is the evidence for racist immigration policies treating Mexicans as sub-human based on the fact that Africans are allowed to stay at a higher rate? Interesting take to say the least.
There are plenty of explanations that don't contradict the claim of top-down racism.
One possibility is that people from Africa may be more frequently vetted than people from South America. Mexicans can hop the border whereas Africans first have to cross the ocean, i.e. arrive by plane. Africans should therefore be more likely to tick all the legal boxes prior to entering the US, thus giving them stronger than average barriers against deportation from the get-go.
We also don't have an economic (or even an ethnic) profile of the Africans who are migrating to the US to begin with. Not all of them are black and they may also be less likely to be poor, unlike Mexicans who are quite often dirt poor when they arrive.
Perhaps Africans migrating successfully can afford better legal representation. This leads back to the first point that Africans may face a higher vetting rate when immigrating and thus a higher rejection rate as well, thus weeding out cases that would later end up with a higher risk of deportation. It's the holes in planes fallacy aka the survivorship bias.
Again, Mexicans can hop the border, but Africans likely have to arrive by plane.
There are so many angles that can easily explain the disparities.
The one thing you can't deny is that migrants from a Western country are almost 100% safe from deportation, and ONLY people from non-Western countries face elevated deportation rates. The odd deportation of a caucasion here or there doesn't change that.
|
On June 16 2025 02:01 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2025 18:56 BlackJack wrote:
I was going to ask the same question as oBlade. Is the evidence for racist immigration policies treating Mexicans as sub-human based on the fact that Africans are allowed to stay at a higher rate? Interesting take to say the least. There are plenty of explanations that don't contradict the claim of top-down racism. One possibility is that people from Africa may be more frequently vetted than people from South America. Mexicans can hop the border whereas Africans first have to cross the ocean, i.e. arrive by plane. Africans should therefore be more likely to tick all the legal boxes prior to entering the US, thus giving them stronger than average barriers against deportation from the get-go. We also don't have an economic (or even an ethnic) profile of the Africans who are migrating to the US to begin with. Not all of them are black and they may also be less likely to be poor, unlike Mexicans who are quite often dirt poor when they arrive. Perhaps Africans migrating successfully can afford better legal representation. This leads back to the first point that Africans may face a higher vetting rate when immigrating and thus a higher rejection rate as well, thus weeding out cases that would later end up with a higher risk of deportation. It's the holes in planes fallacy aka the survivorship bias. Again, Mexicans can hop the border, but Africans likely have to arrive by plane. There are so many angles that can easily explain the disparities.
Your claim was that Mexico has a higher rate of deportation than other countries because of racist policies that viewed them as sub-human. Now you're giving a half-dozen other reasons to explain the disparity that doesn't have to do with racism. I think you've sufficiently refuted your claim.
The one thing you can't deny is that migrants from a Western country are almost 100% safe from deportation, and ONLY people from non-Western countries face elevated deportation rates. The odd deportation of a caucasion here or there doesn't change that.
The only Western country in your study was Canada and under Trump they had a higher rate of deportation than average. Historically the removal rate for immigrants from Canada is about 60-80% based on the graph in your study. That's quite a bit different than being "almost 100% safe from deportation." Whoops.
|
On June 16 2025 02:44 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 02:01 Magic Powers wrote:On June 15 2025 18:56 BlackJack wrote:
I was going to ask the same question as oBlade. Is the evidence for racist immigration policies treating Mexicans as sub-human based on the fact that Africans are allowed to stay at a higher rate? Interesting take to say the least. There are plenty of explanations that don't contradict the claim of top-down racism. One possibility is that people from Africa may be more frequently vetted than people from South America. Mexicans can hop the border whereas Africans first have to cross the ocean, i.e. arrive by plane. Africans should therefore be more likely to tick all the legal boxes prior to entering the US, thus giving them stronger than average barriers against deportation from the get-go. We also don't have an economic (or even an ethnic) profile of the Africans who are migrating to the US to begin with. Not all of them are black and they may also be less likely to be poor, unlike Mexicans who are quite often dirt poor when they arrive. Perhaps Africans migrating successfully can afford better legal representation. This leads back to the first point that Africans may face a higher vetting rate when immigrating and thus a higher rejection rate as well, thus weeding out cases that would later end up with a higher risk of deportation. It's the holes in planes fallacy aka the survivorship bias. Again, Mexicans can hop the border, but Africans likely have to arrive by plane. There are so many angles that can easily explain the disparities. Your claim was that Mexico has a higher rate of deportation than other countries because of racist policies that viewed them as sub-human. Now you're giving a half-dozen other reasons to explain the disparity that doesn't have to do with racism. I think you've sufficiently refuted your claim. Show nested quote +The one thing you can't deny is that migrants from a Western country are almost 100% safe from deportation, and ONLY people from non-Western countries face elevated deportation rates. The odd deportation of a caucasion here or there doesn't change that. The only Western country in your study was Canada and under Trump they had a higher rate of deportation than average. Historically the removal rate for immigrants from Canada is about 60-80% based on the graph in your study. That's quite a bit different than being "almost 100% safe from deportation." Whoops.
