Under very specific circumstances. The Obama admin did so with the goal to protect the children, not to simply be cruel.
separations occurred on a case-by-case basis for parents being prosecuted on more serious charges than illegally crossing the border or in cases when an adult was suspected of not being a child’s parent
"Under specific circumstance" still means it happened.
Yeah, if the parents were wanted for serious crimes or if they weren’t actually the parents. To me these are justifiable reasons, the child could be in danger in both situations.
Under very specific circumstances. The Obama admin did so with the goal to protect the children, not to simply be cruel.
separations occurred on a case-by-case basis for parents being prosecuted on more serious charges than illegally crossing the border or in cases when an adult was suspected of not being a child’s parent
"Under specific circumstance" still means it happened.
Separating kids from parents being arrested for more serious crimes because you can't throw kids in a holding cell is so far from the Trump child separation policy it's disingenuous to try and conflate the two.
Yes if a criminal is arrested for serious crimes the state will take their kids until they can find a safe environment for them. The same thing happens if I get busted driving drunk with my kids in the car or I'm arrested for running drugs or something.
+10
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
Under very specific circumstances. The Obama admin did so with the goal to protect the children, not to simply be cruel.
separations occurred on a case-by-case basis for parents being prosecuted on more serious charges than illegally crossing the border or in cases when an adult was suspected of not being a child’s parent
"Under specific circumstance" still means it happened.
No one denies this but there is a difference between a "circumstance" and a "policy." Under Obama children were to be held in detention when their undocumented guardians were charged with non-immigration related crimes. Under Trump, approaching the Southern border was treated as a crime. That is a massive shift in policy.
Under very specific circumstances. The Obama admin did so with the goal to protect the children, not to simply be cruel.
separations occurred on a case-by-case basis for parents being prosecuted on more serious charges than illegally crossing the border or in cases when an adult was suspected of not being a child’s parent
"Under specific circumstance" still means it happened.
No. Because “child separation” does not mean “a child was separated” it refers to a specific policy.
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
Right now CBP is using the following qualifiers for that suspicion:
- an adult is accompanying a minor
- they're not white
And it's been happening under multiple administrations.
You guys are fixated on Trump because he said the quiet part out loud, but Obama and Bush operated with this shit in more careful rhetoric, Biden is going down that path, and Clinton... well he was closer toward "quiet part out loud."
Child separation is not only "separating children from their biological parents"
It is when they are separated from their family/guardians that they are travelling with.
For goodness' sake, we've already talked about how the government defines "guardian" at the border in a more narrow sense than actual circumstances do, discounting uncles, aunts, grandparents, adult siblings, etc., some time ago, and no one disagreed back then about it.
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
Right now CBP is using the following qualifiers for that suspicion:
- an adult is accompanying a minor
- they're not white
And it's been happening under multiple administrations.
You guys are fixated on Trump because he said the quiet part out loud, but Obama and Bush operated with this shit in more careful rhetoric, Biden is going down that path, and Clinton... well he was closer toward "quiet part out loud."
This is objectively not true.
The CBP has not been separating every child from every non-white person crossing the border for the past thirty years. Trumps separation policies were not just a continuation of the policies of previous administrations.
The US has never had great immigration policies and there is plenty you can criticize previous administrations for, as well as abuse by CBP and other groups, but Trumps policies were far beyond what was in place previously.
+8
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
By the way, our jail-happy America doesn't do a good job when it takes children away even from criminal parents. See: Everyone's arguments they've been making in this thread about those systems lacking. Unless there's gonna be qualifiers now about that being Good, Actually™.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
Right now CBP is using the following qualifiers for that suspicion:
- an adult is accompanying a minor
- they're not white
And it's been happening under multiple administrations.
You guys are fixated on Trump because he said the quiet part out loud, but Obama and Bush operated with this shit in more careful rhetoric, Biden is going down that path, and Clinton... well he was closer toward "quiet part out loud."
This is objectively not true.
The CBP has not been separating every child from every non-white person crossing the border for the past thirty years. Trumps separation policies were not just a continuation of the policies of previous administrations.
The US has never had great immigration policies and there is plenty you can criticize previous administrations for, as well as abuse by CBP and other groups, but Trumps policies were far beyond what was in place previously.
Then swing your effort toward the people denying the policies have been bad even under Democratic administrations. Why are you talking at me about this?
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
Right now CBP is using the following qualifiers for that suspicion:
- an adult is accompanying a minor
- they're not white
And it's been happening under multiple administrations.
You guys are fixated on Trump because he said the quiet part out loud, but Obama and Bush operated with this shit in more careful rhetoric, Biden is going down that path, and Clinton... well he was closer toward "quiet part out loud."
This is objectively not true.
The CBP has not been separating every child from every non-white person crossing the border for the past thirty years. Trumps separation policies were not just a continuation of the policies of previous administrations.
The US has never had great immigration policies and there is plenty you can criticize previous administrations for, as well as abuse by CBP and other groups, but Trumps policies were far beyond what was in place previously.
Then swing your effort toward the people denying the policies have been bad even under Democratic administrations. Why are you talking at me about this?
This is message board in which people interact with each other on a post by post basis, and we are interacting with your posts. "Children were separated in the past" does not equal "the policies were never changed" and the facts do not support the latter statement that you keep pushing. You are engaging in disinformation.
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
Right now CBP is using the following qualifiers for that suspicion:
- an adult is accompanying a minor
- they're not white
And it's been happening under multiple administrations.
You guys are fixated on Trump because he said the quiet part out loud, but Obama and Bush operated with this shit in more careful rhetoric, Biden is going down that path, and Clinton... well he was closer toward "quiet part out loud."
This is objectively not true.
The CBP has not been separating every child from every non-white person crossing the border for the past thirty years. Trumps separation policies were not just a continuation of the policies of previous administrations.
The US has never had great immigration policies and there is plenty you can criticize previous administrations for, as well as abuse by CBP and other groups, but Trumps policies were far beyond what was in place previously.
Then swing your effort toward the people denying the policies have been bad even under Democratic administrations. Why are you talking at me about this?
You were incorrectly alleging that the Trump child separation policy was a continuation of Obama era policies that candidates in 2016 claimed they would end.
Those policies were absolutely clearly not the same for the reason that have been pointed out by myself and several posters. You then tried to conflate policies where children were separated from people arrested for suspected criminal activity with the Trump family separation policies, and when pressed moved the goalpost to try and say anyone who approached the border as a brown person was being arrested for suspected criminal activity for the past three decades. Which is objectively false.
I'm trying to figure out what argument or point you are trying to make since it has jumped around several times. But either way if you are presenting factually incorrect arguments in a discussion thread you shouldn't be shocked I'm responding to you about them.
