|
i just spend a fuckton on mine, but it's worth it imo. the previous one was 20 years old and i figured i need to stop tempting fate by continuing to run it to its limits every summer. e: wrong thread lol Slow News Day fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Mar 24, 2021 |
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 02:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:at what point does it become acceptable to call a facility that is overcrowded to the point of making it impossible to contain the spread of a virulent disease and is run by the kind of people who kick over water stockpiles so that prospective inhabitants of said facility are more likely to die in the desert a "concentration camp" as opposed to a "detention center" You should perhaps bookmark the encyclopedic definition posted above so that you can refer to it whenever you find yourself asking this question.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 05:35
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:"according to webster's dictionary" has never been an acceptable level of discourse in this forum And the below has been? paranoid randroid posted:youre angrier at the terminology than the existence of the camps
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 05:39
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:this is a sincere question - given that we were instructed to "push biden left" as part of the compromise of him being the nominee, shouldn't we be just as angry and forceful with him as we would be under trump Using the term "concentration camp" does not push Joe Biden left, because Joe Biden does not read these forums. Everyone who actually does is very angry, and in one hundred percent agreement with you that the conditions the refugees are subject to are deplorable and unacceptable.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 06:15
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:The Biden admin only contracted hotels for 1200 families. China built an entire hospital in 5 days at the beginning of the pandemic, so your argument of what's actually possible is more liberal handwringing. You can bet your sweet rear end that if tens of thousands of nice white folk from Europe showed up on the southern border needing emergency shelter, we'd be bending over backwards to provide it and the exits wouldn't have bars or armed guards. The component which resulted in 615 people stuffed into a room designed for 32 is racism. The Republicans' racism is loud and the Democrats' racism is quiet. Tens of thousands of nice people from Europe... are you familiar with US history with regards to immigration? Because it sure doesn’t sound like it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 20:52
|
|
|
Lester Shy posted:Sequestering a very important and simple term to one dark corner of history serves to obfuscate ongoing brutality, to the benefit of oppressive regimes everywhere. The claim that asking people to use a different term when discussing something on an online forum "[benefits] oppressive regimes everywhere" is, frankly, laughable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2021 17:02
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I agree, but the tone policing conversation exists to avoid doing that. Multiple people, including mods/IKs, have stated the exact reasons for their objection to a single specific term to describe the refugee centers on the basis that it is needlessly inflammatory since it implies or suggests, intentionally or otherwise, similarities or parallels to genocide. The fact that you are dismissing all of that as merely "tone policing" shows everyone here that you just want to be able to post whatever the hell you want without any consideration whatsoever for the effect it has on others. No, using another term will not lessen the severity of the atrocious and deplorable conditions in refugee centers. No, using another term will not benefit oppressive regimes everywhere. No, using another term will not suddenly make everyone do a one eighty on how they feel about Biden's handling of the situation, because everybody is angry. It will, however, allow us to finally move past this dumb debate, and maybe you should do it on that basis alone if your goal and desire is in fact to discuss conditions, policies, or anything else that has substance?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2021 19:19
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I'm sorry if some people have rigid and specific definitions of certain terms, and may dislike their usage in other contexts. However these are sensitive terms and still applicable and your believe that they have a rigid and specific definition that they do not doesn't mean you get to demand that others accept your definition. These are not slurs, and there's broad disagreement over whether or not they can be used here. The applicability of the term is widely disputed — people have provided sources both for and against. That's why the disagreement exists. Let's not pretend that this an attempt to censor a term whose definition is broadly and universally agreed upon, or a war against an objective and self-evident truth. What I'm saying is that y'all can either stubbornly continue using the term and get called out every time, leading to these derails, or you can simply just use another, synonymous term, of which many exist. In the former scenario, a bunch of people get probated and the thread gets closed in short order. In the latter scenario, we debate matters of actual substance, and in your own head you still get satisfaction from knowing that when you typed out "<synonym of X>", you actually meant "X". Everybody wins.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/march-border-crossing-numbers/2021/04/07/2c252c52-97dd-11eb-8e42-3906c09073f9_story.htmlquote:Border agents took more than 172,000 into custody in March, Biden officials say Said chart:  It is only April and we've had more refugees coming in than the entirety of last year, or the entirety of 2018. And we're well on our way to smash 2019's record by mid-summer.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2021 15:29