You're doing the thing again and I'm not having it. Call me whatever names you want for "running away". You can feel amazing for "winning" yet another argument. I don't give a
Just one thing: I could provide perfect proof of rascism under Trump and you'd still deny it. Proof doesn't matter. You're a denier for life. In your mind racism in America is strictly not possible. It just doesn't exist.
|
On June 16 2025 04:39 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 02:44 BlackJack wrote:On June 16 2025 02:01 Magic Powers wrote:On June 15 2025 18:56 BlackJack wrote:
I was going to ask the same question as oBlade. Is the evidence for racist immigration policies treating Mexicans as sub-human based on the fact that Africans are allowed to stay at a higher rate? Interesting take to say the least. There are plenty of explanations that don't contradict the claim of top-down racism. One possibility is that people from Africa may be more frequently vetted than people from South America. Mexicans can hop the border whereas Africans first have to cross the ocean, i.e. arrive by plane. Africans should therefore be more likely to tick all the legal boxes prior to entering the US, thus giving them stronger than average barriers against deportation from the get-go. We also don't have an economic (or even an ethnic) profile of the Africans who are migrating to the US to begin with. Not all of them are black and they may also be less likely to be poor, unlike Mexicans who are quite often dirt poor when they arrive. Perhaps Africans migrating successfully can afford better legal representation. This leads back to the first point that Africans may face a higher vetting rate when immigrating and thus a higher rejection rate as well, thus weeding out cases that would later end up with a higher risk of deportation. It's the holes in planes fallacy aka the survivorship bias. Again, Mexicans can hop the border, but Africans likely have to arrive by plane. There are so many angles that can easily explain the disparities. Your claim was that Mexico has a higher rate of deportation than other countries because of racist policies that viewed them as sub-human. Now you're giving a half-dozen other reasons to explain the disparity that doesn't have to do with racism. I think you've sufficiently refuted your claim. The one thing you can't deny is that migrants from a Western country are almost 100% safe from deportation, and ONLY people from non-Western countries face elevated deportation rates. The odd deportation of a caucasion here or there doesn't change that. The only Western country in your study was Canada and under Trump they had a higher rate of deportation than average. Historically the removal rate for immigrants from Canada is about 60-80% based on the graph in your study. That's quite a bit different than being "almost 100% safe from deportation." Whoops. You're doing the thing again and I'm not having it. Call me whatever names you want for "running away". You can feel amazing for "winning" yet another argument. I don't give a Just one thing: I could provide perfect proof of rascism under Trump and you'd still deny it. Proof doesn't matter. You're a denier for life. In your mind racism in America is strictly not possible. It just doesn't exist.
On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:
Obviously there are elements of xenophobia/racism/prejudice. The idea that everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced is a ridiculous strawman. The point is people want to argue that the reason people take issue with Biden's disastrous handling of the border is because they don't like black and brown people. It's as ridiculous as dismissing critics of Israel on anti-semitism. Obviously anti-semitism is something that exists and there are elements of that as well in foreign policy discussion but that's not the lion's share of what's happening. So what you get is people posting in the Palestine thread that the criticism of Israel is not about anti-semitism before racing over to the US politics thread to call people criticising immigration policy racists, with no sense of irony about it.
Whoops again.
See the problem isn't that I won't acknowledge that racism exists in America. The problem is that you believe that any form of border enforcement, which will overwhelmingly affect Central Americans because of geography, is inherently racist. Your argument can essentially be boiled down to "open the borders or you're a racist" or "if you deport undocumented people you're a racist." Even Wombat's poll in this left-leaning forum finds this to be a rather extreme position.