I consider myself someone that was pretty aware of the 2016 Democratic Primary and I don't remember "child separation" coming up at all.
I recall detention of families that would arrive together, and similar for unaccompanied minors. But not child separation, maybe they were asking if they would halt child detentions.
I’m drawing a blank. If it was all over the 2016 primary I’m sure we can find a clip without much trouble though.
Yeah, I don't remember child separation being a term used until it became explicit policy under Trump, and I recall that being presented as a big shift in policy at the time.
I think there may be some conflating of different terms / policies going on here, because families and unaccompanied minors being detained was a thing, but actual child separation when they arrived as families was a Trump campaign promise that wasn't implemented until he was in office. Were the debates being asked what they thought about Trumps positions?
I think since we arent rehashing the 2016 primary, just basic chronology of the claim an existing child separation policy came up repeatedly in the primary I would be shocked if that would fall afoul of the 2016 rule. Can a mod weigh in on of Henroid can support their chronology and claims by citing 2016 primaries in that context?
Discussing the chronology of child separation and how it was mentioned in 2016 is fine.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+2
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I'm trying to figure out what argument or point you are trying to make since it has jumped around several times. But either way if you are presenting factually incorrect arguments in a discussion thread you shouldn't be shocked I'm responding to you about them.
Lately my overall agenda in this thread is to try and highlight that Biden is a promise breaker and not the Great White Savior of the immigration issue America faces. It involves smashing through a fiction that only Republicans are bad toward immigrants.
At the end of the day talk is talk and people seem to think Biden saying the occasional nice thing means he's solved things, but the bad policies continue and he's added to the problem in his own ways. Part of it is the national narrative that "whoa we have too many people." He's phrasing it nicer, but when he says that people need to stop trying to come here, it's all coming from the same place. I again cite back to page 24's video that has specific examples of many presidents doing this and the many things the USA has done in its history RE: regard toward immigrants and ethnic groups. Like the huge racism shit that happened in San Francisco when plague rats spread a disease but Asians got blamed for it, because they were the most vulnerable to the disease by way of American living circumstance. Sound familiar by the way? It should.
+3
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited April 2021
Let me try an alternate phrasing since people are sorta maybe dancing around it?
If you want myself and others to acknowledge that Biden has saved the day on immigration reform, the metric for this is the problem tangibly solved. Giving him that credit when the problem is ongoing just because of a few ideas thrown around or a couple small actions taken is not enough and will not be enough and it is logically not enough. It is wrong to give "problem solved" credit right now.
Edit - And this applies to any sort of "acknowledge that he's trying" because no. The metric is, problem solved, yes or no.
Henroid on
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
Precisely zero people anywhere, let alone this forum, ascribe to your "Biden is the Great White Savior" theory so your agenda appears to be entirely senseless.
Let me try an alternate phrasing since people are sorta maybe dancing around it?
If you want myself and others to acknowledge that Biden has saved the day on immigration reform, the metric for this is the problem tangibly solved. Giving him that credit when the problem is ongoing just because of a few ideas thrown around or a couple small actions taken is not enough and will not be enough and it is logically not enough. It is wrong to give "problem solved" credit right now.
Edit - And this applies to any sort of "acknowledge that he's trying" because no. The metric is, problem solved, yes or no.
I think the mistake you’re making here is the assumption that people who feel the Biden approach is better than what Trump was doing, means that they also think that Biden has “saved the day” or that nothing more needs to be done.
Because if that’s your view of the situation, I feel that you are mistaken. People have repeatedly said that even if they think Biden has made an effort to improve the situation, much more work still needs to be done.
I'm trying to figure out what argument or point you are trying to make since it has jumped around several times. But either way if you are presenting factually incorrect arguments in a discussion thread you shouldn't be shocked I'm responding to you about them.
Lately my overall agenda in this thread is to try and highlight that Biden is a promise breaker and not the Great White Savior of the immigration issue America faces. It involves smashing through a fiction that only Republicans are bad toward immigrants.
At the end of the day talk is talk and people seem to think Biden saying the occasional nice thing means he's solved things, but the bad policies continue and he's added to the problem in his own ways. Part of it is the national narrative that "whoa we have too many people." He's phrasing it nicer, but when he says that people need to stop trying to come here, it's all coming from the same place. I again cite back to page 24's video that has specific examples of many presidents doing this and the many things the USA has done in its history RE: regard toward immigrants and ethnic groups. Like the huge racism shit that happened in San Francisco when plague rats spread a disease but Asians got blamed for it, because they were the most vulnerable to the disease by way of American living circumstance. Sound familiar by the way? It should.
Ok, I get it but if this is your agenda doing it by dishonestly conflating Obama and Trump policies and taking 'both sides the same' approach doesn't serve any purposes. Advocacy is good and all but we are here to discuss immigration policy and going on in good faith.
Let me try an alternate phrasing since people are sorta maybe dancing around it?
If you want myself and others to acknowledge that Biden has saved the day on immigration reform, the metric for this is the problem tangibly solved. Giving him that credit when the problem is ongoing just because of a few ideas thrown around or a couple small actions taken is not enough and will not be enough and it is logically not enough. It is wrong to give "problem solved" credit right now.
Edit - And this applies to any sort of "acknowledge that he's trying" because no. The metric is, problem solved, yes or no.
So what is solved? What does that even look like, what would satisfy you?
If you have no interest in discussing what may or may not have been accomplished or progress made since it hasn't been fully solved, we can at least discuss what your goal or ideal may be.
What basic concrete criteria would it take for you to say 'good job Joe, you did well on immigration'? And I'm not even worried about what Joe can do vs. Congress, what is your ideal real world end state?
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Let me try an alternate phrasing since people are sorta maybe dancing around it?
If you want myself and others to acknowledge that Biden has saved the day on immigration reform, the metric for this is the problem tangibly solved. Giving him that credit when the problem is ongoing just because of a few ideas thrown around or a couple small actions taken is not enough and will not be enough and it is logically not enough. It is wrong to give "problem solved" credit right now.
Edit - And this applies to any sort of "acknowledge that he's trying" because no. The metric is, problem solved, yes or no.
I think the mistake you’re making here is the assumption that people who feel the Biden approach is better than what Trump was doing, means that they also think that Biden has “saved the day” or that nothing more needs to be done.
Because if that’s your view of the situation, I feel that you are mistaken. People have repeatedly said that even if they think Biden has made an effort to improve the situation, much more work still needs to be done.
The mistake is happening because people on this forum are fighting tooth and nail against criticism on Biden on this issue.
Let me try an alternate phrasing since people are sorta maybe dancing around it?