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:Biden should do it because Trump proved there's no downside to doing it. Even if you do get blocked by courts you get a free enemy to rile your base up about and an excuse for why you're not doing poo poo, it's a win win! I don't see how you see it as a "win win" because Trump lost both the lawsuits in question, and the election. Sure, his actions riled up his base, but they also riled up Democrats, who first gained control of the House, then the Senate and the WH two years later. In other words, Trump's "imperial" executive style had disastrous consequences for the GOP. There is zero reason for Biden to repeat the same mistakes. Indeed, the only reason one would advocate for it is if they wanted Dems to lose in 2022 and Biden to lose in 2024. I wouldn't put that past some of the folks in this thread, but you, sexpig, should know better.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2021 16:40
|
|
|
Just because the GOP loves authoritarianism and tries to rule by imperial decrees does not mean Dems should do the same. “Dems should ignore labor laws because the GOP is gonna do that the moment they are back in power” is a very shoddy argument. The ends don’t in fact justify the means.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2021 17:55
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:I think 'actually let me tell you what you think' is a pretty huge rear end in a top hat move and that's like 90% of your posting but hey I mean, in all honesty, it would help tremendously if you actually addressed people's arguments rather than repeating the same nonsense like "imperial executive branch". If your argument is "the president shouldn't be inherently bound by the nomination lists of the past president" then fine, make that argument and propose a mechanism to change the law. Suggesting that the president should just ignore the law on the basis that you think it is stupid, and act like a tyrant because that's what the previous president from the opposing party did, is a very intellectually shallow argument and that is why people are responding to you with ridicule.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:the thing you're all forgetting is it's not the law that the president has to loving rubber stamp the nominations of the last guy, presidents of both parties have pulled past administration nominations to agencies under them for literally any reason including 'pft gently caress you you lost', so this handwringing about 'wow you want the president to VIOLATE THE LAW???' is absurd on its own. These are not judicial nominations, these are Justice Department positions.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2021 22:42
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:there were no meaningful consequences, 'trump was mad' is not a meaningful consequence. If it were then the sun rising or birds would have been a crushing blow to trump since I assume he also gets angry at those happening You are wrong, of course. One of the meaningful consequences was that Dems used the Mueller investigation (along with every other scandal and fuckup that Trump managed to cause) to gain control of the House in 2018, which they then successfully used to block most of the rest of his agenda.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Reality Protester posted:Mods, I need help. How am I supposed to argue with this? The same way the rest of us are supposed to argue with this: Reality Protester posted:I think it's true. Be the change you want to see in the thread!
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:Not when Joe signs a bunch of meaningless EOs and occasionally says he hears them and sees them I guess. It's weird how he's taken such strong decisive action on immigration and yet the problem is just getting worse. Really cool how you ignore literally 100% of expert sources and citations that are painstakingly researched, quoted and presented to you, and instead continue to post your cynical, toxic bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2021 05:05
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:hey can you at least explain how 'wave a magic wand' and accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being some secret shadow cabal of posters who runs in to just say we hate biden and be smug is 'good faith' Because you still haven't responded to effort with effort. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2021 17:25
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Incompetence or purposefully doing it the result is the same. Incompetence is defined as lacking the qualities for effective action. How do we know that the crisis at the border has persisted due to the Biden administration's incompetence, as opposed to or at least in part due to lack of resources such as funding and qualified, vetted people? Didn't that last part get raised as a concern literally yesterday or the day before, when some of you complained about how people without proper background checks seem to be put in charge of caring for refugees, and without proper oversight? How does that not scream "lack of resources" to you? Filling the gaps in staffing has been so challenging that other agencies are sending their staff to fill the gaps at HHS/DHS. And you dare chalk everything up to "incompetence"?