|
On June 16 2025 05:22 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 04:39 Magic Powers wrote:On June 16 2025 02:44 BlackJack wrote:On June 16 2025 02:01 Magic Powers wrote:On June 15 2025 18:56 BlackJack wrote:
I was going to ask the same question as oBlade. Is the evidence for racist immigration policies treating Mexicans as sub-human based on the fact that Africans are allowed to stay at a higher rate? Interesting take to say the least. There are plenty of explanations that don't contradict the claim of top-down racism. One possibility is that people from Africa may be more frequently vetted than people from South America. Mexicans can hop the border whereas Africans first have to cross the ocean, i.e. arrive by plane. Africans should therefore be more likely to tick all the legal boxes prior to entering the US, thus giving them stronger than average barriers against deportation from the get-go. We also don't have an economic (or even an ethnic) profile of the Africans who are migrating to the US to begin with. Not all of them are black and they may also be less likely to be poor, unlike Mexicans who are quite often dirt poor when they arrive. Perhaps Africans migrating successfully can afford better legal representation. This leads back to the first point that Africans may face a higher vetting rate when immigrating and thus a higher rejection rate as well, thus weeding out cases that would later end up with a higher risk of deportation. It's the holes in planes fallacy aka the survivorship bias. Again, Mexicans can hop the border, but Africans likely have to arrive by plane. There are so many angles that can easily explain the disparities. Your claim was that Mexico has a higher rate of deportation than other countries because of racist policies that viewed them as sub-human. Now you're giving a half-dozen other reasons to explain the disparity that doesn't have to do with racism. I think you've sufficiently refuted your claim. The one thing you can't deny is that migrants from a Western country are almost 100% safe from deportation, and ONLY people from non-Western countries face elevated deportation rates. The odd deportation of a caucasion here or there doesn't change that. The only Western country in your study was Canada and under Trump they had a higher rate of deportation than average. Historically the removal rate for immigrants from Canada is about 60-80% based on the graph in your study. That's quite a bit different than being "almost 100% safe from deportation." Whoops. You're doing the thing again and I'm not having it. Call me whatever names you want for "running away". You can feel amazing for "winning" yet another argument. I don't give a Just one thing: I could provide perfect proof of rascism under Trump and you'd still deny it. Proof doesn't matter. You're a denier for life. In your mind racism in America is strictly not possible. It just doesn't exist. Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:
Obviously there are elements of xenophobia/racism/prejudice. The idea that everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced is a ridiculous strawman. The point is people want to argue that the reason people take issue with Biden's disastrous handling of the border is because they don't like black and brown people. It's as ridiculous as dismissing critics of Israel on anti-semitism. Obviously anti-semitism is something that exists and there are elements of that as well in foreign policy discussion but that's not the lion's share of what's happening. So what you get is people posting in the Palestine thread that the criticism of Israel is not about anti-semitism before racing over to the US politics thread to call people criticising immigration policy racists, with no sense of irony about it. Whoops again. See the problem isn't that I won't acknowledge that racism exists in America. The problem is that you believe that any form of border enforcement, which will overwhelmingly affect Central Americans because of geography, is inherently racist. Your argument can essentially be boiled down to "open the borders or you're a racist" or "if you deport undocumented people you're a racist." Even Wombat's poll in this left-leaning forum finds this to be a rather extreme position.
"Racism exists if I agree it's racism, otherwise you're wrong and I'm right." There, summed up your argument for you.
|
Border control is not inherently racist. It's just something that racists universally obsess over because it gives them a socially acceptable and lawful opportunity to be wildly cruel to minorities. Can we agree on that?
|
Hey, I'm receptive to hear your anti-racist way to enforce the border that consists of anything besides "just don't enforce the border."
|
Randomly detaining people for looking too Latino is enforcing the border, how?
|
Stop and frisk is totally not racist ya'll, it's a totally non-racist policy that just so happens to predominantly target black neighborhoods. Whoops, whoopsie. Black neighborhoods being targeted because of racism is not a real thing ya'll. Lick that boot already, will ya.
|
I think a stat on who has been deported incorrectly by race might be telling.
|
Look at this peice of shit. Sitting senator for the state of Utah. Bet you won't see any condemnation on the right on this guy, probably going to make money for his reelection campaign if anyone takes issue with him joking about a wonderful woman and her husband being assassinated. Just a pattern of behavior from the people who made jokes about Nancy Pelosi's husband when he was attacked with a hammer in their home.
She was a sunday school teacher a girl scout troop leader and she raised therapy golden retrievers for veterans. the one they were raising at the time was also killed defending them. The other family that was targeted by the pictured man had their daughter in the house and the wife threw herself on her daughter to shield her. They're not guaranteed to live and are going through surgeries for their 8 and 9 bullets they took from the guy. These are the people whos feelings blackjack wants to defend from being called nazies.
|
|
|
Apparently her last political action was to be the only Democrat to side with Republicans to strip access to healthcare for undocumented migrants. I'm glad you think the woman who collaborates with Nazis and who has blood on her hands from denying people access to healthcare is sooooooo amazing. Has Luigi taught you nothing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/740286543641575467/1383955725260296233/rwjt8cmh867f1.png?ex=6850acb5&is=684f5b35&hm=cda1bb61d8a3864673ba8ce460ed0517685520512c4ba3813f8c9840986f40e2&=&format=webp&quality=lossless&width=1475&height=1148)