If you want myself and others to acknowledge that Biden has saved the day on immigration reform, the metric for this is the problem tangibly solved. Giving him that credit when the problem is ongoing just because of a few ideas thrown around or a couple small actions taken is not enough and will not be enough and it is logically not enough. It is wrong to give "problem solved" credit right now.
Edit - And this applies to any sort of "acknowledge that he's trying" because no. The metric is, problem solved, yes or no.
I think the mistake you’re making here is the assumption that people who feel the Biden approach is better than what Trump was doing, means that they also think that Biden has “saved the day” or that nothing more needs to be done.
Because if that’s your view of the situation, I feel that you are mistaken. People have repeatedly said that even if they think Biden has made an effort to improve the situation, much more work still needs to be done.
The mistake is happening because people on this forum are fighting tooth and nail against criticism on Biden on this issue.
The only thing I'm fighting tooth and nail against is the argument that the Trump family separation policy is just a continuation of Obama (and Bush and Clinton) child separation policy and the only reason I don't realize this is because I'm not Mexican.
I'm all for criticizing Biden where criticism is due, and I'm even sympathetic to (although I disagree with) the idea that immigration reform should take priority over pandemic response some people have made. But it's not fighting tooth and nail against criticism to point out that the government can't just hand unaccompanied minors a bus ticket and wash their hands of it, or that it takes time to hire and staff social workers.
+6
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
So what is solved? What does that even look like, what would satisfy you?
Oh neato!
- Cutting the bullshit on "what kind of economic impact can you bring with your working skills?" or any other system that's a mask for "we don't want brown people here." Influx of people means more goods and services needed, which means more employment. The problem solves itself.
- No using police handling or jail systems in the process of people registering at the border and needing temporary shelter.
- Not suspecting everyone with a minor is a child trafficker.
- Not separating families.
- Ending Operation Gatekeeper and conducting sweeps in naturally dangerous territory, with the permission and cooperation of the Mexican government, to find migrants and bring them into safety. Feed them, shelter them, help them get on their way to a new life here. Instead of letting them die from exposure (the point of Op Gatekeeper)
- Abolishing ICE (DHS as well but that's another topic).
- Tearing down all the fucking material wasted on stupid fucking walls and fences (barring being actual safety measures like on cliffs). That shit can be committed to other things.
So what is solved? What does that even look like, what would satisfy you?
Oh neato!
- Cutting the bullshit on "what kind of economic impact can you bring with your working skills?" or any other system that's a mask for "we don't want brown people here." Influx of people means more goods and services needed, which means more employment. The problem solves itself.
- No using police handling or jail systems in the process of people registering at the border and needing temporary shelter.
- Not suspecting everyone with a minor is a child trafficker.
- Not separating families.
- Ending Operation Gatekeeper and conducting sweeps in naturally dangerous territory, with the permission and cooperation of the Mexican government, to find migrants and bring them into safety. Feed them, shelter them, help them get on their way to a new life here. Instead of letting them die from exposure (the point of Op Gatekeeper)
- Abolishing ICE (DHS as well but that's another topic).
- Tearing down all the fucking material wasted on stupid fucking walls and fences (barring being actual safety measures like on cliffs). That shit can be committed to other things.
Among other things I probably forgot.
I can largely agree with this!
Some caveats and quibbles here and there, but I'd say this represents a fairly ideal end-state for immigration. And I'd be willing to bet most everyone in this thread generally agrees (with some overlapping and some different caveats and quibbles ofc) as well.
My ideal situation is that travelling / working / moving between Canada, US, and Mexico is as frictionless as travelling / working / moving between Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky. Sure you might have to go to Sec State and update your residency and voter registration and license plate, but it's primarily just an administrative function. I assume you mostly agree?
Edit - and yes, I did say voter registration, I think if a person lives and pays taxes somewhere they should be eligible to vote there as well even if they aren't a citizen. There probably is some discussion about what citizenship would even look like in a truly open border world that could be really interesting!
zagdrob on
+1
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Let me try an alternate phrasing since people are sorta maybe dancing around it?
If you want myself and others to acknowledge that Biden has saved the day on immigration reform, the metric for this is the problem tangibly solved. Giving him that credit when the problem is ongoing just because of a few ideas thrown around or a couple small actions taken is not enough and will not be enough and it is logically not enough. It is wrong to give "problem solved" credit right now.
Edit - And this applies to any sort of "acknowledge that he's trying" because no. The metric is, problem solved, yes or no.
I think the mistake you’re making here is the assumption that people who feel the Biden approach is better than what Trump was doing, means that they also think that Biden has “saved the day” or that nothing more needs to be done.
Because if that’s your view of the situation, I feel that you are mistaken. People have repeatedly said that even if they think Biden has made an effort to improve the situation, much more work still needs to be done.
The mistake is happening because people on this forum are fighting tooth and nail against criticism on Biden on this issue.
The only thing I'm fighting tooth and nail against is the argument that the Trump family separation policy is just a continuation of Obama (and Bush and Clinton) child separation policy and the only reason I don't realize this is because I'm not Mexican.
I'm all for criticizing Biden where criticism is due, and I'm even sympathetic to (although I disagree with) the idea that immigration reform should take priority over pandemic response some people have made. But it's not fighting tooth and nail against criticism to point out that the government can't just hand unaccompanied minors a bus ticket and wash their hands of it, or that it takes time to hire and staff social workers.
The bolded is something that's very important to this thread. I've mentioned it before, but it bears repeating.
Peoples' personal experience with US immigration varies WILDLY. The US' racist policies on immigration began with targeting Asians, and it currently is focused on Hispanic and Latino peoples on the national discussion stage. Being one of the people from these groups, or being a family member thereof / child thereof, will absolutely give you insight that most other people don't have.
It probably isn't great for people of color from other continents as well. The Middle East, Africa, India, there's probably a LOT of hateful shit going on there as well. Which kinda reinforces my point because a lot of my focus is from the fact I am half Mexican and half Portuguese - with both sides of the family being immigrants here from those countries. The scrutiny each side of my family faced was different from each other, and it's probably different than shit other forumers who are immigrants went through.
But if you're (universal, not you person I'm responding to) a white person coming from another country? You're probably under the assumed view that everything is "fine." Because the systems of this country are built to favor white people, to never suspect white people. White face, white name, those things will get you better treatment.
And then there's the people who aren't immigrants at all, whose families have been here for many generations, and on top of that there's also being white.
Yes, I'm saying white forumers commenting on this issue is coming from a not great place - but I'm not blaming them. I'm saying you guys are detached from the issue, through no fault of your own. But you guys need to know that no amount of reading or asking people will give you the amount of knowledge you think you'd be on par with when it comes to any of the groups above.
