All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[Malvolio]

And here's Liz Cheney making an ass of herself by trying to school AOC about concentration camps.

Just because it's not as awful and horrific as the worst concentration camps in all of history doesn't mean that it's not a concentration camp.

[JackDaw]

Literally none of that has to do with whether or not we're running concentration camps.

We are. No amount semantic gameplaying will change that.

The conditions the people are being kept in are unacceptable and should be radically improved.

But I still suspect that most of the people attempting to come into USA are economic migrants seeking to improve their lives (as I I might do myself in their circumstances!) rather than asylum seekers in considerable life danger in their own country.

For that reason I would accept USA has a legitimate case for incarcerating them while their asylum status is established one way or the other.

I also struggle to see any substantial ethical difference between this and Guantanamo Bay...where people were again held for years in poor conditions without a fair trial.

[numberthirty]

Right? The dictionary, the experts, survivors/relatives of survivors of the holocaust and Japanese internment and the historians all agree that these are concentration camps.


B-b-but some asylum seekers might be lying or something!

While I'm not judging anyone's take on this(because I think that this is a lot like saying "Treason"), I do feel like this needs to be pointed out.

- https://www.britannica.com/topic/concentration-camp

Concentration camp, internment centre for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security, exploitation, or punishment, usually by executive decree or military order. Persons are placed in such camps often on the basis of identification with a particular ethnic or political group rather than as individuals and without benefit either of indictment or fair trial. Concentration camps are to be distinguished from prisons interning persons lawfully convicted of civil crimes and from prisoner-of-war camps in which captured military personnel are held under the laws of war. They are also to be distinguished from refugee camps or detention and relocation centres for the temporary accommodation of large numbers of displaced persons.

[Tendrin]

While I'm not judging anyone's take on this(because I think that this is a lot like saying "Treason"), I do feel like this needs to be pointed out.

- https://www.britannica.com/topic/concentration-camp

Pretty much everyone disagrees with you. They are concentration camps, but hey, feel free to find a way to 'just point things out' that deflect from the fact that they're concentration camps somehow, even when the rest of the definition agrees that they're concentration camps, since these are not 'refugee' camps or mere 'detention and relocation centeres'. :P

[numberthirty]

Pretty much everyone disagrees with you. They are concentration camps, but hey, feel free to find a way to 'just point things out' that deflect from the fact that they're concentration camps somehow, even when the rest of the definition agrees that they're concentration camps.

I get that plenty of folks feel that way.

That said, "The dictionary definition backs me up..." doesn't really work when Britannica points out that detention/relocation/refugee centers are not the same as a concentration camp.

[Tendrin]

The conditions the people are being kept in are unacceptable and should be radically improved.

This always happens in camps like this. It's why they're a bad idea.

But I still suspect that most of the people attempting to come into USA are economic migrants seeking to improve their lives (as I I might do myself in their circumstances!) rather than asylum seekers in considerable life danger in their own country.

Well, that's nice. If we had funded an adequate system with reasonable protocols and not based one in white supremacy, maybe this would matter.

For that reason I would accept USA has a legitimate case for incarcerating them while their asylum status is established one way or the other.

We don't /need/ to detain them in most of these cases. We're doing so largely as a 'deterrent' and a 'show of force' and, of course, white supremacy.

I also struggle to see any substantial ethical difference between this and Guantanamo Bay...where people were again held for years in poor conditions without a fair trial.

we've wanted to do away with that too. What's your point?

[Tendrin]

I get that plenty of folks feel that way.

That said, "The dictionary definition backs me up..." doesn't really work when Britannica points out that detention/relocation/refugee centers are not the same as a concentration camp.

Except it does because that part of the statement doesn't matter to the rest. These /aren't/ refugee or temporary relocation centers. The implications there are not in play.

[JackDaw]

This always happens in camps like this. It's why they're a bad idea.


Well, that's nice. If we had funded an adequate system with reasonable protocols and not based one in white supremacy, maybe this would matter.

We don't /need/ to detain them in most of these cases. We're doing so largely as a 'deterrent' and a 'show of force' and, of course, white supremacy.




we've wanted to do away with that too. What's your point?

The point about Guantanamo Bay...where a universally respected democratic President came in on a mandate to clear up position quickly...but actually allowed it to continue for years...is that in reality it’s often incredibly difficult or impossible to actually clear up things, rather than just say “we want things to be better”.

