|
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 September 27 2024 12:54 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 11:17 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 09:46 micronesia wrote:On September 27 2024 09:11 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 08:40 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 06:06 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 05:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 04:05 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 03:16 Biff The Understudy wrote:
[quote]
Never heard the word. I assume it means mass deportation of brown people and very, very little else? Unless it’s also about sending australians and swedes that have moved in your country packing, which never seems to be on the agenda. What percent of illegal immigrants in the US are Australians and Swedes...? On September 27 2024 03:16 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What strikes me, always with those discussion in the complete lack of compassion and empathy that goes with certain arguments. What happens to the people that are “remigrated”, right wing people seem to just not even think about. Hopefully they would thrive in the country they were born in and maintain citizenship of, which makes it conceptually 100 times more compassionate than mere "deportation," if compassion for outlanders were foremost on your mind. Tell me, why do you think the brown people are there illegally and the white ones legally? I did not say that. You have asked me why nobody cares about illegal Australians and Swedes. I have asked you to show me the illegal Australians and Swedes. You have then assumed that Australians and Swedes are all white, apparently given up on finding evidence of a problem 5 minutes ago you were complaining that people don't complain about, overlooking the possibility that the problem is either miniscule, doesn't exist, or if it does is already fucking included in the solution. Imagine you enter a room and there's red wine spilled everywhere, and one person says "we should clean this up" and you whine "how come you don't care about cleaning up all the spilled white wine" and they say "this is red wine though" and you whine "racist." This is the level of reasoning. You are race baiting pathetically. Find me a single quote of a US politician supporting the deportation of all illegl immigrants except the white ones can stay. Or even find me an X post of a random person saying that. It's a totally asinine position nobody holds except in the fantasyland of boogey-strawmen. Even the white nationalists aren't stupid enough to hold that view. People care about the problems that exist more than made up ones. That's it. It is not the fault of citizens of a country what color the illegal immigrants there are or aren't and how politically correct or incorrect that makes you for being opposed to breaking the law. Do you know why Haitians and Venezuelans are topical? It's not because they are this or that color. It's because Biden launched a parole program called CHNV. Do you know what that stands for? Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela. That's why you find stronger opposition to those migrants than to ones from Malta and Singapore because Biden didn't bring in a million of them without asking and without a plan and with questionable consequences. Not because illegals from Singapore are white so they're okay illegals, of course. But you didn't ask me about Singapore. You asked me about Sweden. Because who is the one making this about race. It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them, that have no problems in life, and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture. The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred. That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from. You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes, you applaud with both hands. And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will. People are fine with immigration of people not like them. There’s tons of foreign students in our universities, foreigners working in tech, Filipinos working in healthcare, etc. it’s almost like people take issue with millions of people flooding through a porous border and the skin color doesn’t matter so much. Do you believe that if Springfield had 20k swedes we'd hear cries of "They're eating our goldfish"? People are obviously not fine with immigration of people not like them. Do these count? Because I actually could see it... ![[image loading]](https://candykitchen.com/cdn/shop/products/ck_assorted_swedish_fish-2508_2048x.jpg?v=1478030704) 100%. Swedes just out there being weird and eating gold fish. Shouting at each other in their bork de bork bork language. Lock ur fishbowls. I found this unreasonably funny. But yeah, talk about broad strokes, in any other context BJ would have a problem with the intellectual dishonesty involved in making too general a statement about this or that thing he feels like being contrarian about, but now that we're talking about illegal immigration, a subject where you have to bury your head in the sand to miss the latent racism, suddenly everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced, and nobody has an issue with people from different ethnicities and different walks of life, and all the problems they have with immigrants are all perfectly justified. Right-O!
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.
|
On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 12:54 NewSunshine wrote:On September 27 2024 11:17 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 09:46 micronesia wrote:On September 27 2024 09:11 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 08:40 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 06:06 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 05:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 04:05 oBlade wrote:
[quote]
What percent of illegal immigrants in the US are Australians and Swedes...?
[quote]
Hopefully they would thrive in the country they were born in and maintain citizenship of, which makes it conceptually 100 times more compassionate than mere "deportation," if compassion for outlanders were foremost on your mind. Tell me, why do you think the brown people are there illegally and the white ones legally? I did not say that. You have asked me why nobody cares about illegal Australians and Swedes. I have asked you to show me the illegal Australians and Swedes. You have then assumed that Australians and Swedes are all white, apparently given up on finding evidence of a problem 5 minutes ago you were complaining that people don't complain about, overlooking the possibility that the problem is either miniscule, doesn't exist, or if it does is already fucking included in the solution. Imagine you enter a room and there's red wine spilled everywhere, and one person says "we should clean this up" and you whine "how come you don't care about cleaning up all the spilled white wine" and they say "this is red wine though" and you whine "racist." This is the level of reasoning. You are race baiting pathetically. Find me a single quote of a US politician supporting the deportation of all illegl immigrants except the white ones can stay. Or even find me an X post of a random person saying that. It's a totally asinine position nobody holds except in the fantasyland of boogey-strawmen. Even the white nationalists aren't stupid enough to hold that view. People care about the problems that exist more than made up ones. That's it. It is not the fault of citizens of a country what color the illegal immigrants there are or aren't and how politically correct or incorrect that makes you for being opposed to breaking the law. Do you know why Haitians and Venezuelans are topical? It's not because they are this or that color. It's because Biden launched a parole program called CHNV. Do you know what that stands for? Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela. That's why you find stronger opposition to those migrants than to ones from Malta and Singapore because Biden didn't bring in a million of them without asking and without a plan and with questionable consequences. Not because illegals from Singapore are white so they're okay illegals, of course. But you didn't ask me about Singapore. You asked me about Sweden. Because who is the one making this about race. It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them, that have no problems in life, and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture. The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred. That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from. You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes, you applaud with both hands. And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will. People are fine with immigration of people not like them. There’s tons of foreign students in our universities, foreigners working in tech, Filipinos working in healthcare, etc. it’s almost like people take issue with millions of people flooding through a porous border and the skin color doesn’t matter so much. Do you believe that if Springfield had 20k swedes we'd hear cries of "They're eating our goldfish"? People are obviously not fine with immigration of people not like them. Do these count? Because I actually could see it... 100%. Swedes just out there being weird and eating gold fish. Shouting at each other in their bork de bork bork language. Lock ur fishbowls. I found this unreasonably funny. But yeah, talk about broad strokes, in any other context BJ would have a problem with the intellectual dishonesty involved in making too general a statement about this or that thing he feels like being contrarian about, but now that we're talking about illegal immigration, a subject where you have to bury your head in the sand to miss the latent racism, suddenly everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced, and nobody has an issue with people from different ethnicities and different walks of life, and all the problems they have with immigrants are all perfectly justified. Right-O! 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.