EDIT: Before anyone tries to reply with "he was talking about the civil rights movement," we all know the original context. I am posting it because what is said is directly applicable to this discussion about immigration policy and the reformation of it. Biden has arguably not even acknowledged the knife in the back, except maybe implying that Trump put it there. But that is not the case, it was buried there a long time before Trump. Arguing that Trump shoved it in 3 inches deeper and Biden's pulled it out 1 inch ain't getting any praise from me.
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
Right now CBP is using the following qualifiers for that suspicion:
- an adult is accompanying a minor
- they're not white
And it's been happening under multiple administrations.
You guys are fixated on Trump because he said the quiet part out loud, but Obama and Bush operated with this shit in more careful rhetoric, Biden is going down that path, and Clinton... well he was closer toward "quiet part out loud."
This is objectively not true.
The CBP has not been separating every child from every non-white person crossing the border for the past thirty years. Trumps separation policies were not just a continuation of the policies of previous administrations.
The US has never had great immigration policies and there is plenty you can criticize previous administrations for, as well as abuse by CBP and other groups, but Trumps policies were far beyond what was in place previously.
Then swing your effort toward the people denying the policies have been bad even under Democratic administrations. Why are you talking at me about this?
You were incorrectly alleging that the Trump child separation policy was a continuation of Obama era policies that candidates in 2016 claimed they would end.
Those policies were absolutely clearly not the same for the reason that have been pointed out by myself and several posters. You then tried to conflate policies where children were separated from people arrested for suspected criminal activity with the Trump family separation policies, and when pressed moved the goalpost to try and say anyone who approached the border as a brown person was being arrested for suspected criminal activity for the past three decades. Which is objectively false.
I'm trying to figure out what argument or point you are trying to make since it has jumped around several times. But either way if you are presenting factually incorrect arguments in a discussion thread you shouldn't be shocked I'm responding to you about them.
The policy of separating children from their parents under certain circumstances has been around for awhile. At least as far back as the GWB years and possibly further. The key change with Trump is they basically made "crossing the border" a thing that warranted separation as part of a plan to discourage people from crossing the border via cruelty. Which was a big change in terms of what actually happened to people crossing the border from anything I've read.
EDIT: Before anyone tries to reply with "he was talking about the civil rights movement," we all know the original context. I am posting it because what is said is directly applicable to this discussion about immigration policy and the reformation of it. Biden has arguably not even acknowledged the knife in the back, except maybe implying that Trump put it there. But that is not the case, it was buried there a long time before Trump.
It’s applicable to immigration, but that doesn’t mean people can’t disagree with the approach. Refusing to acknowledge any forward progress is bad and demoralizing, in my opinion.
It’s certainly not as bad as insisting that the problem doesn’t exist, but this seems like a situation where opinions will differ. Some will take the position from your video, and others will disagree.
+2
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
We've been promised incremental progress for decades and have shit to show for it. And we're being assured that "this time it will be different," just as we were promised with Obama. See how cyclical this is becoming?
So trying to reinforce the narrative of "but progress is being made" doesn't actually help the situation. The only thing it helps is white people from feeling guilty.
We've been promised incremental progress for decades and have shit to show for it. And we're being assured that "this time it will be different," just as we were promised with Obama. See how cyclical this is becoming?
So trying to reinforce the narrative of "but progress is being made" doesn't actually help the situation. The only thing it helps is white people from feeling guilty.
I'm not even arguing about what is happening now. You directly said that progress doesn't matter, only when everything is all done and you are entirely satisfied does anything deserve any acknowledgement.
That's a bad, toxic viewpoint imo. Even if you don't think any progress has been made yet (Which is debatable, but whatever), the idea that when progress is made it doesn't count until everything is all entirely solved is bad
We've been promised incremental progress for decades and have shit to show for it. And we're being assured that "this time it will be different," just as we were promised with Obama. See how cyclical this is becoming?
So trying to reinforce the narrative of "but progress is being made" doesn't actually help the situation. The only thing it helps is white people from feeling guilty.
I'm not even arguing about what is happening now. You directly said that progress doesn't matter, only when everything is all done and you are entirely satisfied does anything deserve any acknowledgement.
That's a bad, toxic viewpoint imo. Even if you don't think any progress has been made yet (Which is debatable, but whatever), the idea that when progress is made it doesn't count until everything is all entirely solved is bad
I didn't say "progress doesn't matter," I said that incremental - specifically token gesture - progress doesn't help. It's appeasement to the people affected by the issue at hand and it's feel-good-vibes for the white people unaffected. It's the story of our country, even outside immigration.
Being mad about the lack of progress being made is how progress is made...and there is always more progress to be made which is why people are always going to be mad about the lack of progress being made.
I, like many people, celebrated in early November because Fuck Donald Trump and everyone in his administration but the next day the world was still full of shit to get mad at.
I get that this is exhausting for some people, but that's what has to be maintained for progress to be made.
We've been promised incremental progress for decades and have shit to show for it. And we're being assured that "this time it will be different," just as we were promised with Obama. See how cyclical this is becoming?
So trying to reinforce the narrative of "but progress is being made" doesn't actually help the situation. The only thing it helps is white people from feeling guilty.
I'm not even arguing about what is happening now. You directly said that progress doesn't matter, only when everything is all done and you are entirely satisfied does anything deserve any acknowledgement.
That's a bad, toxic viewpoint imo. Even if you don't think any progress has been made yet (Which is debatable, but whatever), the idea that when progress is made it doesn't count until everything is all entirely solved is bad
I didn't say "progress doesn't matter," I said that incremental - specifically token gesture - progress doesn't help. It's appeasement to the people affected by the issue at hand and it's feel-good-vibes for the white people unaffected. It's the story of our country, even outside immigration.
I mean, your post is right up there. Maybe you meant to say that token gestures don't matter, which to be fair is a lot more reasonable. It's not what you actually said though. But that's OK, if that's what you meant, then I'd probably agree.
Although I suspect what we'd define as "token gestures" wouldn't align
Being mad about the lack of progress being made is how progress is made...and there is always more progress to be made which is why people are always going to be mad about the lack of progress being made.
I, like many people, celebrated in early November because Fuck Donald Trump and everyone in his administration but the next day the world was still full of shit to get mad at.
I get that this is exhausting for some people, but that's what has to be maintained for progress to be made.
No one said you can't be mad. I bet a lot of us are, even if we don't express it the same way, because the situation is bad.
From the perspective of someone who has read every post in the thread (and that of many other previous versions of said thread), it feels like it basically goes along these lines;
Imagine a ten point scale. Ideally US immigration would get to a perfect 10. I don't care what that is, especially since it's subjective and many will have a differing (if not mutually exclusive) views of it.
Maybe Obama era policy was a 4 or 5. Hell, perhaps even a 6! Not great, maybe barely average, but better than it has been (in some ways, NOT ALL) in the past, Dreamers, etc.