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2021 01:43
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Let's look at this a different way. When bad things happen under Biden, the response from you and others with similar opinions seems to essentially be "can you give hard proof that they could have done something to fix this (or that they're not already doing their best to do so)? If no, then it's not fair to blame them." I think this is a fair description. This same standard is very obviously not applied to Republicans, or the actions of governments in countries that we consider Bad. The proof you are asking for has already been provided in the form of extensive lists, written not by advocates or activists or journalists who heard stuff from volunteers or whatever, but by actual immigration lawyers and legal experts who know both the immigration system and the workings of government inside out. These articles have described in detail the positive effects of Biden’s immigration actions to date, as well as areas in which the administration has fallen short. In other words, they have provided an objective and balanced view of what is reasonable and realistic to expect from the executive branch, what has been done and what still needs to be done. You could have gone and read all that and actually learned something, instead of posting this frankly weird diatribe about how Biden is just a terrible person with a terrible history of creating or contributing to these issues. Since you obviously can’t be bothered to do that, perhaps you should at least cease complaining about how the rest of us always rush to Biden’s defense because that’s just a pot-kettle situation and it’s pretty sad.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2021 05:01
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:you're being condescending and dismissive about whistleblowing from people on the ground in an hhs facility, and his "weird diatribe" is actually a great breakdown of why a reasonable person may not give this admin the benefit of the doubt.. you seem more invested in winning at posting than communicating. Contrary to what you may believe, there is no winning or losing at posting. The only thing that matters here is that one side is providing extensive citations written by, again, actual experts, while the other side is ignoring all that and is instead getting on their soapboxes and ranting about how Biden is a terrible person who has not only failed to accomplish anything of value, but does not care or intend to.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2021 06:06
|
|
|
Come on, willa. Complaining about "walls of text that are hard to wade through" — you can't be serious. You realize you're in D&D, surely? Or maybe you took a wrong turn somewhere? Yes, you are indeed expected to read the sources that people painstakingly research and summarize for you. That is what "meet effort with effort" means, and it is an integral part of good faith debate. You shouldn't need a mod to tell you this.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2021 20:36
|
|
|
Y'all ready to hear about some extraordinary cruelty? https://www.dallasnews.com/news/pol...immigrant-kids/ quote:Gov. Greg Abbott orders Texas child-care regulators to yank licenses of facilities housing immigrant kids
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2021 01:28
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:There were alot of claims bandied around. That HHS would protect these kids better than the CPB, that Biden has this, that the material conditions would improve on their own, that this was all temporary, etc etc The other thing we said was that the administration can only do so much without additional funding from Congress.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2021 02:13
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:No one is assuming anything. We are recognizing that Democrats, like Republicans, can only operate in the interests of capital and it is in the interests of capital to have a labor population that will work for next to nothing, has no rights, and can be deported at any time -- but -- this population can't be too big (it can't be normalized and allowed to organize in any meaningful way), nor can it be too small (companies depend on this labor for profit maximization). All illegal immigration issues in America today falls out of this. So basically, your interpretation of the Democratic Party's approach to immigration is this slightly modified dril tweet:  Got it.  But no, the idea that Dems are making decisions on whether a pathway to citizenship should be provided for undocumented immigrants based on what "capital" feels about the size of the labor force is quite the unadulterated conspiracy theory. It also doesn't mesh with reality; in an age when people are quitting their service sector jobs in hordes, you'd think that business owners would want a larger labor pool so as to reduce the leverage of each individual worker. Based on your tinfoil-hat logic, Dems should be falling over each other to give every undocumented immigrant a green card tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
Can we talk about the ridiculousness of this headline for a second? The author browsed Twitter and found tweets by three people, Christina Jiménez (immigration rights organizer), Robert Cruickshank (campaign director at Demand Progress, an NGO that focuses on civil liberties) and Sawyer Hackett (executive director of People First Future, a PAC launched by Julián Castro). And then wrote a story on it in a way that is designed to elicit a certain type of reaction from the target audience. This was quite successful, judging by the latest series of posts from Biden detractors in this last page. Y'all love to talk about manufacturing consent, but perhaps you should be talking about manufacturing outrage instead.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2021 17:52
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:i disagree with this one. Yeah, it's utterly bizarre to hear an immigration attorney rage against expanding immigration courts to address backlogs. I have a couple of buddies who work in immigration law and the several years of backlogs is a source of immense frustration for them and their clients.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2021 18:48
