That’s right, pretend you don’t understand what an analogy is. Get all huffy. Start backpedaling, pretend you are smart and superior and that only you and your kind are human enough to understand and deal with these things. When it comes to distorting the English language to dehumanize your inferiors, your lying isn’t like a super-power, it’s obvious lying. We are not shocked, we expect such turds in the punch bowl from you.
What the fuck are you talking about now, and who is “we?”
You’re letting the opposition take over the word (the same way they’ve tried to takeover the word “patriot”). The solution to illegal aliens is to make them legal.
Just like the problem of slavery wasn’t solved in a decade, neither has been the problem of illegal aliens.
Thinking that the term “illegal alien” blames the victim is accepting the opposition’s worldview. So don’t do that.
False dichotomy.
It was the loveliest party that I’ve ever attended.
The problem is that they are members of our society and yet don’t the rights and responsibilities that they should have. The comparison to slavery is apt.
You’re letting the opposition take control of the language. The term “illegal alien” has no racist implications. That you think it does means you’re ceding. Don’t do that.
It seems to me that the real driver of this condition is not illegal immigrants or illegal workers, it is illegal employers. There are far fewer of them than of the migrants, and one would suppose they would be more easily subject to US law.
If you really want to stop illegal immigration, call for serious prosecutions of the American businesses that cause it. The rest is political football.
I gotta agree with this. Fuck political correctness.
No, it hasn’t. In fact pretty much nothing has been done at all. So I don’t think changing the terms can hurt anything- particularly if the newer terms might be more accurate or less biased.
I’m not sure who you are describing as “the opposition” here.
Does a country have a moral right to create and impose immigration restrictions?
Bolding mine. **Marley **- I agree that not everyone who talks about illegal immigrants are racist. But from gathering a few context clues, like the ones bolded, I think Elf might be on the more racist-y side.
Maybe in SoCal, Arizona, Texas, etc… the majority of “illegal immigrants” are Mexican. But I live and work in NoVA. I can say that the vast majority of “light brown” immigrants are from El Salvador and Honduras. We also have equal numbers of illegal immigrants from Asia, Africa and Europe.
I work with a large number of immigrants; legal or otherwise. There are many many problems on many many levels. These need to be solved, and quibbling over names ain’t gettin’ it done.
What do you mean by moral? I think a government has an obligation to its citizenry to enact and enforce laws, which work to maintain an ordered society.
My pie-in-the-sky solution: Every one is free to come. You register, get a tax ID number, and get to go wherever you like. You break the law, you go back. Employers who are caught employing anyone without registration and a tax ID get nuked from space.
Maybe. That’s also a post on page three, so I’m not sure how much it has to do with his original argument about the terms (which is wrong anyway).
Most illegal immigrants in the U.S. are from Mexico, and many of the rest are from elsewhere in the Americas. But I assumed Machine Elf was being one of those lazy tools who uses “Mexican” as a catchall for all of South and Central America because they don’t give a shit which country is which anyway.
I’m not sure why you’re insulting me since I’m not insulting you. FWIW, I don’t think Second Stone is helping his case by essentially claiming that everyone who doesn’t agree with him is “a racist” or “a crypto racist fascist”(may have gotten the order wrong). Nor for that matter do I think any criticisms of US policy regarding illegal immigrants is an example of racism.
I merely objected to your insistence that it is “monstrously stupid” to assume that Machine Elf(the OP) was talking about Hispanics.
Yes, not all illegal immigrants are Hispanics just as not all Zionists are Jews but when people talk about illegal immigrants or complain about Zionists we know who they’re complaining about.
Furthermore, you’ll notice that right after I posted that, **Machine Elf ** confirmed that he was thinking of “Mexicans”.
I should add that Machine Elf is horribly misinformed.
Yes, the majority of illegal immigrants are Mexican-Americans, but according to the Department of Homeland Security estimates only about 62% are of Mexican origin(though if you do add in Guatemalans, Hondurans and Salvadorans the number jumps to about 75% Latino).
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf(warning PDF)
Furthermore, his claims that the overwhelming majority entered the country illegally and that those who entered legally but are now staying here illegally by “overstaying their visas and such” is not supported by the facts.