Trump era policy was, on said scale, like... a -14.
The debate on 'better' versus 'perfect' seems to be an ongoing verbal battle over statements that the Biden administration seems to be back in that 4-6 range (from my perspective, at least), give or take a little. Objectively better than it was, but still with room for improvement, and there are elements that are not ideal and likely won't be ideal for a while for a variety of reasons.
A major disparity really seems to be the folks who are like "US immigration is shit, has always been shit, and they've all been -1488 out of 10, and fuck you for thinking otherwise!" (hyperbole for humour present, I'm obviously not quoting anyone here specifically). The perspectives aren't in the same ballpark, and are so wildly disparate as to cause friction simply trying to put the conversation in a similar frame.
There is minimal argument that US policy has had shitty elements. It's been fucked on just so many levels for so long. And then it got a lot worse. A return to the pre-Trump baseline isn't perfect, nobody is claiming it is, but it is better (AT LEAST IN SOME WAYS), and still requires work to improve further. If nothing else, 4 years of an absolute shitshow weren't going to be cleared up in the first 3 months (let alone tidying up issues and racism that have been present for longer than any of us have been alive), and yes, administrations can do more than one thing at a time, but there are also a rather remarkable number of fires to put out currently. To clear out the backlog, to go back to assisting these countries financially and in policy in ways that will tangibly improve quality of life, and more. Nobody who notes a return to that previous baseline (that I've read) has said so assuming that it's perfect and fine, and it is exasperating to have the inevitable "oh so you think kids in cages is great, eh? MONSTER!" hot take responses. As though every post has to have a thesis worth of referencing and caveats.
But especially the last few variations on the thread have felt like a car repeatedly running into a brick wall; noisy, destructive, and prone to points being handed out. I'll leave it up to everyone's imagination as to which 'side' is which in this analogy. Especially since we are all ostensibly on the same side, even if we have reasonable and varied differing views on exact end goals, how to get there, prioritization and how swiftly they should be tackled.
I get it. It's an important topic that is close to everyone's hearts. Passions flare, tempers rise, but being on these forums as long as I have, I feel fairly safe saying that no, very few people here actively 'want kids in cages', even if some form of detention or holding facility while establishing identities and vetting the safety of their destination homes might entail some need for *insert some form of humane detention/lodging here that isn't going to set off eighty eight more pages of outrage*.
I also get that complacency is dangerous, but at the same time nobody is capable of remaining at an 11/10 in outrage forever, and striving to do so is unhealthy. We're all under incredible stress these days, we all have our challenges, and clearly we all care enough to keep abreast of the matter and commit time and thought to it here. The 'even when it's better we just have to yell at them more' might be great to aim at politicians of all levels, but unless I've lost track of the general forumer employment situation, nobody here can directly do much to change existing policy (as written and in application), so any expectations of ceaselessly calling for heads to (figuratively) roll as some kind of 'fuck the carrot, more stick, MORE STICK!' stance on things is also going to get pushback.
I get where the view is coming from, but it makes an already exhausting topic verge on insufferable. "Oh look, a way that things got a tiny bit better!" is met with "and there are a billion ways it's still awful and just the worst"... which... yeah. No improvement we are likely to see in our lifetimes will bump that 4 or 5 up to a 9 overnight, and yelling about the 5 or 6 as being as bad as the aforementioned -14 just feels like nothing will ever be good enough or that there is any ground to hold actual discussion.
It's bad, has always been bad, likely will always be bad, eat at Arbys.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
EDIT: Before anyone tries to reply with "he was talking about the civil rights movement," we all know the original context. I am posting it because what is said is directly applicable to this discussion about immigration policy and the reformation of it. Biden has arguably not even acknowledged the knife in the back, except maybe implying that Trump put it there. But that is not the case, it was buried there a long time before Trump.
It remains a counter-productive toxic narrative and is propaganda rather than fact regardless of who also used the same propaganda tool. Nuance doesn't make for a great rallying cry but this isn't a rally.
Incremental progess, however insufficient, is still factually progress, just as getting the knife away from your more vital organs is progress, even if it's not nearly enough to make it okay.
Is Biden doing enough, fast enough? No. Is Biden exactly the same or as bad as Trump? No. Constantly, desperately, and exhaustively trying to convince people to ignore this admittedly dull fact just distracts from the issue because now you've got to filter out the rhetoric every three posts to talk about the actual situation.
Biden is being goddamn slow with his fixes, is not being loud enough about accelerating them, has provided suspiciously little transparency, and has given himself a timeline that is long enough to allow him to fail without media attention, all suggesting that this isn't a major priority of his. There is a chance that this indicates that he doesn't plan to change things as much as his propaganda suggested. This is all true or at least not counter-factual given the evidence. We don't need to BS each other to talk about Biden's half-assery on this.
The fact that we can even compare Biden to Trump feels like a complete failure on the Biden administrations part.
That's why all of this is unacceptable for me, we're so far down this rabbit hole.
To put it in Forar's terms Obama was not at a 6, he was at a 2. Trump was a -10 and Biden seems to be at a -5 currently.
Like, how is Biden doing compared to Reagan or Nixon?
Better Than Trump is not really a metric I give a shit about
The corollary here is that if Biden were doing the same thing, exactly, as Trump with the same rhetoric and results and whatever, you'd have the same opinion.
From the perspective of someone who has read every post in the thread (and that of many other previous versions of said thread), it feels like it basically goes along these lines;
Imagine a ten point scale. Ideally US immigration would get to a perfect 10. I don't care what that is, especially since it's subjective and many will have a differing (if not mutually exclusive) views of it.
Maybe Obama era policy was a 4 or 5. Hell, perhaps even a 6! Not great, maybe barely average, but better than it has been (in some ways, NOT ALL) in the past, Dreamers, etc.
Trump era policy was, on said scale, like... a -14.
The debate on 'better' versus 'perfect' seems to be an ongoing verbal battle over statements that the Biden administration seems to be back in that 4-6 range (from my perspective, at least), give or take a little. Objectively better than it was, but still with room for improvement, and there are elements that are not ideal and likely won't be ideal for a while for a variety of reasons.
A major disparity really seems to be the folks who are like "US immigration is shit, has always been shit, and they've all been -1488 out of 10, and fuck you for thinking otherwise!" (hyperbole for humour present, I'm obviously not quoting anyone here specifically). The perspectives aren't in the same ballpark, and are so wildly disparate as to cause friction simply trying to put the conversation in a similar frame.