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:It's germane to the topic because if you think class and class conflict actually exists and apply your analysis to the current situation it would suggest that the Democrats will not do anything to meaningfully resolve the crisis at our border, for the reasons I (and others) have laid out here. You might be able to get some reduction of raw cruelty, but probably not much more. The problem with this is that it gives you the ability to move goal posts when needed. No matter what Democrats do, using the above line of reasoning you can always claim that it merely amounts to "some reduction in raw cruelty," rather than anything substantial or praiseworthy, and respond with something along the lines of "...that's nice I guess." This isn't me conjuring things out of thin air either. It happened earlier in this very thread, where someone painstakingly cited, catalogued and summarized the Biden administration's immigration accomplishments in its first 100 days, and the post went mostly ignored, and the one or two posters who begrudgingly acknowledged it (after being repeatedly asked to do so) responded with the equivalent of "okay FINE, it's good that Biden did those (minor) things, but <insert something Biden has not done yet>" I think at this point y'all should just come out and admit that nothing that Democrats can do short of the complete and total abolishment of ICE and the freeing of every detainee in border camps into
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2021 22:35
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:Yes obviously I want the complete and total abolishment of ICE and every detainee in border camps to be given the care and dignity that they deserve as human beings. Yes this administration is only slightly less monstrous than the previous one, as evidenced by (amongst many other things) their not abolishing ICE and the all of the kids that are still in the cages. Yes. Obviously yes. One hundred billion times yes. This stuff is so blisteringly obvious it's insane to consider that I'd be arguing for anything less. You're not serving me up a clever GOTCHA!, this is the stuff I and anyone who is not totally subsumed by the idiotic spectacle of the Pragmatic Democrats Getting Things Done™ believe. What's the alternative? Dance in the streets because the Biden administration is making the minimum possible headway that itself won't even stand up past the 2022 elections the Democrats are bound to lose? No thanks lmao. It wasn't a gotcha attempt, and frankly, it is totally fine to want ICE abolished and the border camps closed. The problem I'm having with your stance, though, is that neither you nor anyone else has, afaict, described any realistic roadmap to getting those things to happen. Earlier in the thread some people posted historical precedents for agencies getting abolished and the different forms those have taken, and discussed the mechanisms for doing so again, but that conversation seems to have gone nowhere. Since this is D&D, perhaps you can post your thoughts on how exactly ICE can be abolished, what should take its place and what that thing should look like, etc.?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2021 00:38
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:The problem you have with my stance is because you don't understand it -- because you can't understand without understanding Marxist class analysis. I can't know "exactly how ICE can be abolished", or the totally bonkers "what thing should take its place and what the thing should look like" (?????) nor should I be expected to. But because I'm not totally captured by the idea that bureaucratic neoliberalism is the highest form of justice to possibly exist I can actually tell you how, in broad strokes, ICE should be dismantled. Shockingly it's the same way every major social or economic concession has been won: an organized movement of the working class that demands it. You may want to study the history of major social and economic movements, then, because the people fighting for those movements actually did a ton of excruciating work and were very thorough with the concessions they wanted. Things like 40 hour workweeks and overtime pay were specific things they demanded from government and capital. They didn't just loudly complain about the general problem of insane work hours and leave the solutions to other people. There are other lessons from those movements. One is that the concessions were won over gradually, usually over a period of many decades. The period from the National Labor Union asking Congress to pass an eight-hour workday law to such a law actually going into effect spanned 74 years (from 1866 until 1940), and progress was made with sweat and blood and tears and lives... and a ton of intellectual work. The other lesson is that there were many defeats along the way, and many approaches were tried. For example, the National Labor Union was a big fan of strikes, but the Knights of Labor discouraged those and instead advocated restructuring society along cooperative lines. Then the movement shifted back to strikes and culminated in the bloody Haymarket Affair, which diminished popular support for organized labor. Then it made a resurgence. And so on. In other words, if you want progress, be patient and do your drat homework. You're free to criticize and express disgust at how the government functions but if you want to be taken seriously then when someone asks you what should be done instead and how, you better have some sort of coherent, well-formulated answer beyond "close the camps, abolish ICE" because then people will correctly point out that it's not that simple and you'll get upset. Like, seriously, you've posted paragraphs and paragraphs of text in this thread arguing for Marxist class analysis or whatever. It's something you have obviously given a lot of thought to. Why don't you apply the same level of effort to better understanding why the problems we have with immigration are so complex and what solutions are actually feasible with the Congress we currently have? What exactly do you hope to accomplish with your constant "oh heh, looks like neither Biden nor his Dem buddies want to solve any of these problems  " style posting?Pentecoastal Elites posted:I don't know what that entails, specifically, in America in 2021. I don't know if that means electing radicals into enough positions that they will actually do something about it, or if it means grassroots organization that foments strikes and other unrest until the government capitulates, or something else I don't understand and can't anticipate. I don't know the precise steps involved here but what I do know is how it's not going to get fixed, which is by jerking each other off when the Biden administration tells us that everything is okay and they're workin' on fixin' it, honest, Jack! You accused me of being disingenuous earlier, yet you're doing the same thing here by claiming that we are "jerking each other off when