The reason why people argue that is because the biggest headlines, created by many Republican leaders, are indeed nothing more than racist and xenophobic attacks on these immigrants (legal or illegal). Most conservative leaders are lying about what immigrants are doing to our country, simply labeling them as rapists and murderers and pet-stealers and pet-eaters and fundamentally evil human beings and being-smuggled-in-to-our-country-so-that-they-can-become-illegal-Democratic-voters. It's obvious fearmongering and hatemongering, and it's unjustified. If Trump and Vance and other Republicans had focused primarily on truthful concerns regarding negative impacts that immigrants may have on local economies (or whatever the real problems are), then the conversation would be about those. But those legitimate concerns rarely appear, because they aren't the usual sensationalist bullshit that goes viral with Trump and Fox News.
|
On September 27 2024 18:12 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects. This argument makes no sense. You just said that the problem in Sweden is mass migration,[citation needed] presumably of non-Swedes. These then non-Swedes migrate to other countries[citation needed] where these other countries are considering introducing border controls to presumably stem this migration of non-Swedes[citation needed]. In what way is this about Swedes migrating?
Here is a graph showing the increase in gun violence in Sweden (it's up around 300% over the last decade). If you doubt that this has to do with mass migration, just compare with the other Scandinavian countries, which are very similar to Sweden except that they didn't have our immigration policies (we now have about as many shootings per month as the rest of Scandinavia has per year). Here is an article from BBC - BBC! - about this uptick in organized crime and its relation immigration. I already linked an article in the previous post about our neighboring countries implementing new border controls.
|
On September 27 2024 19:36 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 18:12 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects. This argument makes no sense. You just said that the problem in Sweden is mass migration,[citation needed] presumably of non-Swedes. These then non-Swedes migrate to other countries[citation needed] where these other countries are considering introducing border controls to presumably stem this migration of non-Swedes[citation needed]. In what way is this about Swedes migrating? Here is a graph showing the increase in gun violence in Sweden (it's up around 300% over the last decade). If you doubt that this has to do with mass migration, just compare with the other Scandinavian countries, which are very similar to Sweden except that they didn't have our immigration policies (we now have about as many shootings per month as the rest of Scandinavia has per year). Here is an article from BBC - BBC! - about this uptick in organized crime and its relation immigration. I already linked an article in the previous post about our neighboring countries implementing new border controls.
This tangent was about Swedish people emigrating. Neither of your links specifies if Swedish people emigrate or people living in Sweden move elsewhere.
|
On September 27 2024 19:36 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 18:12 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects. This argument makes no sense. You just said that the problem in Sweden is mass migration,[citation needed] presumably of non-Swedes. These then non-Swedes migrate to other countries[citation needed] where these other countries are considering introducing border controls to presumably stem this migration of non-Swedes[citation needed]. In what way is this about Swedes migrating? Here is a graph showing the increase in gun violence in Sweden (it's up around 300% over the last decade). If you doubt that this has to do with mass migration, just compare with the other Scandinavian countries, which are very similar to Sweden except that they didn't have our immigration policies (we now have about as many shootings per month as the rest of Scandinavia has per year). Here is an article from BBC - BBC! - about this uptick in organized crime and its relation immigration. I already linked an article in the previous post about our neighboring countries implementing new border controls.
Ok but would Swedes take issue with gangland violence if it were Australians doing it?
|
On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects.
The murder rate in Sweden is stable at just above 1 per 100K
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1315123/sweden-homicide-rate/
There is a real problem with gangs from the balkans, that by the way are from population that didn’t come with the recent wave of immigration, that have kind of militarized and use Kalashnikovs very liberally against each other.
Sweden remains exceptionally safe in general and the murder rate is one of the lowest in Europe. The narrative “we accepted all those Muslims and now they are shooting at us and it’s literally Baghdad” is a far right trope that has very little to do with reality, as you should know.
|
On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects.
Ha, fair! It was legitimately my poor, tiny brain going "What's a country generally seen as good or agreeable that could be said to eat pets" and it got stuck on swedish fish.
I think migration can be done 'wrong' or in ways that are harmful to the country. I think that's worth thinking about. However, I think DPB absolutely smashed the nail on the head:
On September 27 2024 19:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The reason why people argue that is because the biggest headlines, created by many Republican leaders, are indeed nothing more than racist and xenophobic attacks on these immigrants (legal or illegal). Most conservative leaders are lying about what immigrants are doing to our country, simply labeling them as rapists and murderers and pet-stealers and pet-eaters and fundamentally evil human beings and being-smuggled-in-to-our-country-so-that-they-can-become-illegal-Democratic-voters. It's obvious fearmongering and hatemongering, and it's unjustified. If Trump and Vance and other Republicans had focused primarily on truthful concerns regarding negative impacts that immigrants may have on local economies (or whatever the real problems are), then the conversation would be about those. But those legitimate concerns rarely appear, because they aren't the usual sensationalist bullshit that goes viral with Trump and Fox News.
|
On September 28 2024 02:52 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects. Ha, fair! It was legitimately my poor, tiny brain going "What's a country generally seen as good or agreeable that could be said to eat pets" and it got stuck on swedish fish. I think migration can be done 'wrong' or in ways that are harmful to the country. I think that's worth thinking about. However, I think DPB absolutely smashed the nail on the head.
Thank you 
PS I just voted a few hours ago - Harris (obviously) and then Andy Kim for NJ Senator.
|
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 06:06 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 05:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 04:05 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 03:16 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 02:16 WombaT wrote:On September 27 2024 01:57 oBlade wrote:On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
First of all, how do you measure Europe being more racist then the US? Is that your personal feeling Yes, from having been in 49 states and had a civic education. On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
from all the connections you have with people using remigration in normal conversation from Europe? What? On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
Or are you just imposing 'Murica!' on the topic? Yes, I am imposing America on the topic of a comparison between Europe and America. As long as you conceive of "more" as some kind of rate or percentage, rather than a total, in which case a huge country would be more racist simply by amount in most comparisons. They're either equally racist or one is more. Would you happen to think it's the US - then why? On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:You know, your argument suxx. The Swastika is a very normal symbol for luck and holyness, both in europe (roman) and asian societies . As words and symbols are just words and symbols, why don't you just decide that the politics associated to it by the people using it, are not relevant to you and just use the old meaning. Let's see how you do I agree with you 100%, people are not Nazis just because they use a swastika, despite the ignorance of more than zero westerners who have ventured East and been confronted by one at a temple or elsewhere, only to quickly descend into a fit of tiktok rage, even before tiktok was invented. On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
Remigration is the new idea of the alt-right (mostly in Austria and moving from there to every other right-wing movement in the continent) to magically get rid of people Already we've reached an impasse of charitability. Do you think the policy goal you're criticizing literally involves people advocating the teleportation of human souls, or do you just personally believe against all evidence that it's physically impossible to remove a human from somewhere? On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
why are legally in the country but don't pass their definition of a good citizen. This is equivocating. Having status to legally be in a country doesn't encompass citizenship. At all. Nor is it irrevocable. People with legal status can lose it. It's not a guarantee of its own perpetuation. Countries can change and even reverse their own policies. (Depending on the country, even people born with citizenship can lose that in extraordinary circumstances.) This reflects the ultimate truth that being born, whether you like it or not, is accompanied by not only rights, but also responsibilities. That may sound unfair, but that's due to our comfort allowing us to naively conflate want with fairness. And your beautifully framed sentence seems utterly nonracial by the way, which is great. On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
If you use that term now without providing context how your definition of the word differs from the other people using it, then maybe you just refer to what those other people use.