There is minimal argument that US policy has had shitty elements. It's been fucked on just so many levels for so long. And then it got a lot worse. A return to the pre-Trump baseline isn't perfect, nobody is claiming it is, but it is better (AT LEAST IN SOME WAYS), and still requires work to improve further. If nothing else, 4 years of an absolute shitshow weren't going to be cleared up in the first 3 months (let alone tidying up issues and racism that have been present for longer than any of us have been alive), and yes, administrations can do more than one thing at a time, but there are also a rather remarkable number of fires to put out currently. To clear out the backlog, to go back to assisting these countries financially and in policy in ways that will tangibly improve quality of life, and more. Nobody who notes a return to that previous baseline (that I've read) has said so assuming that it's perfect and fine, and it is exasperating to have the inevitable "oh so you think kids in cages is great, eh? MONSTER!" hot take responses. As though every post has to have a thesis worth of referencing and caveats.
But especially the last few variations on the thread have felt like a car repeatedly running into a brick wall; noisy, destructive, and prone to points being handed out. I'll leave it up to everyone's imagination as to which 'side' is which in this analogy. Especially since we are all ostensibly on the same side, even if we have reasonable and varied differing views on exact end goals, how to get there, prioritization and how swiftly they should be tackled.
I get it. It's an important topic that is close to everyone's hearts. Passions flare, tempers rise, but being on these forums as long as I have, I feel fairly safe saying that no, very few people here actively 'want kids in cages', even if some form of detention or holding facility while establishing identities and vetting the safety of their destination homes might entail some need for *insert some form of humane detention/lodging here that isn't going to set off eighty eight more pages of outrage*.
I also get that complacency is dangerous, but at the same time nobody is capable of remaining at an 11/10 in outrage forever, and striving to do so is unhealthy. We're all under incredible stress these days, we all have our challenges, and clearly we all care enough to keep abreast of the matter and commit time and thought to it here. The 'even when it's better we just have to yell at them more' might be great to aim at politicians of all levels, but unless I've lost track of the general forumer employment situation, nobody here can directly do much to change existing policy (as written and in application), so any expectations of ceaselessly calling for heads to (figuratively) roll as some kind of 'fuck the carrot, more stick, MORE STICK!' stance on things is also going to get pushback.
I get where the view is coming from, but it makes an already exhausting topic verge on insufferable. "Oh look, a way that things got a tiny bit better!" is met with "and there are a billion ways it's still awful and just the worst"... which... yeah. No improvement we are likely to see in our lifetimes will bump that 4 or 5 up to a 9 overnight, and yelling about the 5 or 6 as being as bad as the aforementioned -14 just feels like nothing will ever be good enough or that there is any ground to hold actual discussion.
It's bad, has always been bad, likely will always be bad, eat at Arbys.
Like, the fact that you put Obama/Biden in the 4-6 and Trump at a -14 shows the actual problem. Trump was bad. Clearly deserves all the scorn he got. But Obama/Bid\en at best are in the low 1-2 range. People tend to overlook immigration, especially during D control eras because it tends to ride the status quo. Multiple times the Dems have controlled all 3 branches of government (though not necessarily filibuster proof) and real honest to god bills designed to fix things haven't even really made progress. Honestly, the biggest support we tend to see for immigration reform is by Dem's during Republican control. In 20 years, NEITHER HOUSE has even been able to pass the DREAM act, something most people on both sides generally agree is a "good thing" and certainly enjoys overwhelming support among Democrats.
In my opinion, most of the "Best" things that have come down to help undocumented immigrants in the last few years have come down for specific reasons that benefit people OTHER than the immigrants. Sanctuary cities, by allowing immigrants to reach out to the police w/o fear of deportation reduces and prevents crime.
Being better than Trump is a good thing, but it's an INCREDIBLY low bar to clear. If Biden et al want any real approval from the pro-immigration camp, they need to do a lot more.
Posts
Yeah, if the parents were wanted for serious crimes or if they weren’t actually the parents. To me these are justifiable reasons, the child could be in danger in both situations.
Separating kids from parents being arrested for more serious crimes because you can't throw kids in a holding cell is so far from the Trump child separation policy it's disingenuous to try and conflate the two.
Yes if a criminal is arrested for serious crimes the state will take their kids until they can find a safe environment for them. The same thing happens if I get busted driving drunk with my kids in the car or I'm arrested for running drugs or something.
No one denies this but there is a difference between a "circumstance" and a "policy." Under Obama children were to be held in detention when their undocumented guardians were charged with non-immigration related crimes. Under Trump, approaching the Southern border was treated as a crime. That is a massive shift in policy.
No. Because “child separation” does not mean “a child was separated” it refers to a specific policy.
Suppose someone crosses the border and we have a reasonable suspicion that they are abusing the child they crossed with. Should we detain them together simply so that we don’t “separate a child?”
- an adult is accompanying a minor
- they're not white
And it's been happening under multiple administrations.
You guys are fixated on Trump because he said the quiet part out loud, but Obama and Bush operated with this shit in more careful rhetoric, Biden is going down that path, and Clinton... well he was closer toward "quiet part out loud."
It is when they are separated from their family/guardians that they are travelling with.
For goodness' sake, we've already talked about how the government defines "guardian" at the border in a more narrow sense than actual circumstances do, discounting uncles, aunts, grandparents, adult siblings, etc., some time ago, and no one disagreed back then about it.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
This is objectively not true.
The CBP has not been separating every child from every non-white person crossing the border for the past thirty years. Trumps separation policies were not just a continuation of the policies of previous administrations.
The US has never had great immigration policies and there is plenty you can criticize previous administrations for, as well as abuse by CBP and other groups, but Trumps policies were far beyond what was in place previously.
This is message board in which people interact with each other on a post by post basis, and we are interacting with your posts. "Children were separated in the past" does not equal "the policies were never changed" and the facts do not support the latter statement that you keep pushing. You are engaging in disinformation.
You were incorrectly alleging that the Trump child separation policy was a continuation of Obama era policies that candidates in 2016 claimed they would end.
Those policies were absolutely clearly not the same for the reason that have been pointed out by myself and several posters. You then tried to conflate policies where children were separated from people arrested for suspected criminal activity with the Trump family separation policies, and when pressed moved the goalpost to try and say anyone who approached the border as a brown person was being arrested for suspected criminal activity for the past three decades. Which is objectively false.
I'm trying to figure out what argument or point you are trying to make since it has jumped around several times. But either way if you are presenting factually incorrect arguments in a discussion thread you shouldn't be shocked I'm responding to you about them.
Discussing the chronology of child separation and how it was mentioned in 2016 is fine.
At the end of the day talk is talk and people seem to think Biden saying the occasional nice thing means he's solved things, but the bad policies continue and he's added to the problem in his own ways. Part of it is the national narrative that "whoa we have too many people." He's phrasing it nicer, but when he says that people need to stop trying to come here, it's all coming from the same place. I again cite back to page 24's video that has specific examples of many presidents doing this and the many things the USA has done in its history RE: regard toward immigrants and ethnic groups. Like the huge racism shit that happened in San Francisco when plague rats spread a disease but Asians got blamed for it, because they were the most vulnerable to the disease by way of American living circumstance. Sound familiar by the way? It should.