the Biden administration tells us that everything is okay." Virtually every poster in this thread who can be described as "liberal" (by the leftist definition of the word, that is) has repeatedly expressed tremendous disgust and frustration at Biden administration's falling short of its campaign promises. The difference is that you and your friends claim that this lack of progress is on purpose because neither Democrats nor Joe Biden himself actually care about immigration, and every piece of bad news and Twitter hot take that gets slammed into this thread Pentecoastal Elites posted:The idea that the system we live under can produce justice without an exogenous force demanding that it does is utterly deranged, psychotic optimism and is easily recognized as such by anyone who is not totally dependent on that psychotic optimism to let them think they're a good person who is on the good team and saved democracy by voting for an administration who will continue to do the absolute minimum possible to address honest-to-god no-poo poo humanitarian crisis. Pointing out that the problems are immensely complex and intractable and trying to celebrate whatever wins can be achieved in the short term counts as "psychotic optimism"? What is more likely here is that you spend a lot of time elsewhere on the forums getting mad at Twitter accounts of various prominent liberal figures (who can actually credibly be accused of too much optimism) and then you come into threads like this and assume the same qualities about us. Pentecoastal Elites posted:Thinking that it's not fair that I, some guy on the internet, demand the shuttering of the camps and the dissolution of ice without having a workable plan that is legally viable and politically actionable is, I'm sorry, totally loving insane and is clear evidence that you know that the concentration camps are morally inexcusable but can't acknowledge it because it makes you uncomfortable. Everyone is already doing the best they can possibly do, everything is already as good as it can possibly be. Everything is going to be totally fine, it'll just take a lot of time, you just have to trust in the system! I'm sorry that you believe expecting critics to actually understand the thing they are criticizing and put at least a token amount of effort into figuring out what solutions are actually possible is "totally loving insane" to you. To me, what is totally loving insane is believing that all these... I don't know — tantrums? will accomplish anything other than rile up people you have identified as your ideological opponents because you believe they totally and unquestioningly support the system you're criticizing on the basis that the party they like is in charge. Then again, maybe riling up people here is your actual goal, and these forums are just a place for you to vent your frustrations? Pentecoastal Elites posted:ICE is good, actually? This reminds me of the recent QCS episode where someone claimed that explaining something counts as supporting it and everyone laughed at them. What you're doing here is the same thing: Jarmak pointed out that ICE does way more than immigration-related arrests, things that are actually good like going after human traffickers and weapons smugglers, and your response was a childish and flippant "wow, ICE is good actually???" Like, I genuinely don't understand why you continue to post things like that in this thread. What exactly is your aim?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2021 18:20
|
|
|
Ciprian Maricon posted:It's a bad story I guess and I'm deeply sorry for derailing the breakneck pace of discussion here. It resonated with my experience as an immigrant. Congrats though, you've successfully defended the needlessly cruel immigration apparatus of the United States, maybe you should think carefully about why you're interested in doing that before posting here. From one immigrant to another, let me just say: this is god drat embarrassing. You got owned, and are now trying to turn the tables on the person who owned you by accusing them of being motivated to defend the cruel policies of the administration. Maybe the article you posted, and your motivations behind posting it, are reasons why this thread (and those like it) gets such low traffic: it takes much more effort to refute bad faith bullshit from terrible sources than to share it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law quote:Brandolini's law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle, is an internet adage that emphasizes the difficulty of debunking false, facetious, or otherwise misleading information:[1] "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it."[2][3] Maybe instead of complaining about how liberals don't want to discuss this topic, do your drat part to improve the quality of discourse?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2021 19:50
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:All branches of US federal and state governments are absolute jokes and people should stop pretending we have a functioning democracy. Thanks for the hot take.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1502318717455441922quote:Deportations by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement fell sharply last year under President Biden to the lowest levels in the agency’s history despite record-high border crossings, according to statistics released Friday in an annual report.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 13:58
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:You really missed the part of the article where they said that deportations are down because they are kicking so many people out under the auspices of Title 42. I didn't "miss" it, it's in fact literally the second paragraph in the quote I included.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
The Biden administration is ending Title 42. https://www.vox.com/23006820/title-42-border-pandemic-biden quote:The Biden administration announced Friday that it’s lifting controversial pandemic-related border restrictions under which the US has expelled thousands of migrants without giving them access to their legal right to apply for asylum.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2022 22:58
|
|
|
Yeah, I read that story, and it's pretty embarrassing. The number of refugees coming to the Southern border will only increase over time, especially as climate disasters get worse. It seems that something has to give. I just don't know what.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2022 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/Haleaziz/status/1527758198102319104
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2022 22:18
|
|