It's not my word, it was Drumpf's word, read the quote of his I posted, find another quote of his if you have additional context. The word means people going whence they came. In the context of American politics, that's about deporting tens of millions of illegal immigrants who have entered and even live in the country, and people who would otherwise have no legal basis to be in the US and would be illegal except for the fact that the current administration overstepped their executive authority in not only granting parole, but actively facilitating the influx of almost a million people by skirting US law. In the context of European politics, it may be about reversing a recent trend of legal immigration, refugees, and illegal immigrants. In both cases, it's about people leaving a country and going back. The word has always meant that (or it has meant entering and leaving countries many times, but that's a descriptive case, not something to be debated as policy). That's why while in Austria it might mean returning people who have mostly come from the Middle East and North Africa I assume, and it doesn't mean that in the US because the nature of immigration and assimilation to each place in recent history is different. Olive branch: the word "immigration" is not inherently treasonous. I think I may be the forth person in this thread chain to have never have encountered the ‘demigration’ term before this particular tangent. Who uses a term, and why are also of some import. I don’t see why you exhaust such intellectual capital arguing on the contrary. Never heard the word. I assume it means mass deportation of brown people and very, very little else? Unless it’s also about sending australians and swedes that have moved in your country packing, which never seems to be on the agenda. What percent of illegal immigrants in the US are Australians and Swedes...? On September 27 2024 03:16 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What strikes me, always with those discussion in the complete lack of compassion and empathy that goes with certain arguments. What happens to the people that are “remigrated”, right wing people seem to just not even think about. Hopefully they would thrive in the country they were born in and maintain citizenship of, which makes it conceptually 100 times more compassionate than mere "deportation," if compassion for outlanders were foremost on your mind. Tell me, why do you think the brown people are there illegally and the white ones legally? I did not say that. You have asked me why nobody cares about illegal Australians and Swedes. I have asked you to show me the illegal Australians and Swedes. You have then assumed that Australians and Swedes are all white, apparently given up on finding evidence of a problem 5 minutes ago you were complaining that people don't complain about, overlooking the possibility that the problem is either miniscule, doesn't exist, or if it does is already fucking included in the solution. Imagine you enter a room and there's red wine spilled everywhere, and one person says "we should clean this up" and you whine "how come you don't care about cleaning up all the spilled white wine" and they say "this is red wine though" and you whine "racist." This is the level of reasoning. You are race baiting pathetically. Find me a single quote of a US politician supporting the deportation of all illegl immigrants except the white ones can stay. Or even find me an X post of a random person saying that. It's a totally asinine position nobody holds except in the fantasyland of boogey-strawmen. Even the white nationalists aren't stupid enough to hold that view. People care about the problems that exist more than made up ones. That's it. It is not the fault of citizens of a country what color the illegal immigrants there are or aren't and how politically correct or incorrect that makes you for being opposed to breaking the law. Do you know why Haitians and Venezuelans are topical? It's not because they are this or that color. It's because Biden launched a parole program called CHNV. Do you know what that stands for? Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela. That's why you find stronger opposition to those migrants than to ones from Malta and Singapore because Biden didn't bring in a million of them without asking and without a plan and with questionable consequences. Not because illegals from Singapore are white so they're okay illegals, of course. But you didn't ask me about Singapore. You asked me about Sweden. Because who is the one making this about race. It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them,
Maybe.
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
that have no problems in life,
Yes.
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture.
Maybe, but not exclusively, and also no, not necessarily, not at all. Not interested in any magnates hiding their capital abroad in my country for tax purposes by bubbling local markets. Not interested in foreign acquisition of my country's means of production.
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred.
This sounds like it might be true until you realize that those differences already exist intracountry.
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from.
You do not have to have a lot of empathy to be in favor of the government spending strangers' money, or borrowing your children's money to spend, on even more distant strangers without asking any of them.
I allocate empathy by proximity. Suicidal empathy is reserved for the equivalent of immediate family, especially if you're a woman. Anything more is dangerous. I do not have the empathy to let a drowning man pull me under. Empathy is a fine emotion, but it's only one part of being a human. Empathy should be a trigger for actual thought. How can I actually help and improve the world? Not how can I improve my emotions or reputation by feeling like I'm helping and improving, even if I'm actually messing things up. There is truth to the term "bleeding heart." The world still has a lot of problems, you can't fix them with magic wish power, and you only have 5 liters of blood to lose for them. It's nowhere near enough.
Not impressed by the fact that the "border czar" has done so well to address the "root causes" of immigration that the US now has to take people in from all the countries she has helped.
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes,
It is not helpful to anybody to attempt to graft what you admit is the poorest and most difficult country to your own country. You may feel good, while leaving the rest in the lurch. Okay, take the rest too. It's not feasible to take the whole world and put it in the US. If you want to save the world, make save the world policies, prove they work, and vote for them. Immigration does not save the world. (This is a general "you.")
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
you applaud with both hands.
Is that a French expression? I've tried applauding with each hand separately but it was less than effective.
On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will.
Seems dehumanizing.
On September 27 2024 21:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects. The murder rate in Sweden is stable at just above 1 per 100K https://www.statista.com/statistics/1315123/sweden-homicide-rate/There is a real problem with gangs from the balkans, that by the way are from population that didn’t come with the recent wave of immigration, that have kind of militarized and use Kalashnikovs very liberally against each other. Sweden remains exceptionally safe in general and the murder rate is one of the lowest in Europe. The narrative “we accepted all those Muslims and now they are shooting at us and it’s literally Baghdad” is a far right trope that has very little to do with reality, as you should know.
That's one angle. Have you looked at violent crime, sex crimes, robbery, drugs, and grenade attacks?
