Trump’s Sadism — and Democrats’ AccomodationismJan 10
“This has been the broader pattern of the Democratic position on immigration over the last decade. In the pursuit of what they call comprehensive immigration reform, the Democrats have persistently accepted the Republican framing of an immigration crisis, and nodded to the need for more enforcement and more deportation, while opposing only the most lunatic excesses of Republican xenophobia, whether it was the Sensenbrenner bill in 2006, Arizona’s SB 1070 in 2010, or Trump’s “beautiful, thirty-foot wall” today.
The result of this accomodationism has been a massive militarization of the Southern border that has caused untold human suffering. It is estimated that over ten thousand people have died crossing the border since Bill Clinton first started constructing a border barrier, the effect of which has been to drive migrants into deeper and more remote parts of the desert as they attempt to cross. Today, border enforcement resembles nothing so much as organized sadism, as Border Patrol agents literally comb through the desert dumping out containers of water they find lest they give succor to thirsty immigrants.
That the Democrats are willing to countenance such brutality, while opposing Trump’s wall as a step too far, is only one of the sad ironies that afflict immigration politics in the United States. The bigger one is that the increasing acceptance of militarized border enforcement in official politics has developed at the same time that public opinion has become less and less xenophobic. In this light, the Trump administration’s contempt for democracy is, in the context of American politics, far less exceptional than liberal pundits would like to think.
This brutality will continue until pro-immigrant public opinion is translated into a political movement capable of confronting both Trump’s Neanderthal xenophobia and the Democrats’ more urbane vision of unmanned drones and seismic sensors. Against both, the Left should pose a simple demand: let them all in.”
- Microsoft hellobybyIllegals are illegal - and accretive to crime rate in volume and per person. Most aren’t refugees and are looking to leech off US welfare system. No thanks, SJWs.
- From the article posted by helloboy:
“The same cannot be said for illegal aliens because virtually all adult, illegal aliens commit felonies in order to procure the documents they need to get jobs, to drive and to obtain other benefits that are restricted to U.S. citizens.”
In other words by criminalizing people migrating to look for jobs or escape a bad situation, the immigration policies lead people to the black market.
We’ve seen this pattern before, it was called the drug war and the war on terror.
1. Create a hysteria around a “crisis”: the war on drugs, the war on terror, the immigration “crisis”.
(The “war on drugs” began before crack was a thing. Immigration rates have been declining. In the case of 9/11, the terror was real, but the state-sponsored/axis-of-evil focus turned out to be all hype.)
2. Use hysteria to demand immediate action.
3. Accuse any politician who agrees about the “crisis” but thinks the status-quo is fine to handle it of supporting “the enemy”.
4. When the repression/invasion doesn’t do anything productive, use that to say... “see we didn’t repress enough” and ask for more repression or funding for repressive agencies.
5. Quietly and tacitly acknowledge overreach a decade later but only ofter the repressive structures begin to crack (prison overcrowding/widespread animosity towards courts and law enforcement; widespread dislike of US military intervention/regional competitors gaining from US strategic errors; and if the wall is built, the cracking might be literal.)
In the meantime, lives are trampled on and the “small-government” types help justify the US becoming a police state.Jan 104
- 1. Xenophobia? - Please get checked with a doctor. He's only talking about illegal immigrants as defined by our constitution
2. People dying? - Well why wouldn't they be happy in Mexico? Why would they not follow the process?
3. Republican stance has always been consistent. Democrats are all over the place on this issue, and their hypocrisy is showing more than ever
4. I'm sorry, but if I die in an accident while coming to your house, how is that your fault? It's my fault for not driving well
Say yay for Open borders and Universal Healthcare.
- 1. Birther issue - How is that xenophobia? Also, the buzz word doesn't apply if you only say it about one particular person. He also said Rosie O'Donnell was ugly. Doesn't mean he hates women. I've watched his first speech. His whole speech was centered around illegal immigration, and he NEVER said all Mexicans are rapists. Muslim ban? It was a specific ban on certain countries only. The 4 most Muslim populated countries were untouched. You call that Muslim ban?
2. Have you read the dead children's parents statements? They were more than satisfied with how ICE treated their kids. They even got a chopper to transfer a kid.
3. Out of topic points. Irrelevant.
4. Not if I'm aware of your situation and I call a special chopper to get you to hospital.
- 1. “They are rapists and some I assume are good people”. If you don’t see how saying a black president was born in Kenya with no evidence is xenophobic i don’t know what to say. The Muslim ban was on countries that had 0 terrorists since 2001.
2. Not according to this guy https://www.google.ca/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/5481070/father-7-year-old-died-border-patrol-custody
3. How so? You were saying Republicans are consistent. I showed you how they absolutely were not.
- Trump’s appeal is his willingness—eagerness—gleefulness!—to mock the ridiculous lies we’ve been incessantly force-fed for the past 19 years (at least) and tell the truth. “Diversity” is not “our strength”; it’s a source of weakness, tension and disunion. America is not a “nation of immigrants”; we are originally a nation of settlers, who later chose to admit immigrants, and later still not to, and who may justly open or close our doors solely at our own discretion, without deference to forced pieties. Immigration today is not “good for the economy”; it undercuts American wages, costs Americans jobs, and reduces Americans’ standard of living. Islam is not a “religion of peace”; it’s a militant faith that exalts conversion by the sword and inspires thousands to acts of terror—and millions more to support and sympathize with terror. “American exceptionalism” does not require, or even encourage, us to democratize the world—a task of which we are in any case incapable. The Iraq War was a strategic and tactical blunder that destroyed a country (however badly governed), destabilized a region, and harmed American interests. The benefits of free trade concentrate at the top (outsize profits) and bottom (cheap panem et circenses); the middle, and especially the working, classes have been hurt by globalization.
- The Preamble to the United States Constitution pledges its purpose to “form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”
The Preamble’s final five words make abundantly clear, there are practical limits to how much good, and for whom, politics can accomplish. The Constitution and the social compact it enshrines are for us—the American people—and not for foreigners, immigrants (except those we choose to welcome), or anyone else. The original state constitutions of Massachusetts and Virginia—twin cradles of the American Revolution—state much the same: “The end of … government is to secure the existence of the body-politic; to protect it; and to furnish the individuals who compose it”; and “government is … instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community.” The same men who declared that “all men are created equal” also, and in virtually the same breath, excluded “all men” from de facto or implicit membership in the American nation.Jan 106
- I’ve never understood the claim that on the one hand, liberty and rights are inherent—not bestowed by government—but on the other hand, that inherency is dependent on where government says a border is and which side one is born on.