# "Illegals" and "invaders" should be moderated as hate speech in the context of immigration debates
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244
**Category:** About This Message Board
**Created:** [June 9, 2023, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244 "2023-06-09T15:31:20Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 11
### Author:  [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/201 "2023-06-10T11:45:09Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#):
>
> There’s a word beginning with N. It means ‘person who has dark skin, or is defined as a member of the group of people having dark skin.’ That is its accurate meaning.
You are being far too generous here. A word’s etymology or superficial original meaning without considering how the word is actually used in the relevant context is not its “accurate” meaning.
When people make a rigid claim that a tomato is a fruit, they often claim that they are being “pedantic”. No, a pedant is annoying but actually _correct_. They are simply wrong. They don’t understand how language works.
Similarly, @The_Other_Waldo_Pepper’s claims of “accuracy” are bogus. Usage defines meaning. When the word “illegal” or “invader” (in the context of immigrants) is widely used in a certain way, with a particular consensus connotation and subtext, it is not “accurate” to simply ignore that. All that semantic baggage is an integral part of the total semantic content. And we don’t just get to ignore that and pick our own idiosyncratic meanings for words. If you use the word, you communicate that connotation and dehumanizing subtext whether you like it or not.
It was a _reductio ad absurdum_, but what @The_Other_Waldo_Pepper is doing really is analogous to claiming that “wetback” in this context _can_ just mean a person with a wet back, on the basis that he has looked in the dictionary and he knows the “accurate” meanings of “wet” and “back”.
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/202 "2023-06-10T11:50:37Z")
> [@Riemann](#):
>
> When people make a rigid claim that a tomato is a fruit, they often claim that they are being “pedantic”. No, a pedant is annoying but actually _correct_. They are simply wrong.
When people claim that a tomato is a fruit, aren’t they simply _right?_ Seems like the analogy here would be to a guy who correctly claims that a tomato is a fruit, but who of course doesn’t tell other people that they can’t also use other terms.
---
### Author:  [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/203 "2023-06-10T11:51:57Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> When people claim that a tomato is a fruit, aren’t they simply _right?_
It’s hardly a surprise that you would think so, but no - the rigid unqualified claim that a tomato is a fruit is wrong. It depends on context. When the word “fruit” is used in a technical scientific sense, a tomato is a fruit. As a culinary ingredient in the everyday sense, it is not a fruit.
---
### Author:  [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/204 "2023-06-10T12:55:38Z")
> [@ASL\_v2.0](#):
>
> > [@msmith537](#):
> >
> > “Illegal immigrant” more accurately describes a person whose status is that they crossed the border with the intent to permanently live here without following proper immigration or asylum-seeking protocols.
>
> I disagree. Whether someone’s presence in the US is legal or not is (1) a question of law none of us are qualified to answer and (2) morally irrelevant. Even “illegal immigrant” is a stigmatizing term without moral justification.
So “alleged illegal immigrant”?
It’s a perfectly reasonable term to describe a person whose intent is to remain permanently in the United States when they do not have the legal right to do so under current immigration laws. Whether one feels those laws or the person’s intent are morally justified should not matter.
They are trying to immigrate. They are doing so illegally.
“Invasion” on the hand has nothing but stigmatizing. When one thinks of an “invasion”, images such as foreign barbarians hoards, military conquest, and / or insects or vermin infestations come to mind. That is not by accident.
---
### Author:  [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/205 "2023-06-10T13:06:50Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#):
>
> As a technical term, that’s true. And it’s also true that many “aliens” are entirely legal residents and often entirely legal workers.
>
> It’s also true that in casual speech it usually means “extraterrestrials”: that is, non-humans. So if you’re using it in a technical discussion: no problem. If you’re ranting about the subject in the coffee shop: I’d say it’s a problem, because of the association. I will grant that in this thread we’re having a technical discussion; but the technical discussion is also about usage in casual speech.
I mean sure. There are also a substantial number of aliens that are not immigrants. Presumably this is why the term “alien” is qualified in some manner (whether it’s “illegal” or “unauthorized” or “unlawfully present”).
If we’re talking about someone using the unadorned term “alien” to refer exclusively to unlawfully present aliens, then that’s obviously imprecise and unhelpful. I’ve never heard it used that way (unlike “illegals” which I am familiar with). But if someone is discussing “aliens” in the context of immigration or naturalization (ranting or otherwise), they’re clearly using the “technical” definition.
---
### Author:  [@mordecaiB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mordecaiB)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/206 "2023-06-10T17:46:44Z")
> [@Drsunflower1](#):
>
> The French term, which I like, is sans papiers. The undocumented.
Just the undocumented? There is no undocumented people or migrants etc? That’s seems on par with illegals, as it has no reference to an actual human being. Surely referring to people as documents is demeaning also.
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/207 "2023-06-10T18:14:27Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> The term, being specifically accurate, is worth reclaiming, remember?
That’s not how language works. You can’t just declare a harmful word reclaimed or “worth reclaiming.” You’re free to use it, and your various societies (of which the SDMB is but one) are free to react according to their nature and perspective.
---
### Author:  [@Drsunflower1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drsunflower1)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/208 "2023-06-10T18:17:52Z")
I agree, but somehow it’s better than illegal in my book
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/209 "2023-06-10T18:39:29Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#):
>
> That’s not how language works. You can’t just declare a harmful word reclaimed or “worth reclaiming.”
It was Left\_Hand’s idea from upthread:
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#):
>
> I’d directly repudiate the racist terrorist movement and explain why, despite their use of the term, I thought the term was so specifically accurate that it was worth reclaiming from the terrorists.
