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 think overstaying a tourist visa by a few days due to unforseen circumstances or something should be treated with leniency. But this isn't that:
Get them all.
Speedy deportation with minimal hassle seems like the best way to handle this. They're no worse off than they would be if they had just left when they were supposed to.
More options
Context Copy link
Agree. And honestly many are probably not bad people who abuse the system so play the “empathy” card. The Twitter algo has been shoving down my throat a 30 year old white Argentinian girl with a bf. Yes as a MAGA person I don’t have a big problem with her staying.
But it’s the NYT labeling enforcing Tourist Visas as not permanent Visas that rubs me the wrong way. It’s mostly their tone we it’s assumed the reader knows this is “obviously a bad thing”.
We have procedures for doing things for a reason. And she only applied for a 6 month tourist Visa not residency. And we did a shorter review of her background for a Visa because it was a contract that she would come visit and leave. It wasn’t an offer of citizenship which if we are offering citizenship we should do a very long review process of her application.
Society does need to have processes that it follows for everything it does. This is just normal process following governance. And NYT tone is basically “Mr. Reader you should clearly understand that enforcing tourist visas to a short visit is clearly proof that Trump is literally Hitler”.
More options
Context Copy link
I think marriage / spousal visas are such a scam in most cases. Just because an 85 IQ citizen decides they want to invite another random person from anywhere in the world into my country, their descendants get to be citizens forever and they can leech off the state for the rest of their lives consequence free (any thresholds for sponsorship are laughably low)? Seems dumb.
I would favor a blanket $200,000 cash charge for sponsoring a fiancée or spouse. Either you have the money or can borrow it, or they’re not coming.
I am a reasonably decent person/worker. I would like to think that I am an asset to my company and my country. Had they required that price to sponsor my wife, I would certainly not have been able to afford it. I would have just figured out a way to get hired/get a visa in a different country, such as hers.
More options
Context Copy link
How many instances do you think are actually IQ 85 citizens inviting "another random person", as opposed to the probably far from random person that they chose to make pivotal to their self-actualisation and life plans? A $200k cash charge would filter out not just 85 IQ citizens with mail-order brides, but the vast majority of native/foreign couples. Do you think your candidate wants to explain to his electorate why they should be denied a freedom that almost everyone in the developed world enjoys?
Yeah, considering my wife is foreign and I had to sponsor her to come to Canada, I am obviously in favor of that remaining an option, but I don't see why not pick the obvious low hanging fruit that would dramatically slow down or stop chain migration: increase the delay between sponsorships, increase the delay between citizenship and first sponsorship. Sponsoring a family member or spouse for immigration is not a right, it's a privilege, even for natives-born citizens, let alone naturalized ones, and it's perfectly proper for a country that feels that this privilege is being abused to change the parameters of it.
The sponsorship process took, for us, about a year and a half. Here it takes 3-5 years from residence to citizenship, that means that within 5 years of securing their way here, someone could be sponsoring another migrant (and their dependants). If there were a 10 year delay period from citizenship to being able to sponsor a family member, the whole process would be 15 years; I think that would discourage a lot of it. It would probably redirect a lot of chain migration towards countries that allow it faster. Even if they still plan to do it, you've reduced by a factor of three the speed at which it happens. Of course, if I could trust the bureaucrats doing the filtering, exceptions on humanitarian grounds could be allowed, but as of now I don't trust them, so I would rather not allow it.
More options
Context Copy link
He’s almost certainly right that chain migration vastly trumps that now. It’s some Colombian family slow immigrating their entire family to the US versus an American bringing a girl home now. Sometimes they even just do it for money and the marriage is fake. There is an active market for that in Miami.
Trump importing a foreign eastern mail order bride is a very small part of the market.
We’ve already imported the 15% of non-Americans who can now bring in their local ties. It’s not foreign brides being brought in any more. It’s Ilhan Omar bringing in her brother.
In which case money isn’t even the right metric but it would filter out a lot.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You only feel this way because you don’t like a lot of the current immigration to this country and chain migration. If it was a Heritage American bringing back even the occasional slightly brown girl you would feel this way. Which I agree with.
In practice your probably fine with the Family Guy immigration (system)[https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/family-guy-skin-color-chart]
There is some talk that with increasing migration that country of origin easy visas won’t exists anymore and everyone will have to be screened.
We probably should get rid of spousal citizenship at this point. And its because it brings in people I don’t want and not some Southern Boy in the military bringing back a German wife.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link