If you want myself and others to acknowledge that Biden has saved the day on immigration reform, the metric for this is the problem tangibly solved. Giving him that credit when the problem is ongoing just because of a few ideas thrown around or a couple small actions taken is not enough and will not be enough and it is logically not enough. It is wrong to give "problem solved" credit right now.
Edit - And this applies to any sort of "acknowledge that he's trying" because no. The metric is, problem solved, yes or no.
I think the mistake you’re making here is the assumption that people who feel the Biden approach is better than what Trump was doing, means that they also think that Biden has “saved the day” or that nothing more needs to be done.
Because if that’s your view of the situation, I feel that you are mistaken. People have repeatedly said that even if they think Biden has made an effort to improve the situation, much more work still needs to be done.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Ok, I get it but if this is your agenda doing it by dishonestly conflating Obama and Trump policies and taking 'both sides the same' approach doesn't serve any purposes. Advocacy is good and all but we are here to discuss immigration policy and going on in good faith.
So what is solved? What does that even look like, what would satisfy you?
If you have no interest in discussing what may or may not have been accomplished or progress made since it hasn't been fully solved, we can at least discuss what your goal or ideal may be.
What basic concrete criteria would it take for you to say 'good job Joe, you did well on immigration'? And I'm not even worried about what Joe can do vs. Congress, what is your ideal real world end state?
The only thing I'm fighting tooth and nail against is the argument that the Trump family separation policy is just a continuation of Obama (and Bush and Clinton) child separation policy and the only reason I don't realize this is because I'm not Mexican.
I'm all for criticizing Biden where criticism is due, and I'm even sympathetic to (although I disagree with) the idea that immigration reform should take priority over pandemic response some people have made. But it's not fighting tooth and nail against criticism to point out that the government can't just hand unaccompanied minors a bus ticket and wash their hands of it, or that it takes time to hire and staff social workers.
- Cutting the bullshit on "what kind of economic impact can you bring with your working skills?" or any other system that's a mask for "we don't want brown people here." Influx of people means more goods and services needed, which means more employment. The problem solves itself.
- No using police handling or jail systems in the process of people registering at the border and needing temporary shelter.
- Not suspecting everyone with a minor is a child trafficker.
- Not separating families.
- Ending Operation Gatekeeper and conducting sweeps in naturally dangerous territory, with the permission and cooperation of the Mexican government, to find migrants and bring them into safety. Feed them, shelter them, help them get on their way to a new life here. Instead of letting them die from exposure (the point of Op Gatekeeper)
- Abolishing ICE (DHS as well but that's another topic).
- Tearing down all the fucking material wasted on stupid fucking walls and fences (barring being actual safety measures like on cliffs). That shit can be committed to other things.
Among other things I probably forgot.
I can largely agree with this!
Some caveats and quibbles here and there, but I'd say this represents a fairly ideal end-state for immigration. And I'd be willing to bet most everyone in this thread generally agrees (with some overlapping and some different caveats and quibbles ofc) as well.
My ideal situation is that travelling / working / moving between Canada, US, and Mexico is as frictionless as travelling / working / moving between Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky. Sure you might have to go to Sec State and update your residency and voter registration and license plate, but it's primarily just an administrative function. I assume you mostly agree?
Edit - and yes, I did say voter registration, I think if a person lives and pays taxes somewhere they should be eligible to vote there as well even if they aren't a citizen. There probably is some discussion about what citizenship would even look like in a truly open border world that could be really interesting!
Peoples' personal experience with US immigration varies WILDLY. The US' racist policies on immigration began with targeting Asians, and it currently is focused on Hispanic and Latino peoples on the national discussion stage. Being one of the people from these groups, or being a family member thereof / child thereof, will absolutely give you insight that most other people don't have.
It probably isn't great for people of color from other continents as well. The Middle East, Africa, India, there's probably a LOT of hateful shit going on there as well. Which kinda reinforces my point because a lot of my focus is from the fact I am half Mexican and half Portuguese - with both sides of the family being immigrants here from those countries. The scrutiny each side of my family faced was different from each other, and it's probably different than shit other forumers who are immigrants went through.
But if you're (universal, not you person I'm responding to) a white person coming from another country? You're probably under the assumed view that everything is "fine." Because the systems of this country are built to favor white people, to never suspect white people. White face, white name, those things will get you better treatment.
And then there's the people who aren't immigrants at all, whose families have been here for many generations, and on top of that there's also being white.
Yes, I'm saying white forumers commenting on this issue is coming from a not great place - but I'm not blaming them. I'm saying you guys are detached from the issue, through no fault of your own. But you guys need to know that no amount of reading or asking people will give you the amount of knowledge you think you'd be on par with when it comes to any of the groups above.
EDIT: Before anyone tries to reply with "he was talking about the civil rights movement," we all know the original context. I am posting it because what is said is directly applicable to this discussion about immigration policy and the reformation of it. Biden has arguably not even acknowledged the knife in the back, except maybe implying that Trump put it there. But that is not the case, it was buried there a long time before Trump. Arguing that Trump shoved it in 3 inches deeper and Biden's pulled it out 1 inch ain't getting any praise from me.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
The policy of separating children from their parents under certain circumstances has been around for awhile. At least as far back as the GWB years and possibly further. The key change with Trump is they basically made "crossing the border" a thing that warranted separation as part of a plan to discourage people from crossing the border via cruelty. Which was a big change in terms of what actually happened to people crossing the border from anything I've read.
It’s applicable to immigration, but that doesn’t mean people can’t disagree with the approach. Refusing to acknowledge any forward progress is bad and demoralizing, in my opinion.
It’s certainly not as bad as insisting that the problem doesn’t exist, but this seems like a situation where opinions will differ. Some will take the position from your video, and others will disagree.
So trying to reinforce the narrative of "but progress is being made" doesn't actually help the situation. The only thing it helps is white people from feeling guilty.
I'm not even arguing about what is happening now. You directly said that progress doesn't matter, only when everything is all done and you are entirely satisfied does anything deserve any acknowledgement.
That's a bad, toxic viewpoint imo. Even if you don't think any progress has been made yet (Which is debatable, but whatever), the idea that when progress is made it doesn't count until everything is all entirely solved is bad
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
I, like many people, celebrated in early November because Fuck Donald Trump and everyone in his administration but the next day the world was still full of shit to get mad at.
I get that this is exhausting for some people, but that's what has to be maintained for progress to be made.
