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 -
ICE (and CBP - Minneapolis is a joint operation) is arresting every illegal immigrant who comes to its attention, including schoolchildren. They have said they are doing this, the media say they are doing this, and supporters of the operation (including on this forum) say they should be doing this.
The argument about whether it is possible to be out of legal immigration status innocently has been done to death, but if you think the answer is "Yes" then ICE are absolutely rounding up innocents, and this is what the core MAGA vote want. The claim that Trump-era immigration enforcement is focussed on "the worst of the worst" is a lie for the benefit of low-information normies. MAGA think ICE are deporting them all and this is good, Minnesota Nice thinks ICE are deporting them all and this is bad. So mocking the "worst of the worst" lie is an entirely normal thing to do.
Think of the five year olds! It is a nice emotional appeal, but what does it actually mean?
My take on children who are not legally present is that they will either have a illegally present parent or their parents are in another country. It is a pretty weird edge case for one to have a legally present parent but somehow be illegally present themselves. If that is the case, then I 100% would prefer they become naturalized themselves over deportation.
If their parents are in another country, they were effectively kidnapped. They should be recovered and sent back to their parents.
If their parents are not legally present and have a final order of removal, then the child should also be deported with their parent. The fate of staying in the US and going into the foster system is not superior to keeping the child with their parents.
If the child was sent to stay with legally present relatives by their parents in another country, I still think it's better to send them back to their parents. How do we know that both parents consented to this? Otherwise we have to investigate a lot of domestic situations in other countries, which each might have their own custody laws, it's simpler and more ethical to send them back to their parents.
Ideally we would have a lot more family detention centers that look more like kindergartens than Alcatraz. We need a place to put kids and their guardians in a monitored and controlled way while we determine if they are even related to the people bringing them over the border. That would be my ideal. But deporting fewer five year olds seems like an odd goal when actually thought through.
More options
Context Copy link
Certainly ICE is not rounding up innocents. They've mistakenly detained at least a few innocents who (following the activist playbook) refused to identify themselves, but those innocents were released when identified. The illegal immigrants they've arrested, detained and/or deported may not have committed any crimes, but they were not innocent -- they were unlawfully present in the United States, and had orders of removal against them. Arresting them is ICE's job.
And, quite a few of these detained immigrants are also, in fact, serious criminals.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link