For what it’s worth I think USA...a large country with good employment levels and fairly low social benefits could just allow the immigrants in. But there again , I’m not a USA citizen whose job prospects, etc might well suffer by allowing immigrants in.

Any country has a right to control immigration into it, and pragmatically that does in some circumstances involve imposing some deterrents...I’d say its a judgment call when to impose sanctions (such as incarceration while asylum status is determined) rather than something that is completely unethical to do.

[aja_christopher]

Any country has a right to control immigration into it, and pragmatically that does in some circumstances involve imposing some deterrents.

You're dancing around what the Republicans are actually doing -- "deterrence" shouldn't include the mandatory separation of families or forcing asylum seekers to live in inhumane conditions indefinitely.

[aja_christopher]

"Laura Ingraham: Migrant child detention centers 'essentially summer camps'"

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...y-summer-camps

[numberthirty]

The point about Guantanamo Bay...where a universally respected democratic President came in on a mandate to clear up position quickly...but actually allowed it to continue for years...is that in reality it’s often incredibly difficult or impossible to actually clear up things, rather than just say “we want things to be better”.

For what it’s worth I think USA...a large country with good employment levels and fairly low social benefits could just allow the immigrants in. But there again , I’m not a USA citizen whose job prospects, etc might well suffer by allowing immigrants in.

Any country has a right to control immigration into it, and pragmatically that does in some circumstances involve imposing some deterrents...I’d say its a judgment call when to impose sanctions (such as incarceration while asylum status is determined) rather than something that is completely unethical to do.

Just to point this out...

In the US, there are regular news stories on "Migrant Caravans..." moving up through South America and Mexico. Let's just go on the assumption that all of that reporting is on the level.

As far as I can tell, there is almost no effort to actually point the reality out to folks who are making that journey. It's not like we don't live in a world where you could store US news reports of what the reality is and find a way to get it to folks who seem to think that it is as simple as showing up.

If no effort is going into any serious attempt at leveling with folks who have a perfectly logical reason to leave their home countries, it's kind of hard to take talk of reasonable deterrents seriously.

Never mind that current(and past) US policy plays a large part in how those countries wound up in the shape that they are in.

[PwrdOn]

The point about Guantanamo Bay...where a universally respected democratic President came in on a mandate to clear up position quickly...but actually allowed it to continue for years...is that in reality it’s often incredibly difficult or impossible to actually clear up things, rather than just say “we want things to be better”.

For what it’s worth I think USA...a large country with good employment levels and fairly low social benefits could just allow the immigrants in. But there again , I’m not a USA citizen whose job prospects, etc might well suffer by allowing immigrants in.

Any country has a right to control immigration into it, and pragmatically that does in some circumstances involve imposing some deterrents...I’d say its a judgment call when to impose sanctions (such as incarceration while asylum status is determined) rather than something that is completely unethical to do.

Guantanamo Bay is actually sort of an extreme example of what happens in our prison system generally. Most of the people detained there were probably not dangerously violent radicals, but after being beaten and tortured for so many years you can bet that most of them hate America a whole lot more than they did when they came in, and so simply releasing them is no longer feasible. The same is true in a lot of our prisoners stateside, many of them are really just teenage wannabes who got mixed up with the wrong crowd and wanted to prove how tough they were, but weren't really a genuine threat to anyone. But you stick them in the kind of insane environment that exists in our prisons, and over time a lot of them do turn into violent psychopaths who will be a menace to society if released, so that essentially the prison system is creating the exact problem it's supposed to be stopping.

As far as immigration goes, the US could absolutely take in way more immigrants than we currently are, because most of them do not really compete with locals for jobs and generally contribute more in taxes than they take in services. Now, there's a lot you could say about how it's unsustainable for our economy to continually rely on bringing in cheap labor to do dirty jobs that American citizens refuse to do, but that's not really what Republicans are concerned about, because when's the last time they gave a **** about sustainability? The real existential threat in their minds is the possibility that a flood of new immigrants combined with higher birth rates compared to white Americans will erode the monopoly that white people have on wealth and power in this country. That's also the same reason that they hated Obama so much, even though by any objective account he was pretty moderate and hardly some leftist ideologue. We've spent our entire history trying to pretend to be the standard bearer for freedom and democracy, while at the same time denying those rights to anybody who doesn't fit the mold of what a "proper" American should be, the difference now is that those "real Americans" will soon be in the minority, so that the rest of us will have a chance to pick leaders and policies that suit our interests, and this prospect terrifies the GOP.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Donald Trump Officially Launches 2020 Reelection Campaign In Orlando

The president has planned to run for a second term since his inauguration. And he probably longs to find a way to stay in the Oval Office for life. Meanwhile....