Since I was replying there _to_ Left\_Hand, I figured I’d give it an honest try.
---
### Author:  [@chela](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chela)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/210 "2023-06-10T19:04:22Z")
Undocumented immigrant or unauthorized immigrant is perfectly acceptable.
We can go one step further and attach a nationality to them. Unauthorized British immigrant, undocumented Saudi immigrant.
---
### Author:  [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)
#### Post date: [June 10, 2023, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/211 "2023-06-10T20:04:32Z")
> [@Eva\_Luna](#):
>
> The assortment of nationalities predominating among those entering the U.S. without advance permission has varied quite a lot over time. Right now it’s Central Americans, but historically it’s been Mexicans. The net negative rate of unlawful immigration from Mexico is a relatively recent development. Heck, in the
True, but there is a difference from those crossing the border illegally to get work (mostly from Mexico) and those asking for asylum at the southern border (mostly central America)
> [@Eva\_Luna](#):
>
> More recently there was a sizeable batch of Ukrainians, but the U.S. welcomed them with open arms and created [an entire new program from scratch, entirely outside the normal legislative immigration framework, just for Ukrainians.](https://www.uscis.gov/ukraine) I am glad the Ukrainians have been allowed in, but there are plenty of Guatemalans and Hondurans who would have loved a small sliver of an opportunity like that.
Well, I have no issue with Central American getting asylum, but Ciudad de Guatemala is not being bombarded by Russian missiles on a daily basis.
---
### Author:  [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/212 "2023-06-11T01:49:05Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> By that metric, is, say, “felon” dehumanizing?
“Felon” is a noun. Try referring to a person as a “felonious” and see if you get any pushback.
On an unrelated note, how would you go about pluralizing “felonious” so you could apply it to a group?
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/213 "2023-06-11T01:54:19Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#):
>
> “Felon” is a noun.
“Invader” is, too.
---
### Author:  [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/214 "2023-06-11T02:08:25Z")
Oh, I’m sorry. I thought your comment was a part of your defense of the use of “illegal” as a noun that can be pluralized and applied to human beings whilst simultaneously _not_ being dehumanizing. Was I mistaken?
If so, my deepest apologies.
But if not, I entreat you to unpack how _“Invader” is, too._ can be construed as anything but a _non-sequitur_.
TIA
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/215 "2023-06-11T02:17:19Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#):
>
> Oh, I’m sorry. I thought your comment was a part of your defense of the use of “illegal” as a noun that can be pluralized and applied to human beings whilst simultaneously _not_ being dehumanizing. Was I mistaken?
>
> If so, my deepest apologies.
You were mistaken — search this thread, and you’ll see I’ve made no mention of using “illegal” as a noun rather than as an adjective — and your apology is, of course, accepted.
---
### Author:  [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/216 "2023-06-11T02:45:29Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> You were mistaken — search this thread, and you’ll see l’ve made no mention of using “illegal” as a noun rather than as an adjective — and your apology is, of course, accepted.
Okay, I’ve done a search of your posts up to your first “felon” comment. I’ll offer no excuses for my misapprehension of your intent.
I _will_, however, ask you to unpack the “felon” comment wrt your defense of characterizing undocumented immigrants as “invaders.”
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/217 "2023-06-11T02:56:51Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#):
>
> I _will_, however, ask you to unpack the “felon” comment wrt your defense of characterizing undocumented immigrants as “invaders.”
You stated, when replying to me with a copy-and-pasted quote from me, that “felon” is a noun; and, well, I didn’t know why you mentioned that. But since, as you say, I’ve been talking about characterizing them as “invaders”, I responded by noting that “invader,” too, is a noun.
I maybe should’ve asked you to unpack _your_ comment, but I didn’t; I just figured that, if for some reason it made sense for you to mention that “felon” is a noun in your reply to me, then it’d presumably make just as much sense for me to reply that “invader” is a noun, too.
---
### Author:  [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/218 "2023-06-11T05:16:48Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> maybe should’ve asked you to unpack _your_ comment,
I kinda thought I did, in my next post. How did “felon” enter into it?
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/219 "2023-06-11T09:37:51Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#):
>
> I kinda thought I did, in my next post.
You did. But I thought you were asking me to unpack a comment I made _before_ that “next post” of yours: talking about what I did, and why, before you’d so unpacked.
> [@](#):
>
> How did “felon” enter into it?
Riemann was discussing whether the term “invader” was dehumanizing; I asked whether, by the metric Riemann was using, the term “felon” would also be dehumanizing.
You can of course read the reply upthread; it’s the one that leads off with: _“It can be, sure.”_
Which — since we don’t ban the use of the term “felon” hereabouts — maybe shows how the term, uh, _entered into it_; Riemann seems to be arguing that we should ban one term because it’s dehumanizing, and so I asked whether another term is dehumanizing: figuring that, if the answer is ‘yes’, then folks can ask why there’s no push to ban _it,_ too; and that, if the answer is ‘no’, then folks can ask _why not._
(And, with that, this thread now seems to be devolving into discussions about discussions about discussions about what’s already been said; I’m not sure any new ground is being covered.)
---
### Author:  [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)
#### Post date: [June 11, 2023, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244/220 "2023-06-11T09:49:02Z")
Does the use of the term “felon” hereabouts refer to a group of people that is not _people convicted of felonies_?
'Cause I’m not certain that your use of “invaders” does not include people seeking asylum.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244.md?page=10)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/illegals-and-invaders-should-be-moderated-as-hate-speech-in-the-context-of-immigration-debates/985244.md?page=12)