This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I am very pro-mass deportation but it seems nearly impossible to do at scale in practice with current laws regardless of the money/political capital thrown at it. I understand that we haven’t even really been trying to enforce immigration laws and have in fact been showering illegal immigrants with money and benefits, but even if we stop all of that, I don’t think we can make a serious dent in the illegal immigrant population.
I’m Jose Gonzalez from Mexico, I cross the border illegally without being apprehended, and go live at my cousins apartment in El Paso. I work as a day laborer paid in cash, don’t have a bank account, and have never had a formal interaction with the state where my fingerprints or anything were taken. ICE raids my workplace and I tell them I’m Jose Gonzalez, I’m a US citizen, and I don’t say another word the whole time. How could they affirmatively prove that I’m not? I don’t understand how anyone who wasn’t apprehended and fingerprinted at the border can be deported without significant time being put into an investigation. What’s the way around this unless we can change the law so that the burden of proof is on the individual to prove citizenship?
It seems possible that a lot of the recent wave that claimed asylum could be deported, but I’d imagine that still leaves ~5-10 million who did it the old fashioned way. I think the only way to seriously mass deport is to make it impossible to work as a non-citizen, which would be massively disruptive to agriculture, restaurants, construction etc. in the short term and would be extremely difficult and probably have costly effects to the economy (as far as the costs of compliance for small businesses, not strawberries being more expensive) to enforce perpetually.
Like, on the spot? Nobody carries around proof of citizenship.
Also, this is such a “be careful what you wish for” sort of thing.
Conservatives are now pushing for random passport/citizenship spot checks as you’re walking down the street, that’s what “freedom” and america means to you?
Don’t have immediate proof of citizenship, get detained? Who cares if you have an American accent, we can never be too sure and that can be faked. Russian spies go through strict accent training and speak just like you and I.
“If you’ve got nothing to hide, you got nothing to fear” lmao
Do you believe that Conservatism is a live political force? Do you believe America is a live political entity? The Constitution? In what meaningful sense would any of these be true?
I think you perhaps should consider taking a few steps back and reassessing the realities of the present situation.
This is the law in Japan for any non-Japanese. You must carry proof of your status at all times--the 外国人登録証 or popularly-known "gaijin card," which indicates your visa status. Everyone here who stays longer than 3 months gets one (students, those employed, etc.) except maybe diplomats. This is in lieu of carrying your passport, which visitors (under 3 months) are required to do. In the US, if I'm not mistaken, visitors can carry a paper photocopy of their (foreign) passports. Those who are born here but are not Japanese (e.g. Zainichi Koreans) have a 特別永住者証明書 card or "special permanent residency" card that they also must carry.
That said, Japanese nationals are not required to do this. The fact that all Japanese do not look exactly alike aside, it is obviously different in the US to some degree--American citizens cannot be easily dentified simply on what they look like (though jeans and a t-shirt isn't a bad profiling protocol). I would personally be at least wary of a law that by default would require everyone to carry not just ID but proof-of-citizenship.
"Reassessing the realities of the present situation" is a vague pronouncement, of the kind that is not your habit. It's also not a phrase that engenders trust. We should at least acknowledge the fact that all manner of shackles can be added in the name of "realities of the situation."
I feel like this is pretty standard for all the non-US countries I've visited worldwide, at least on paper. I will admit to, say, going for a run and leaving my passport at the hotel, but in theory I've been required to carry it with me at all times. As far as I know, this is true in the US too: green card holders are supposed to carry it with them at all times, and visitors are supposed to carry their passports, although citizens are not required to do so (but if you are carrying such ID, you may be compelled to display it). Actual checks seem less frequent outside of ports of entry (and the occasional border patrol checkpoint further from the border).
On one hand, I respect the American tradition of civil liberties, but on the other I have trouble being alarmed at backsliding into fascism by adopting policies that checks notes align with every other first world country.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link