In fact, probably around 35-40% of all illegals came to the US legally and then “overstayed”.
http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/19.pdf(warning PDF)
Now, does that mean that The Second Stone’s wild charges of racism was right? No.
Nor does it mean that demanding the US have tougher policies regarding illegal immigrants is racist? Again no.
In this case “the opposition” is you, Marley. He is suggesting that when I call out the OP and you for calling people “illegals” that I am fighting on your turf over the use of the word illegal and not choosing my ground well.
That’s close to being correct. I am calling you and your racist OP friend “racists” for flinging about the term “illegals”, but I am intentionally doing it over that word and drawing the line there.
“Niggers” used to be acceptable language in this country for describing an oppressed underclass not entitled to rights and used for menial labor and discarded. That is exactly the context in which you and the OP are using the word “illegals”. The difference being that there is a semantic amphiboly because the root of “illegals” is the word “legal” which has ample acceptable contexts, whereas “niggers” has no other acceptable context or usage.
The word “illegals” is used to dehumanize people, call them criminals when no such adjudication has been made, remove their rights and allow them to be oppressed. That’s what Clothahump wants to do when completely discarding “political correctness.” Political rights and social niceties are what make civilization.
The only people who are within the meaning of the law “illegal” immigrants are those who have so been adjudged and awaiting deportation. Very few. And of those very few, it is only their immigration status that is illegal, they are not illegal as people. Once they are deported they are no longer immigrants. Prior to a judicial determination, they are, if awaiting trial, accused, not illegal, as a matter of law and custom going back to the Magna Carta.
Suggesting that there are whole swaths of “illegals” roaming around out there not convicted or even under indictment is an intentional fallacy of the heap. At no time are you not talking about individual human beings whose status in this country has not been questioned by any individual or government. To the extent that racist demagogues like Rush Limbaugh popularize the term “illegals”, it is to accuse them all of a crime where each individual has a presumption of innocence. This mass accusation is also an attack on the whole concept of presumption of innocence, but I digress.
I do not have to prove my immigration status to you or anyone else. Because I am lily-white, it is assumed that I have proper papers on file in public offices that pertain to me. But you don’t have the right to accuse me, directly or impliedly, of not having them. As an individual, I could sue you for defamation if you were to claim otherwise. Groups don’t have such defamation protections. But they do have the protection of public shaming the racists who attack them.
Presume that everyone has a right to be in a public or private place unless you know better. If you actually know an individual who may be violating immigration laws, have the courage of your convictions and turn them in to the INS. When you do neither, and sneer that they are “illegals” you are keeping them socially oppressed and allowing for their exploitation.
Where did marley call people “illegals”?
Well said, The Second Stone, well said.
Yes, it’s about time someone stood up and took a bold stand against… uh, curlcoat.
Seriously?
“Forget it, he’s rolling.”
That’s definitely not what Pleonast is saying. It’s one thing if you want to rant and rave and convince yourself you’re fighting injustice by doing some kind of imitation of a cartoon liberal college professor, but don’t fuck up a conversation with someone else. Let the adults talk.
I am wondering if you are confusing “illegals” - a stupid and offensive term - with “illiterate,” which pretty well describes you. I don’t call people illegals, and as a reminder, I told the OP he’s wrong that “illegal immigrant” is the super duper magic right term.
This is probably wrong and not really relevant. You’re no lawyer. Rest of pointless rant snipped. Your insistence on confusing me with someone who listens to Rush is pretty funny and only serves to demonstrate that you’re the type of idiot who thinks anyone who disagrees with him about anything, no matter how minor, is EEEEEEEEEVULL. This is how stupid people think.
I thought I made it obvious enough. I’d rather avoid your mandatory “ah, if you believe that, you must also believe [random comparison to, usually, hating Jews]” hijack.
Post 10. Here:
I think this is the same argument used for centuries. Ben Franklin famously railed against German immigrants. Lawrence Welk, who was born in North Dakota, had a German accent because, outside of school, everybody spoke German in his town and English could be said to be his second language.
I think most Mexicans (illegal or otherwise) come here because they want to work and lead a life not possible in Mexico. That is no different from most of us.