site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 31, 2025

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.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I do not see any reason why the government could not make an identical argument if an "administrative error" meant they deported a United States citizen.

Here's a small hint, U.S. Citizens are 'owed' certain 'duties' by 'their' (key word) Government. Non-citizens (once they've been determined to be such) are not.

Here's the actual Federal Law on the matter:

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title22/chapter23&edition=prelim

And the quote:

§1731. Protection to naturalized citizens abroad

All naturalized citizens of the United States while in foreign countries are entitled to and shall receive from this Government the same protection of persons and property which is accorded to native-born citizens.

Bonus points:

§1732. Release of citizens imprisoned by foreign governments

Whenever it is made known to the President that any citizen of the United States has been unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority of any foreign government, it shall be the duty of the President forthwith to demand of that government the reasons of such imprisonment; and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation of the rights of American citizenship, the President shall forthwith demand the release of such citizen...

Granted, what this looks like in practice is up for debate. What does "unjustly deprived" mean?


I'll reiterate the point I already made that I think the only way the Administration gets any heavy pushback on these actions is if they accidentally deport an actual U.S. citizen, who is then tangibly, physically harmed or killed while in custody, where-ever that is.

I actually agree that these measures are pretty draconian, but its hard to feel like "due process" is a major concern.

It'd be MUCH, MUCH easier to get Due Process if these folks, you know, followed the process and entered the country via the channels established to keep track of them and grant them permission to be here, so they can have a 'known' status.

"I intentionally skipped the procedural steps that would have established my right to stay in the country, but don't you DARE skip the procedural steps that would delay my inevitable removal from the country" is not a winning argument, I daresay.

While I am always reluctant to grant the government any additional powers, I do have to agree with this due process take. Due process only exists if the parties involved sign on to the process. If you are not going to bother to legally arrive, the government should not have to legally bother to deport you, just pack you up and ship you home.

What about asylum seekers who go through the legal port of entry instead of sneaking in? Are they owed due process?

Yes, that is the proper process, and they are owed due process. The "credible fear" exception that has become the standard response in recent years is so transparently abused that it should be done away with entirely.

I asked that because apparently one such refugee got deported to El Salvador who was such a legal asylum seeker. He had a mom and dad tattoo that apparently made him get kicked out

Did he get kicked out after being admitted, or was his claim processed and rejected?

It was in the process of being approved or not

So, if his application got rejected for this reason, that's pretty dumb, but not quite the same thing as grabbing a dude who went in legally, was accepted, and then got deported.

True. I think the media is trying to blow these cases up to gain public sympathy. So far it seems to be failing as polls show voters approve of Trump on illegal immigration