Also, a more general principled objection to what what you're saying entails is this. Say every country has a set of problems that can be quantified, like murder rates. You could be above or below the world average. Let's say the world murder rate average is 10 per 100k and your country is at 1. Then you enact unelected sweeping immigration that changes your society. The murder rate is now 3 per 100k. This is not a good thing just because you're still better than the world average. It tripled. It got 3 times worse. If this happened to every such metric, your country would literally be 3 times worse. The fact that it still has a way to go before it reaches the world average, meaning we can still make it even worse, because people don't have a right to complain until it reaches being worse than the world average, is bullshit. It's an argument rooted in an appeal to cosmic fairness, which is something that doesn't exist, and it totally eschews self-determination, personal responsibility, and frankly common sense.
|
Northern Ireland22910 Posts
On September 28 2024 03:28 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 06:06 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 05:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 04:05 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 03:16 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 02:16 WombaT wrote:On September 27 2024 01:57 oBlade wrote:On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
First of all, how do you measure Europe being more racist then the US? Is that your personal feeling Yes, from having been in 49 states and had a civic education. On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
from all the connections you have with people using remigration in normal conversation from Europe? What? On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
Or are you just imposing 'Murica!' on the topic? Yes, I am imposing America on the topic of a comparison between Europe and America. As long as you conceive of "more" as some kind of rate or percentage, rather than a total, in which case a huge country would be more racist simply by amount in most comparisons. They're either equally racist or one is more. Would you happen to think it's the US - then why? On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:You know, your argument suxx. The Swastika is a very normal symbol for luck and holyness, both in europe (roman) and asian societies . As words and symbols are just words and symbols, why don't you just decide that the politics associated to it by the people using it, are not relevant to you and just use the old meaning. Let's see how you do I agree with you 100%, people are not Nazis just because they use a swastika, despite the ignorance of more than zero westerners who have ventured East and been confronted by one at a temple or elsewhere, only to quickly descend into a fit of tiktok rage, even before tiktok was invented. On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
Remigration is the new idea of the alt-right (mostly in Austria and moving from there to every other right-wing movement in the continent) to magically get rid of people Already we've reached an impasse of charitability. Do you think the policy goal you're criticizing literally involves people advocating the teleportation of human souls, or do you just personally believe against all evidence that it's physically impossible to remove a human from somewhere? On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
why are legally in the country but don't pass their definition of a good citizen. This is equivocating. Having status to legally be in a country doesn't encompass citizenship. At all. Nor is it irrevocable. People with legal status can lose it. It's not a guarantee of its own perpetuation. Countries can change and even reverse their own policies. (Depending on the country, even people born with citizenship can lose that in extraordinary circumstances.) This reflects the ultimate truth that being born, whether you like it or not, is accompanied by not only rights, but also responsibilities. That may sound unfair, but that's due to our comfort allowing us to naively conflate want with fairness. And your beautifully framed sentence seems utterly nonracial by the way, which is great. On September 26 2024 04:53 Broetchenholer wrote:
If you use that term now without providing context how your definition of the word differs from the other people using it, then maybe you just refer to what those other people use.
It's not my word, it was Drumpf's word, read the quote of his I posted, find another quote of his if you have additional context. The word means people going whence they came. In the context of American politics, that's about deporting tens of millions of illegal immigrants who have entered and even live in the country, and people who would otherwise have no legal basis to be in the US and would be illegal except for the fact that the current administration overstepped their executive authority in not only granting parole, but actively facilitating the influx of almost a million people by skirting US law. In the context of European politics, it may be about reversing a recent trend of legal immigration, refugees, and illegal immigrants. In both cases, it's about people leaving a country and going back. The word has always meant that (or it has meant entering and leaving countries many times, but that's a descriptive case, not something to be debated as policy). That's why while in Austria it might mean returning people who have mostly come from the Middle East and North Africa I assume, and it doesn't mean that in the US because the nature of immigration and assimilation to each place in recent history is different. Olive branch: the word "immigration" is not inherently treasonous. I think I may be the forth person in this thread chain to have never have encountered the ‘demigration’ term before this particular tangent. Who uses a term, and why are also of some import. I don’t see why you exhaust such intellectual capital arguing on the contrary. Never heard the word. I assume it means mass deportation of brown people and very, very little else? Unless it’s also about sending australians and swedes that have moved in your country packing, which never seems to be on the agenda. What percent of illegal immigrants in the US are Australians and Swedes...? On September 27 2024 03:16 Biff The Understudy wrote:
What strikes me, always with those discussion in the complete lack of compassion and empathy that goes with certain arguments. What happens to the people that are “remigrated”, right wing people seem to just not even think about. Hopefully they would thrive in the country they were born in and maintain citizenship of, which makes it conceptually 100 times more compassionate than mere "deportation," if compassion for outlanders were foremost on your mind. Tell me, why do you think the brown people are there illegally and the white ones legally? I did not say that. You have asked me why nobody cares about illegal Australians and Swedes. I have asked you to show me the illegal Australians and Swedes. You have then assumed that Australians and Swedes are all white, apparently given up on finding evidence of a problem 5 minutes ago you were complaining that people don't complain about, overlooking the possibility that the problem is either miniscule, doesn't exist, or if it does is already fucking included in the solution. Imagine you enter a room and there's red wine spilled everywhere, and one person says "we should clean this up" and you whine "how come you don't care about cleaning up all the spilled white wine" and they say "this is red wine though" and you whine "racist." This is the level of reasoning. You are race baiting pathetically. Find me a single quote of a US politician supporting the deportation of all illegl immigrants except the white ones can stay. Or even find me an X post of a random person saying that. It's a totally asinine position nobody holds except in the fantasyland of boogey-strawmen. Even the white nationalists aren't stupid enough to hold that view. People care about the problems that exist more than made up ones. That's it. It is not the fault of citizens of a country what color the illegal immigrants there are or aren't and how politically correct or incorrect that makes you for being opposed to breaking the law. Do you know why Haitians and Venezuelans are topical? It's not because they are this or that color. It's because Biden launched a parole program called CHNV. Do you know what that stands for? Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela. That's why you find stronger opposition to those migrants than to ones from Malta and Singapore because Biden didn't bring in a million of them without asking and without a plan and with questionable consequences. Not because illegals from Singapore are white so they're okay illegals, of course. But you didn't ask me about Singapore. You asked me about Sweden. Because who is the one making this about race. It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them, Maybe. Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
that have no problems in life, Yes.Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture. Maybe, but not exclusively, and also no, not necessarily, not at all. Not interested in any magnates hiding their capital abroad in my country for tax purposes by bubbling local markets. Not interested in foreign acquisition of my country's means of production. Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred. This sounds like it might be true until you realize that those differences already exist intracountry. Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from. You do not have to have a lot of empathy to be in favor of the government spending strangers' money, or borrowing your children's money to spend, on even more distant strangers without asking any of them. I allocate empathy by proximity. Suicidal empathy is reserved for the equivalent of immediate family, especially if you're a woman. Anything more is dangerous. I do not have the empathy to let a drowning man pull me under. Empathy is a fine emotion, but it's only one part of being a human. Empathy should be a trigger for actual thought. How can I actually help and improve the world? Not how can I improve my emotions or reputation by feeling like I'm helping and improving, even if I'm actually messing things up. There is truth to the term "bleeding heart." The world still has a lot of problems, you can't fix them with magic wish power, and you only have 5 liters of blood to lose for them. It's nowhere near enough. Not impressed by the fact that the "border czar" has done so well to address the "root causes" of immigration that the US now has to take people in from all the countries she has helped. Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes, It is not helpful to anybody to attempt to graft what you admit is the poorest and most difficult country to your own country. You may feel good, while leaving the rest in the lurch. Okay, take the rest too. It's not feasible to take the whole world and put it in the US. If you want to save the world, make save the world policies, prove they work, and vote for them. Immigration does not save the world. (This is a general "you.") Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
you applaud with both hands. Is that a French expression? I've tried applauding with each hand separately but it was less than effective. Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will. Seems dehumanizing. Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 21:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 15:53 Elroi wrote:It's ironic that you use Swedes as an example of immigrants people wouldn't mind having in their country, given that crime is so bad in Sweden now (because of mass migration) that our neighboring Scandinavian countries are debating closing the borders to avoid spillover effects. The murder rate in Sweden is stable at just above 1 per 100K https://www.statista.com/statistics/1315123/sweden-homicide-rate/There is a real problem with gangs from the balkans, that by the way are from population that didn’t come with the recent wave of immigration, that have kind of militarized and use Kalashnikovs very liberally against each other. Sweden remains exceptionally safe in general and the murder rate is one of the lowest in Europe. The narrative “we accepted all those Muslims and now they are shooting at us and it’s literally Baghdad” is a far right trope that has very little to do with reality, as you should know. That's one angle. Have you looked at violent crime, sex crimes, robbery, drugs, and grenade attacks? Also, a more general principled objection to what what you're saying entails is this. Say every country has a set of problems that can be quantified, like murder rates. You could be above or below the world average. Let's say the world murder rate average is 10 per 100k and your country is at 1. Then you enact unelected sweeping immigration that changes your society. The murder rate is now 3 per 100k. This is not a good thing just because you're still better than the world average. It tripled. It got 3 times worse. If this happened to every such metric, your country would literally be 3 times worse. The fact that it still has a way to go before it reaches the world average, meaning we can still make it even worse, because people don't have a right to complain until it reaches being worse than the world average, is bullshit. It's an argument rooted in an appeal to cosmic fairness, which is something that doesn't exist, and it totally eschews self-determination, personal responsibility, and frankly common sense.
