@Amadan's banner p

Amadan

Letting the hate flow through me

10 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 297

Amadan

Letting the hate flow through me

10 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 297

Verified Email

This sudden received indisputable wisdom that going after the employers is the best and only reasonable way to do anything about illegal immigration and, as a result, going directly after illegal immmigrants is cruel and should be verboten is not credible.

Granting somewhere on the Internet someone has probably said this, this looks like a straw man to me.

You and @crushedoranges -

One of my least favorite things is looking at a thread where two people are going at it over some slapfight from weeks or months (sometimes years!) ago. I don't like it when someone comes after me because he wants to renew an argument we had so long ago I barely remember it, and I don't like seeing a bunch of reports because two guys are at it again over some petty shit that they should both just let drop.

What happened was this:

@crushedoranges said "It's understandable that someone who keeps getting called a Nazi will eventually say 'Okay fine, I'm a Nazi.'" You said: "So you're a Nazi then?"

And you've both been going at each other unnecessarily ever since, crushedoranges angry that you called him a Nazi (which you didn't, really, you were just being snarky and trying to score a zinger), you indignant that he said it's okay to be a Nazi (which he didn't, really, he was talking about a natural human reaction to someone constantly accusing you of being something you're not).

IMO, you are both being deliberately obtuse in refusing to see what the other one is really saying, but it doesn't matter. Let it go.

Actually, Jiro, you are a perfect example of terrible voting and reporting patterns. There are few long-timers on the Motte with a worse history of bad faith posting, bad faith reporting, and generally taking a reflexive conflict theory approach to any post. "If it supports my tribe, it is good. If it advocates for any member of my outgroup, it is bad and should not exist."

You are of course allowed to upvote or downvote a post for any reason you like. We would prefer people actually vote according to the quality of the argument and whether it contributes anything interesting or new to the discussion (even if you disagree with the post!), rather than using it as an Agree/Disagree button, but most people do the latter. We would really prefer people not use the Report button to call the mods' attention to posts, presumably with the intent that we should warn or ban someone, because you don't like their opinion.

A silly mod score doesn't memory hole an X times reported AAQC post or hide it from the editorial review process, I hope.

It does not. The janny score gives us some community feedback, but mods make the final decision.

That is not my experience, though I admit I don't exactly hang around with the Hasan Piker fan club. Mostly what I see in the way of insults is they are evil and devoid of human feelings, or they are stupid and uneducated. The most "sexual" common insult is claims that their guns/SUVs/McMansions/etc. are compensating for small dicks.

Dunno where you see all this queer talk. Maybe you are deeper in leftist circles than I am.

Interestingly, this post has received 3 AAQC nominations. (I'm frankly surprised there have been no "boo outgroup" or "antagonistic" reports-not that I think it was boo outgroup or antagonistic, just that a post going against the popular grain here usually gets those with the speed of a hammer tapping the femoral nerve.) However, because it is in the mod queue, it's also in the volunteer mod queue (which does not reveal to the volunteer jannies whether it's in the queue for AAQCs or negative reports or both).

It's currently sitting at a "Bad" rating--meaning most of the volunteers going through the queue marked it as "Deserves a warning or ban."

Fascinating.

The right equivalent is usually calling leftists pussies, cucks, or otherwise implying they are weak and womanly.

I'm arguing the state should exercise discretion in punishing crimes, not all crimes are equal in severity, and not all criminals are equal in deleteriousness to the public good. This is why we have courts and judges and a Constitution, though I am increasingly persuaded by those who argue that these things are fabulations and all that matters is who's holding the gun. I think that's a very unfortunate descent.

Okay. Lots of people walk around every day committing some form of crime, whether it's minor violations they aren't even aware of or an ongoing illegal behavior. I am just not moved by "EVERY SINGLE DAY THEY WAKE UP ILLEGAL THEY ARE CONSTANTLY IN A STATE OF DOING CRIME!" Yes, that's true. I disagree we should make every one of them eat pavement and boot and there's no other remedy but that, but I understand this is a minority view here. Perhaps if you stretch your capacity for charity a bit you can understand this does not also mean I think everyone should be allowed to COMMIT CRIME EVERY DAY with impunity.

If I inserted the word "otherwise" would you be less distressed?

Yes, of course it's law. It's not all migrants from third world countries, though. There are people who overstayed tourist or student visas, maybe had some kids, and because of various complicated personal situations, couldn't or wouldn't become legalized. Are they breaking the law? Sure. Do I think they made avoidable mistakes at some point? Yes. Should they all be tackled by ICE outside their homes and shipped home in cuffs, even if they've been working and paying taxes for decades? Yeah, I am aware this gives some people a hard-on.

Should every single one of us be subjected to maximal enforcement of every law we have every violated? Okay, fine, you hate illegals. I think illegal immigrants should be prosecuted and deterred. I think people who break other laws should be prosecuted and deterred.

I hate drunk drivers. DUI is bad, I think they absolutely should be punished. Should the police pull every drunk driver out of their car at gunpoint? No. And I don't necessarily think everyone should go to jail on their first DUI, but certainly on their third or fourth. But some people think you should go to prison and lose your driving privileges forever on your first DUI. I disagree with these people. It doesn't mean I think DUI is okay or shouldn't be enforced. Some people think DUI is a minor violation and no big deal and everyone does it. I think those people are wrong too.

I'm curious as to why someone in the country for 26 years who has been compliant with regulations isn't given asylum or citizenship. I'm not doubting the story, but if this is so, then the entire system is backed up worse than a toilet and is clearly not able to handle the applicants it has, on top of the new applications flooding in.

