Sheril KirshenbaumImmigrants are people.
Regardless of where they stand on border policies, it would be nice to hear candidates talk about them that way.
Sally Strange@Sheril "Regardless of their immigration policies" seems naive, or a cop-out. Talking about immigrants as if they were people would render the GOP's platform unworkable. You can't mass deport people without dehumanizing them.
post-punkedThe trick is a bunch of Americans have already been dehumanized, most of them Democratic, so less concern for failed Spanish colonials isn't a problem.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/14/us/desantis-florida-migrants-marthas-vineyard.html
@postpunky couple things. You're not factually wrong but the frame needs work.
Just because I typically vote Democratic doesn't make me a Democratic person. They don't own me. They're just a political party. And they're not guiltless when it comes to dehumanizing immigrants.
Then, there are the 30 - 35% of people who mostly don't vote at all. That group has an even more disproportionate share of people likely to be dehumanized by the GOP than "typical Democratic voters" does.
I find it interesting in California unified independents would replace #CAGOP & no one courts them. The party has enough support to get a governor recalled but is too weak to have him removed. The electorate needs support for a viable constituency.
What the Democrats are doing this era on immigration makes any excuse for anything if this is the height of the ethical bar. Just because something doesn't bother us doesn't make it acceptable.
@postpunky I am having a hard time seeing the connection between what I said and what you just said
Lloyd Lemons@Sheril Agreed.
Claire Bangasser@Sheril
We were all immigrants once.
We were all immigrants once.
Katy Swain@Sheril I've always thought it ironic that it was my country (Australia), which pioneered all the "turn back the boats", "illegal", "people smugglers", "queue jumpers", "border protection" rhetoric that is now standard across the political spectrum in the allegedly wealthy and secure countries.
We depend largely on an already marginal thin strip of green along the east coast of the continent for our food security, and when climate push comes to shove, I suspect among the refugees will be us.
Americans are losing at the replacement rate of entire states while being ravaged by hurricanes. I have one hometown I am afraid of the other financially excluded from by unregulated #globalism while the reason I am tooting you is you're Australian. Americans don't care, even those naturally allied.
Familiar streets in San Francisco have been turned over to homeless junkies between points A-B.
I won't call it "the woke mind virus" but agree it's the end of civilization.
Daniel S. Reichenbach@Sheril we are all just people, countries and borders are the things which are largely made up fantasy.
Nobody talks about birds switching countries and calls them immigrants. Just migration. Why do we coin immigration as a negative term for humans?
Do you consider yourself more of a libertarian or a communist? That's what you're tooting.
@postpunky @Sheril if you are fine with such a limited view. I am neither of those, and their definition does not really fit well with my statement.
Rosemary McNaughton@Sheril yes! We can debate immigration policy without dehumanizing migrants. People move for human reasons-safety, opportunity, dignity, proximity to family. And sure maybe we can’t just let everyone move wherever whenever they decide to, but if we see them as human beings we can work on humane decisions.
Makavell@Sheril True, they are people. However, there's a need for immigrants to follow & respect rules and laws of whatever country they may find themselves in. If not, hostility between them (immigrants) and native citizens will keep on popping up now and again, thus making their asylum status not conducive.