What is your overall point? You spend a lot of words dancing around and pontificating, what’s your actual position?
As for the bolded, sure cosmic fairness is in short supply. Self determination and personal responsibility though?
‘I can have a better life in x country and will make that happen’, I mean that feels it ticks both of those boxes, like the overall phenomenon or not
|
On September 27 2024 19:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 12:54 NewSunshine wrote:On September 27 2024 11:17 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 09:46 micronesia wrote:On September 27 2024 09:11 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 08:40 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 06:06 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2024 05:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:
[quote]
Tell me, why do you think the brown people are there illegally and the white ones legally? I did not say that. You have asked me why nobody cares about illegal Australians and Swedes. I have asked you to show me the illegal Australians and Swedes. You have then assumed that Australians and Swedes are all white, apparently given up on finding evidence of a problem 5 minutes ago you were complaining that people don't complain about, overlooking the possibility that the problem is either miniscule, doesn't exist, or if it does is already fucking included in the solution. Imagine you enter a room and there's red wine spilled everywhere, and one person says "we should clean this up" and you whine "how come you don't care about cleaning up all the spilled white wine" and they say "this is red wine though" and you whine "racist." This is the level of reasoning. You are race baiting pathetically. Find me a single quote of a US politician supporting the deportation of all illegl immigrants except the white ones can stay. Or even find me an X post of a random person saying that. It's a totally asinine position nobody holds except in the fantasyland of boogey-strawmen. Even the white nationalists aren't stupid enough to hold that view. People care about the problems that exist more than made up ones. That's it. It is not the fault of citizens of a country what color the illegal immigrants there are or aren't and how politically correct or incorrect that makes you for being opposed to breaking the law. Do you know why Haitians and Venezuelans are topical? It's not because they are this or that color. It's because Biden launched a parole program called CHNV. Do you know what that stands for? Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela. That's why you find stronger opposition to those migrants than to ones from Malta and Singapore because Biden didn't bring in a million of them without asking and without a plan and with questionable consequences. Not because illegals from Singapore are white so they're okay illegals, of course. But you didn't ask me about Singapore. You asked me about Sweden. Because who is the one making this about race. It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them, that have no problems in life, and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture. The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred. That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from. You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes, you applaud with both hands. And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will. People are fine with immigration of people not like them. There’s tons of foreign students in our universities, foreigners working in tech, Filipinos working in healthcare, etc. it’s almost like people take issue with millions of people flooding through a porous border and the skin color doesn’t matter so much. Do you believe that if Springfield had 20k swedes we'd hear cries of "They're eating our goldfish"? People are obviously not fine with immigration of people not like them. Do these count? Because I actually could see it... 100%. Swedes just out there being weird and eating gold fish. Shouting at each other in their bork de bork bork language. Lock ur fishbowls. I found this unreasonably funny. But yeah, talk about broad strokes, in any other context BJ would have a problem with the intellectual dishonesty involved in making too general a statement about this or that thing he feels like being contrarian about, but now that we're talking about illegal immigration, a subject where you have to bury your head in the sand to miss the latent racism, suddenly everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced, and nobody has an issue with people from different ethnicities and different walks of life, and all the problems they have with immigrants are all perfectly justified. Right-O! 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. The reason why people argue that is because the biggest headlines, created by many Republican leaders, are indeed nothing more than racist and xenophobic attacks on these immigrants (legal or illegal). Most conservative leaders are lying about what immigrants are doing to our country, simply labeling them as rapists and murderers and pet-stealers and pet-eaters and fundamentally evil human beings and being-smuggled-in-to-our-country-so-that-they-can-become-illegal-Democratic-voters. It's obvious fearmongering and hatemongering, and it's unjustified. If Trump and Vance and other Republicans had focused primarily on truthful concerns regarding negative impacts that immigrants may have on local economies (or whatever the real problems are), then the conversation would be about those. But those legitimate concerns rarely appear, because they aren't the usual sensationalist bullshit that goes viral with Trump and Fox News.
In the middle of the discussion about Springfield I posted a graph showing that violent crime had more than doubled in Springfield since 2019 which was predictably ignored. There's lots of headlines about immigration and I doubt you're just getting the pet-eating ones. If you are you should broaden your reading material. Of course it's easiest to argue that Hatians aren't eating cats but it would be a refreshing change of pace if we went after each other's strongest arguments. If you want to agree that Biden's handling of the border is disastrous and also Trump is an old white racist asshole then I'm happy to do that as well.
|
Also worth pointing out that calling right-wingers racist on immigration exists in the European politics thread as well, and it existed before Trump. The idea that "We're only saying that because of Trump/Vance's rhetoric" could not be more easily disprovable.
This 1 minute clip from Bill Maher pretty much sums up my thoughts on it. "Calling it racist doesn't solve the problem, it handles future elections to someone who will and who I guarantee you're not going to like."
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On September 28 2024 12:29 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2024 19:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 12:54 NewSunshine wrote:On September 27 2024 11:17 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 09:46 micronesia wrote:On September 27 2024 09:11 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 08:40 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On September 27 2024 06:06 oBlade wrote:
[quote]
I did not say that.
You have asked me why nobody cares about illegal Australians and Swedes. I have asked you to show me the illegal Australians and Swedes.