Ex-GOP Congressman David Jolly Rips Donald Trump’s ‘Tired, Lazy’ 2020 Reelection Launch

Then there's this:

**********

Orlando Sentinel Endorses ‘Not Donald Trump’ Just Hours Before His Florida Rally

An editorial said “there’s no point pretending we would ever recommend that readers vote for Trump” because “after 2½ years we’ve seen enough.” Talk about a biting commentary!

**********

Republicans Are Freaking Out Over Deceased Gerrymandering Expert’s Files

Lawyers representing North Carolina Republicans said lawyers representing Common Cause obtained the information unethically. Caught with their hands in the figurative cookie jar, the GOP resorts to an old stratagem....sue opponents out the wazoo!

**********

Senate Leaders Agree On Funding Deal For Refugee Housing And Care

Sen. Mitch McConnell and other lawmakers agreed on a $4.6 billion deal to house and care for immigrant refugees crossing the Mexico border. How much you wanna bet Trump vetoes the measure because it isn't cruel and brutal to immigrants?

**********

Father Of Sandy Hook Victim Wins Defamation Suit Against Hoaxers

Lenny Pozner’s 6-year-old son Noah died in the shooting. Two authors wrote a book saying it never happened. GOOD! Hitting those bastards in the wallet is the only way to end this hoax madness.

[Mister Mets]

I understand what you mean here, however your arguments imply you're fine with them getting this mistreatment as long as they aren't here legally. It also jokingly sounds like you support undocumented mistreatment.



The GoP you support is slashing funding for the camps for both children and adults, and moving them to military areas less subject to oversight. They cherry picked the ones who designed and built the facilities that 'weren't meant' to hold that many people, and more and more people are dying in these camps as well.

I just meant that no one deserved the level of mistreatment that has been described.

I'll also add that one potential solution is the current deal the Trump administration seems to be getting with Mexico to get Mexico to be considered a safe harbor, which means that anyone seeking asylum is obligated to do so there. This has several benefits. The cost of living is cheaper in Mexico; the right thing for the US to do would be to increase federal aid in Mexico to cover their costs for people who would otherwise be in the United States. It's also better for refugees if they settle close to their homeland as that makes it easier to return when the situation is no longer as precarious.

It's not "creep" Mets -- it's the literal definition of what they are as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary.

Scholars and historians also agree that they are concentration camps but here you are trying to argue against facts again, just because you disagree with them due to personal politics.

It speaks volumes about both you and your party that you can't even call them what the dictionary says they are: concentration camps.

Is every prison a concentration camp?

[Mister Mets]

The conditions the people are being kept in are unacceptable and should be radically improved.

But I still suspect that most of the people attempting to come into USA are economic migrants seeking to improve their lives (as I I might do myself in their circumstances!) rather than asylum seekers in considerable life danger in their own country.

For that reason I would accept USA has a legitimate case for incarcerating them while their asylum status is established one way or the other.

I also struggle to see any substantial ethical difference between this and Guantanamo Bay...where people were again held for years in poor conditions without a fair trial.

Guantanamo was different.

You had people accused of crimes kept against their will for years.

They were generally taken against their will from their residences. The decision to move them to Guantanamo is also part of an effort to exploit legal loopholes.

One of those areas they're using is literally the same base as for the Japanese-American /concentration camp/.

It was also used the house migrants under the Obama administration.

https://q13fox.com/2019/06/13/oklaho...ternment-camp/

I did address this point earlier.

There's a point that the optics are bad, and I said I'll agree that they don't care that much about optics, although they shouldn't. An argument about optics essentially ignores the important things, and suggests time and money be wasted on something insubstantial. There is also the point that another way to frame it is that this controversial thing is the same thing Obama did.

I also said that just because two things happen in the same location doesn't mean it's the same thing.

There are areas that are Revolutionary War/ Civil War battlefields. It doesn't mean a modern argument about politics between residents there is an indication of another war.