People who came in illegally and lived law-abiding lives for decades are still technically here illegally. There are avenues for such people to pursue naturalization and citizenship, but it's not simple and typically they have to leave the country and spend a minimum number of years outside the US before being allowed to reenter. As abused as asylum laws are, not everyone can just claim asylum ("Really, you were fleeing from the dystopian failed state of... Ireland?") So yeah, there are people who have been here for years, raised families, pay taxes, but technically could be arrested by ICE even now. Reagan issued an amnesty in the 80s which allowed many long-time illegal residents to naturalize, but there hasn't been such an opportunity since.

Yes, well, define it however you like. Rightists and leftists both clearly believe the other side wants to kill you and is dangerous. Good news for the accelerationists -this will become a self-fulfulilling prophecy!

You were never warned for posting too much about Gaza.

From some of the responses, I am not far off.

I don't propose we only slap employers around. I propose that if we don't address employers at all, the effort is largely wasted. Even without a future Democratic administration opening the borders again, employers who are not disincentivized will just continue to encourage illegal immigrants to replace the ones who were deported. The level of violence you'll have to inflict to really scare people out of coming is more than most Americans would stomach.

I mean, I don't think we necessarily need to arrest the CEOs of Tyson Chicken and Walmart (though that would sure send a message). But as it stands, the Trump administration isn't willing to even make a token gesture towards recognizing the actual root cause of illegal immigration. Which makes me think they are fundamentally unserious about addressing it as a real economic/social issue and are mostly engaging in performative theater to please their base.

I would accept such an economic "correction" if they were really serious about it, even if that meant I felt some of the pain. But they won't do it.

That's just "We should maintain an arbeiter class" with extra rationalizations.

You can get people to do any job, reliably, if you pay enough. We don't want to pay enough to entice Americans to do this work. So right now, the only way we can get a reliable workforce willing to do it at acceptable wages is by importing illegal labor. If you actually want to end mass illegal immigration, you have to solve the left side of the equation somehow.

I am... very skeptical that the reason the administration isn't going after businesses is that those darn protesters are tying up too many resources, and if they all went home and localities stopped declaring themselves sanctuary cities, we'd start seeing CEOs arrested.

In theory, it should be simple enough to identify the largest employers with large numbers of illegals on the payrolls, throw the book at one or two of the CEOs, and let incentives take their course.

In theory it should be. Yet no one does this. Why?

For many years, I have heard, ironically from both open borders enthusiasts and even immigration conservatives, that we can't "really" crack down on employers because then crops would rot in the fields and restaurants and hotels would have to close. A tacit admission that we have entire sectors of the economy that are completely dependent on the existence of illegal labor.

I always found this a strange thing to admit, especially from liberals. "So... basically you want an underclass of underpaid, easily exploited labor with no real rights so your grocery bills will stay low?"

It's absolutely true that if we could magically teleport every last illegal out of the country, it would wreck a lot of the economy. In the absence of magical deportation rays, a serious effort to go after businesses depending on illegal labor would over time result in rising costs (you'd have to actually pay American citizens American wages to pick those crops and clean those hotel rooms).

I think this would be a good thing, but it seems to be a price even the so-called anti-immigrationists are not willing to pay.

So instead, what we have right now is absolute fucking theater. Does anyone think all this ICE sturm und drang is really going to result in a meaningful reduction in the number of illegals in the country? Because I'd like to check back in on that in one year, two years, and five years.

Por qué no los dos?

Not gonna lie, I was happy to see that your story was one of sympathy and compassion. From the tone around here lately, I was half-expecting it to end with "I decided 'Fuck this guy, one less illegal is a good thing.'"

The more extreme people on the political left, the kind currently protesting ICE in Minnesota, call people like me “nazis”. Well, if I am a nazi, I am one with a soft heart.

I think the right and the left are increasingly unable to model one another's thinking. I come here and see people who are celebrating violence and clearly want more of it. I get disgusted, go to other places, and see people... celebrating violence and clearly want more of it. Just directed at different people. I think about a reddit (yeah yeah, I know) post I read the other day, where some woman out of the blue texts her brother basically demanding to know "where he stands" on Trump and ICE. No indication that this had been a previous topic of discussion or that he was MAGA, just suddenly she needs to know if he's aligned with her. When he replies with a sort of mealy-mouthed "It's not a black and white issue, but I love you and family over politics," etc. etc., she informs him that she's going no contact with him and his family forever, and immediately tells their mother that he's cut out of his life. He didn't even say he's a Trump supporter (though I guess one could infer it), just that he's not completely on-board with her TDS.

I recently got into an argument here where I said I know very leftist "woke" people, and they are not evil. I was piled on by Motters saying of course they are, they just haven't turned on me yet. Unsurprisingly, I have had similar arguments in left spaces. "I know conservatives/MAGAs, they aren't Nazis, they aren't evil." "Well, you can say that because they don't want to kill you." (I mean, some of y'all do, but...)

It's just... very sad. And tiresome. Thank you for still having a heart.

I hate this place more than anywhere else on the Internet, except all the other places.

This rule isn't new and it's not "my" rule. We don't want low-effort posts. That's not an invitation to violate the spirit of the rule while obeying the letter- the point is not whether you can generate 200 words by yourself or with ChatGPT. The point is we are not a news aggregator, we are not reddit, and taking a little while to reflect on whatever big happening is happening before posting about it would improve the quality of discussion.

Yes, there is going to be discussion about it, and you wanted to be FIRST!!!!

It's not a race. You don't have to wait until there is "substantive truth" but you should wait until you have something more to post than a link. Yes, that means someone else might start a thread before you.

Once again, this is not X and we would prefer people actually wait until they have something substantive to say about breaking news rather than rushing to be the first to start a thread about it.