You have then assumed that Australians and Swedes are all white, apparently given up on finding evidence of a problem 5 minutes ago you were complaining that people don't complain about, overlooking the possibility that the problem is either miniscule, doesn't exist, or if it does is already fucking included in the solution.
Imagine you enter a room and there's red wine spilled everywhere, and one person says "we should clean this up" and you whine "how come you don't care about cleaning up all the spilled white wine" and they say "this is red wine though" and you whine "racist." This is the level of reasoning.
You are race baiting pathetically. Find me a single quote of a US politician supporting the deportation of all illegl immigrants except the white ones can stay. Or even find me an X post of a random person saying that. It's a totally asinine position nobody holds except in the fantasyland of boogey-strawmen. Even the white nationalists aren't stupid enough to hold that view.
People care about the problems that exist more than made up ones. That's it. It is not the fault of citizens of a country what color the illegal immigrants there are or aren't and how politically correct or incorrect that makes you for being opposed to breaking the law.
Do you know why Haitians and Venezuelans are topical? It's not because they are this or that color. It's because Biden launched a parole program called CHNV. Do you know what that stands for? Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela. That's why you find stronger opposition to those migrants than to ones from Malta and Singapore because Biden didn't bring in a million of them without asking and without a plan and with questionable consequences. Not because illegals from Singapore are white so they're okay illegals, of course. But you didn't ask me about Singapore. You asked me about Sweden. Because who is the one making this about race. It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them, that have no problems in life, and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture. The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred. That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from. You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes, you applaud with both hands. And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will. People are fine with immigration of people not like them. There’s tons of foreign students in our universities, foreigners working in tech, Filipinos working in healthcare, etc. it’s almost like people take issue with millions of people flooding through a porous border and the skin color doesn’t matter so much. Do you believe that if Springfield had 20k swedes we'd hear cries of "They're eating our goldfish"? People are obviously not fine with immigration of people not like them. Do these count? Because I actually could see it... 100%. Swedes just out there being weird and eating gold fish. Shouting at each other in their bork de bork bork language. Lock ur fishbowls. I found this unreasonably funny. But yeah, talk about broad strokes, in any other context BJ would have a problem with the intellectual dishonesty involved in making too general a statement about this or that thing he feels like being contrarian about, but now that we're talking about illegal immigration, a subject where you have to bury your head in the sand to miss the latent racism, suddenly everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced, and nobody has an issue with people from different ethnicities and different walks of life, and all the problems they have with immigrants are all perfectly justified. Right-O! 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. The reason why people argue that is because the biggest headlines, created by many Republican leaders, are indeed nothing more than racist and xenophobic attacks on these immigrants (legal or illegal). Most conservative leaders are lying about what immigrants are doing to our country, simply labeling them as rapists and murderers and pet-stealers and pet-eaters and fundamentally evil human beings and being-smuggled-in-to-our-country-so-that-they-can-become-illegal-Democratic-voters. It's obvious fearmongering and hatemongering, and it's unjustified. If Trump and Vance and other Republicans had focused primarily on truthful concerns regarding negative impacts that immigrants may have on local economies (or whatever the real problems are), then the conversation would be about those. But those legitimate concerns rarely appear, because they aren't the usual sensationalist bullshit that goes viral with Trump and Fox News. In the middle of the discussion about Springfield I posted a graph showing that violent crime had more than doubled in Springfield since 2019 which was predictably ignored. There's lots of headlines about immigration and I doubt you're just getting the pet-eating ones. If you are you should broaden your reading material. Of course it's easiest to argue that Hatians aren't eating cats but it would be a refreshing change of pace if we went after each other's strongest arguments. If you want to agree that Biden's handling of the border is disastrous and also Trump is an old white racist asshole then I'm happy to do that as well.
Theres no detail there in your springfield numbers. Did crime by haitians account for the doubling? What if it was crime AGAINST haitians? How do we know unless we have the details?
|
On September 28 2024 17:41 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2024 12:29 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 19:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 12:54 NewSunshine wrote:On September 27 2024 11:17 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 09:46 micronesia wrote:On September 27 2024 09:11 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 08:40 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
[quote]
It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them, that have no problems in life, and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture.
The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred.
That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from.
You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes, you applaud with both hands.
And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will. People are fine with immigration of people not like them. There’s tons of foreign students in our universities, foreigners working in tech, Filipinos working in healthcare, etc. it’s almost like people take issue with millions of people flooding through a porous border and the skin color doesn’t matter so much. Do you believe that if Springfield had 20k swedes we'd hear cries of "They're eating our goldfish"? People are obviously not fine with immigration of people not like them. Do these count? Because I actually could see it... 100%. Swedes just out there being weird and eating gold fish. Shouting at each other in their bork de bork bork language. Lock ur fishbowls. I found this unreasonably funny. But yeah, talk about broad strokes, in any other context BJ would have a problem with the intellectual dishonesty involved in making too general a statement about this or that thing he feels like being contrarian about, but now that we're talking about illegal immigration, a subject where you have to bury your head in the sand to miss the latent racism, suddenly everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced, and nobody has an issue with people from different ethnicities and different walks of life, and all the problems they have with immigrants are all perfectly justified. Right-O! 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. The reason why people argue that is because the biggest headlines, created by many Republican leaders, are indeed nothing more than racist and xenophobic attacks on these immigrants (legal or illegal). Most conservative leaders are lying about what immigrants are doing to our country, simply labeling them as rapists and murderers and pet-stealers and pet-eaters and fundamentally evil human beings and being-smuggled-in-to-our-country-so-that-they-can-become-illegal-Democratic-voters. It's obvious fearmongering and hatemongering, and it's unjustified. If Trump and Vance and other Republicans had focused primarily on truthful concerns regarding negative impacts that immigrants may have on local economies (or whatever the real problems are), then the conversation would be about those. But those legitimate concerns rarely appear, because they aren't the usual sensationalist bullshit that goes viral with Trump and Fox News. In the middle of the discussion about Springfield I posted a graph showing that violent crime had more than doubled in Springfield since 2019 which was predictably ignored. There's lots of headlines about immigration and I doubt you're just getting the pet-eating ones. If you are you should broaden your reading material. Of course it's easiest to argue that Hatians aren't eating cats but it would be a refreshing change of pace if we went after each other's strongest arguments. If you want to agree that Biden's handling of the border is disastrous and also Trump is an old white racist asshole then I'm happy to do that as well. Theres no detail there in your springfield numbers. Did crime by haitians account for the doubling? What if it was crime AGAINST haitians? How do we know unless we have the details?
It's like when conservatives post about how the frequency of violent incidents inside public bathrooms could increase when the trans community can use their preferred bathrooms - as supposed evidence that trans people are the offenders - when in reality they're the victims.