I mean, your post is right up there. Maybe you meant to say that token gestures don't matter, which to be fair is a lot more reasonable. It's not what you actually said though. But that's OK, if that's what you meant, then I'd probably agree.
Although I suspect what we'd define as "token gestures" wouldn't align
No one said you can't be mad. I bet a lot of us are, even if we don't express it the same way, because the situation is bad.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Imagine a ten point scale. Ideally US immigration would get to a perfect 10. I don't care what that is, especially since it's subjective and many will have a differing (if not mutually exclusive) views of it.
Maybe Obama era policy was a 4 or 5. Hell, perhaps even a 6! Not great, maybe barely average, but better than it has been (in some ways, NOT ALL) in the past, Dreamers, etc.
Trump era policy was, on said scale, like... a -14.
The debate on 'better' versus 'perfect' seems to be an ongoing verbal battle over statements that the Biden administration seems to be back in that 4-6 range (from my perspective, at least), give or take a little. Objectively better than it was, but still with room for improvement, and there are elements that are not ideal and likely won't be ideal for a while for a variety of reasons.
A major disparity really seems to be the folks who are like "US immigration is shit, has always been shit, and they've all been -1488 out of 10, and fuck you for thinking otherwise!" (hyperbole for humour present, I'm obviously not quoting anyone here specifically). The perspectives aren't in the same ballpark, and are so wildly disparate as to cause friction simply trying to put the conversation in a similar frame.
There is minimal argument that US policy has had shitty elements. It's been fucked on just so many levels for so long. And then it got a lot worse. A return to the pre-Trump baseline isn't perfect, nobody is claiming it is, but it is better (AT LEAST IN SOME WAYS), and still requires work to improve further. If nothing else, 4 years of an absolute shitshow weren't going to be cleared up in the first 3 months (let alone tidying up issues and racism that have been present for longer than any of us have been alive), and yes, administrations can do more than one thing at a time, but there are also a rather remarkable number of fires to put out currently. To clear out the backlog, to go back to assisting these countries financially and in policy in ways that will tangibly improve quality of life, and more. Nobody who notes a return to that previous baseline (that I've read) has said so assuming that it's perfect and fine, and it is exasperating to have the inevitable "oh so you think kids in cages is great, eh? MONSTER!" hot take responses. As though every post has to have a thesis worth of referencing and caveats.
But especially the last few variations on the thread have felt like a car repeatedly running into a brick wall; noisy, destructive, and prone to points being handed out. I'll leave it up to everyone's imagination as to which 'side' is which in this analogy. Especially since we are all ostensibly on the same side, even if we have reasonable and varied differing views on exact end goals, how to get there, prioritization and how swiftly they should be tackled.
I get it. It's an important topic that is close to everyone's hearts. Passions flare, tempers rise, but being on these forums as long as I have, I feel fairly safe saying that no, very few people here actively 'want kids in cages', even if some form of detention or holding facility while establishing identities and vetting the safety of their destination homes might entail some need for *insert some form of humane detention/lodging here that isn't going to set off eighty eight more pages of outrage*.
I also get that complacency is dangerous, but at the same time nobody is capable of remaining at an 11/10 in outrage forever, and striving to do so is unhealthy. We're all under incredible stress these days, we all have our challenges, and clearly we all care enough to keep abreast of the matter and commit time and thought to it here. The 'even when it's better we just have to yell at them more' might be great to aim at politicians of all levels, but unless I've lost track of the general forumer employment situation, nobody here can directly do much to change existing policy (as written and in application), so any expectations of ceaselessly calling for heads to (figuratively) roll as some kind of 'fuck the carrot, more stick, MORE STICK!' stance on things is also going to get pushback.
I get where the view is coming from, but it makes an already exhausting topic verge on insufferable. "Oh look, a way that things got a tiny bit better!" is met with "and there are a billion ways it's still awful and just the worst"... which... yeah. No improvement we are likely to see in our lifetimes will bump that 4 or 5 up to a 9 overnight, and yelling about the 5 or 6 as being as bad as the aforementioned -14 just feels like nothing will ever be good enough or that there is any ground to hold actual discussion.
It's bad, has always been bad, likely will always be bad, eat at Arbys.
It remains a counter-productive toxic narrative and is propaganda rather than fact regardless of who also used the same propaganda tool. Nuance doesn't make for a great rallying cry but this isn't a rally.
Incremental progess, however insufficient, is still factually progress, just as getting the knife away from your more vital organs is progress, even if it's not nearly enough to make it okay.
Is Biden doing enough, fast enough? No. Is Biden exactly the same or as bad as Trump? No. Constantly, desperately, and exhaustively trying to convince people to ignore this admittedly dull fact just distracts from the issue because now you've got to filter out the rhetoric every three posts to talk about the actual situation.
Biden is being goddamn slow with his fixes, is not being loud enough about accelerating them, has provided suspiciously little transparency, and has given himself a timeline that is long enough to allow him to fail without media attention, all suggesting that this isn't a major priority of his. There is a chance that this indicates that he doesn't plan to change things as much as his propaganda suggested. This is all true or at least not counter-factual given the evidence. We don't need to BS each other to talk about Biden's half-assery on this.
That’s fine, people are allowed to feel differently and express that.
That's why all of this is unacceptable for me, we're so far down this rabbit hole.
To put it in Forar's terms Obama was not at a 6, he was at a 2. Trump was a -10 and Biden seems to be at a -5 currently.
Like, how is Biden doing compared to Reagan or Nixon?
The corollary here is that if Biden were doing the same thing, exactly, as Trump with the same rhetoric and results and whatever, you'd have the same opinion.
I can't agree with that at all.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Like, the fact that you put Obama/Biden in the 4-6 and Trump at a -14 shows the actual problem. Trump was bad. Clearly deserves all the scorn he got. But Obama/Bid\en at best are in the low 1-2 range. People tend to overlook immigration, especially during D control eras because it tends to ride the status quo. Multiple times the Dems have controlled all 3 branches of government (though not necessarily filibuster proof) and real honest to god bills designed to fix things haven't even really made progress. Honestly, the biggest support we tend to see for immigration reform is by Dem's during Republican control. In 20 years, NEITHER HOUSE has even been able to pass the DREAM act, something most people on both sides generally agree is a "good thing" and certainly enjoys overwhelming support among Democrats.
In my opinion, most of the "Best" things that have come down to help undocumented immigrants in the last few years have come down for specific reasons that benefit people OTHER than the immigrants. Sanctuary cities, by allowing immigrants to reach out to the police w/o fear of deportation reduces and prevents crime.
Being better than Trump is a good thing, but it's an INCREDIBLY low bar to clear. If Biden et al want any real approval from the pro-immigration camp, they need to do a lot more.