And BJ, of course your premise of Biden's border handling is disagreeable, but then we couldn't also dismantle the other points you're making. For example, the compilation of racist headlines aren't just about the recent Haiti migrant drama; the xenophobic messaging has existed for at least the last 8 years of Trump's anti-immigration speeches. It's hard to take conservatives seriously about the occasional legitimate complaint, when they've been crying wolf forever. And then when those legitimate complaints are actually considered and possibly addressed, Republicans use it as ammunition to fuel their racism again anyway. They're not complaining in good faith.
|
I always find it funny to disregarf about 150 million people as having illegitemate claims or not needing to take seriously because they don't agree with what you see and feel.
Sure, they actually might be claiming ridiculous stuff and not based in reality. But doing this blatently shows you have no understanding how to actually go into a dialogue.
You don't justmake your points over and over if you want to progress and hope for some weird reason they'll suddenly comply. You're just talking to yourself and a wall at that point.
If they don't comply or never will, why engage? Why not just split your country in half? It might actually be the best solution. Idk. Seems ridiculous. Substance on the right is difficult to find, or maybe we're talking two different languages using the same words?
All this to say: if you want meaningful change or an actual conversation, you don't just make the other person feel like you feel superior over them. You make them entrench themselves just that much more. If you want to change opinions, find common ground - that does not mean giving in to their ridiculous assessments - and go from there. Every time I'm seeing these conversations they're just mudslinging and ridiculous rabbit hole rides to "disprove" claims but don't have any relevance to situation or go to the root of these ideologies. It's a waste of time.
@DPB: just in your last post, you use bad faith, ridiculous, illegitemate, xenophobic, racist. How do you feel when someone accuses you of doing this? You'll probably hard disagree, no? How do you know how genuine they are? The bad faith lines have to stop because they're the worst off the cuff line to use in political discourse imo.
|
On September 28 2024 17:41 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2024 12:29 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 19:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 12:54 NewSunshine wrote:On September 27 2024 11:17 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 09:46 micronesia wrote:On September 27 2024 09:11 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 08:40 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 07:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:
[quote]
It’s not race baiting. People are totally fine with immigration as long as it’s people like them, that have no problems in life, and are also priviledged, wealthy, from a western culture.
The moment it’s someone with a different religion, a different skin colour and most importantly, an economically difficult background, there is only rejection, fear mongering and hatred.
That’s where I wonder why you guys have so little empathy, and where that lack comes from.
You have a candidate villfying, demonizing, openly defaming with lies and racist tropes people who come from one of the poorest and most difficult country on earth. And instead of thinking about their lives, their hopes, their misfortunes, you applaud with both hands.
And i don’t get that lack if humanity and i hope i never will. People are fine with immigration of people not like them. There’s tons of foreign students in our universities, foreigners working in tech, Filipinos working in healthcare, etc. it’s almost like people take issue with millions of people flooding through a porous border and the skin color doesn’t matter so much. Do you believe that if Springfield had 20k swedes we'd hear cries of "They're eating our goldfish"? People are obviously not fine with immigration of people not like them. Do these count? Because I actually could see it... 100%. Swedes just out there being weird and eating gold fish. Shouting at each other in their bork de bork bork language. Lock ur fishbowls. I found this unreasonably funny. But yeah, talk about broad strokes, in any other context BJ would have a problem with the intellectual dishonesty involved in making too general a statement about this or that thing he feels like being contrarian about, but now that we're talking about illegal immigration, a subject where you have to bury your head in the sand to miss the latent racism, suddenly everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced, and nobody has an issue with people from different ethnicities and different walks of life, and all the problems they have with immigrants are all perfectly justified. Right-O! 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. The reason why people argue that is because the biggest headlines, created by many Republican leaders, are indeed nothing more than racist and xenophobic attacks on these immigrants (legal or illegal). Most conservative leaders are lying about what immigrants are doing to our country, simply labeling them as rapists and murderers and pet-stealers and pet-eaters and fundamentally evil human beings and being-smuggled-in-to-our-country-so-that-they-can-become-illegal-Democratic-voters. It's obvious fearmongering and hatemongering, and it's unjustified. If Trump and Vance and other Republicans had focused primarily on truthful concerns regarding negative impacts that immigrants may have on local economies (or whatever the real problems are), then the conversation would be about those. But those legitimate concerns rarely appear, because they aren't the usual sensationalist bullshit that goes viral with Trump and Fox News. In the middle of the discussion about Springfield I posted a graph showing that violent crime had more than doubled in Springfield since 2019 which was predictably ignored. There's lots of headlines about immigration and I doubt you're just getting the pet-eating ones. If you are you should broaden your reading material. Of course it's easiest to argue that Hatians aren't eating cats but it would be a refreshing change of pace if we went after each other's strongest arguments. If you want to agree that Biden's handling of the border is disastrous and also Trump is an old white racist asshole then I'm happy to do that as well. Theres no detail there in your springfield numbers. Did crime by haitians account for the doubling? What if it was crime AGAINST haitians? How do we know unless we have the details?
How do we know it’s not the native Swedes committing grenade attacks against the immigrants?
|
On September 28 2024 20:01 Uldridge wrote:
I always find it funny to disregarf about 150 million people as having illegitemate claims or not needing to take seriously because they don't agree with what you see and feel.
Sure, they actually might be claiming ridiculous stuff and not based in reality. But doing this blatently shows you have no understanding how to actually go into a dialogue.
I think most of your post is aimed generally - not just at me - but I'd like to respond with my thoughts. Having a one-on-one, in-person dialogue is vastly different than having online discussions or talking about 150 million people. There are countless ways to approach these kinds of discussions, and in some cases we might discover that the other person has no interest in being open-minded or engaging in good faith, in which case the possibility for progress is essentially over. That goes both ways and in all directions, of course.
You don't justmake your points over and over if you want to progress and hope for some weird reason they'll suddenly comply. You're just talking to yourself and a wall at that point.
If they don't comply or never will, why engage? Why not just split your country in half? It might actually be the best solution. Idk. Seems ridiculous. Substance on the right is difficult to find, or maybe we're talking two different languages using the same words?
I agree with you that substance on the right is difficult to find, and I agree with you that engaging with closed-minded people can be a waste of time. I'm not sure if the best solution is to therefore split the country in half though. There are many liberals living in conservative states, and conservatives living in liberal states. It's not practical to ask people to relocate to other states or parts of the country. Additionally, many on the left are bleeding hearts who would consider it to be immoral to screw over the children of conservative families by leaving them in a situation where education would be defunded, healthcare would be non-existent, vaccines wouldn't be prevalent, women (and then LGBTQ+ and people of color) would have their rights revoked, and the red states would lose their necessary welfare that the blue states have been subsidizing for years.
All this to say: if you want meaningful change or an actual conversation, you don't just make the other person feel like you feel superior over them. You make them entrench themselves just that much more. If you want to change opinions, find common ground - that does not mean giving in to their ridiculous assessments - and go from there.
I agree with you. I think this is harder to do with strangers on the internet than with people you know.
Every time I'm seeing these conversations they're just mudslinging and ridiculous rabbit hole rides to "disprove" claims but don't have any relevance to situation or go to the root of these ideologies. It's a waste of time.
Most of us in this TL thread have some pretty clear positions that we're not willing to back down from, and interpret the news through our individual lenses. I'm not so sure that the latter is necessarily the worst thing ever - it provides context from other people's perspectives - although it's certainly the case that few people will be persuaded in new directions. I consider this thread to be more of a discussion-of-contemporary-issues-with-some-arguing, rather than an official debate or persuasion forum, so I'm not super surprised when a group of posters go down a rabbit hole for a page or two (as long as we eventually move on).
@DPB: just in your last post, you use bad faith, ridiculous, illegitemate, xenophobic, racist. How do you feel when someone accuses you of doing this? You'll probably hard disagree, no? How do you know how genuine they are? The bad faith lines have to stop because they're the worst off the cuff line to use in political discourse imo.
I don't think I've ever had people accuse me of being racist or xenophobic, but people have absolutely criticized my position on certain topics (so I'm sure terms like "bad faith" and "ridiculous" and "illegitimate" are fair game). I'm sure my first instinct would be to get defensive and deny that my perspective is absurd, but if we're having a good-faith conversation, I would make it a point to ask them why they feel that my ideas or wording are so problematic. Then we go from there - maybe they make a valid point and I need to reassess what I thought or how I said it, or maybe there was a misunderstanding, or maybe they're merely projecting, or maybe something else is going on.
To engage with your hypothetical about "racist" and "xenophobic": Suppose Person X makes a racist claim, and then Person Y correctly calls it racist and correctly explains why such a racist claim is inappropriate. I agree with you that Person X can become defensive when hearing their claim (accurately) being described as "racist", and perhaps they become so upset that they completely ignore the valid explanation of why it's racist, and choose to retain that racist position no matter what. Certain language can be triggering for certain people and cause them to shut down, so in some cases it can make more sense to describe the problematic issue without using the (again, accurate) labels of "racist" or "xenophobic". There's definitely a trade-off, though, because then we might get to a point where we can't directly engage with matters of prejudice, systemic racism, and other injustices because we're spending too much time trying to treat the snowflakey offenders with kid gloves. And, furthermore, if everyone keeps correctly explaining to Person X why Person X is wrong and being racist, at what point do we hold Person X accountable and expect Person X to realize that they are being the problem, and not everyone else?
|
On September 28 2024 20:55 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2024 17:41 Sadist wrote:On September 28 2024 12:29 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 19:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2024 19:17 BlackJack wrote:On September 27 2024 12:54 NewSunshine wrote:On September 27 2024 11:17 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 09:46 micronesia wrote:On September 27 2024 09:11 Fleetfeet wrote:On September 27 2024 08:40 BlackJack wrote:
[quote]
People are fine with immigration of people not like them. There’s tons of foreign students in our universities, foreigners working in tech, Filipinos working in healthcare, etc. it’s almost like people take issue with millions of people flooding through a porous border and the skin color doesn’t matter so much. Do you believe that if Springfield had 20k swedes we'd hear cries of "They're eating our goldfish"? People are obviously not fine with immigration of people not like them. Do these count? Because I actually could see it... 100%. Swedes just out there being weird and eating gold fish. Shouting at each other in their bork de bork bork language. Lock ur fishbowls. I found this unreasonably funny. But yeah, talk about broad strokes, in any other context BJ would have a problem with the intellectual dishonesty involved in making too general a statement about this or that thing he feels like being contrarian about, but now that we're talking about illegal immigration, a subject where you have to bury your head in the sand to miss the latent racism, suddenly everyone is perfectly rational and unprejudiced, and nobody has an issue with people from different ethnicities and different walks of life, and all the problems they have with immigrants are all perfectly justified. Right-O! 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. The reason why people argue that is because the biggest headlines, created by many Republican leaders, are indeed nothing more than racist and xenophobic attacks on these immigrants (legal or illegal). Most conservative leaders are lying about what immigrants are doing to our country, simply labeling them as rapists and murderers and pet-stealers and pet-eaters and fundamentally evil human beings and being-smuggled-in-to-our-country-so-that-they-can-become-illegal-Democratic-voters. It's obvious fearmongering and hatemongering, and it's unjustified. If Trump and Vance and other Republicans had focused primarily on truthful concerns regarding negative impacts that immigrants may have on local economies (or whatever the real problems are), then the conversation would be about those. But those legitimate concerns rarely appear, because they aren't the usual sensationalist bullshit that goes viral with Trump and Fox News. In the middle of the discussion about Springfield I posted a graph showing that violent crime had more than doubled in Springfield since 2019 which was predictably ignored. There's lots of headlines about immigration and I doubt you're just getting the pet-eating ones. If you are you should broaden your reading material. Of course it's easiest to argue that Hatians aren't eating cats but it would be a refreshing change of pace if we went after each other's strongest arguments. If you want to agree that Biden's handling of the border is disastrous and also Trump is an old white racist asshole then I'm happy to do that as well. Theres no detail there in your springfield numbers. Did crime by haitians account for the doubling? What if it was crime AGAINST haitians? How do we know unless we have the details? How do we know it’s not the native Swedes committing grenade attacks against the immigrants?
Im just saying the devils in the details. Crime going up and then blaming immigrants with no Pareto chart of whats actually happening is not cool
|
ICE Friday revealed exact stats of illegals known to be criminals, who are allowed by the US government to remain in the US for god knows what reason. 7 million who are known about but allowed to take advantage with total impunity.
The Department of Homeland Security knows of at least 660,000 illegal immigrants at large in the U.S. with criminal records, including 13,000 convicted killers, nearly 16,000 convicted of sexual assault and 56,000 involved with dangerous drugs.
Thousands of other migrants have been charged but not yet convicted of those and other crimes.
They are part of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s “non-detained docket,” a list of more than 7 million illegal immigrants that ICE is supposed to be monitoring as they roam free in the U.S.
These are known convicts, so you add those charged and fugitives and add in crimes people have committed yet gotten away with so far to approach a tolerated true crime rate. How is this justified again? Perhaps the gambler's fallacy? Those 13,000 murderers have a near zero chance of killing again. You're much more likely to be killed by an innocent person who hasn't killed yet, than by someone who has already murdered someone. The last thing a convicted murderer in the US would want to do is draw attention to themselves by committing a crime - that would be against their fully intact rational sense of self-preservation. I'm sure they are on their best behavior. Or is this because corporatist Democrats need more labor to exploit?
|
given there are an estimated 11-12 million illegal immigrants in the states total, a figure i’m sure you know given all your recent research on the topic, you might consider for a moment that you are misreading your statistic if you think 7 million of them are known criminals. the 7 million is just known ‘illegal immigrants.’
a good time for a reminder that this rate of criminals is far below the rate of criminals for our legal citizens. very far. a useful timely statistic to display how relatively non violent and not criminal most immigrants are. should the bad ones be dealt with? yes of course. are they still much less common per capita than criminals here legally? yep. sure are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
