If by that you mean the Trumpistas, I’d have to wait until they sober up or finish having sex with their sisters. That could take a while, and I don’t know if the kids dying of malnutrition and dysentery have that kind of time.
Words have meanings and definitions. Why do you have such an issue with this?
Why yes, it is more important to use the correct terms to discuss human rights abuses, because euphemistic language is one of the key tools used by those who would abuse others to mask the depths of the harm being done, thank you for grasping the gist of what the historian I quoted said, octopus. Not sure why you find it funny. That’s explicitly not me asking for an explanation, mind you, I think we just find very different things funny. I like Bo Burnham, you like kids in cages, nothing wrong with that.
Let’s not let them control the conversation. Accurately describing the abuses in question are “humpty-dumptyism” to him. What more need be said?
Maybe “enhanced accommodation” is more to his liking.
Yeah, fancy that. iiandyiiii spent the first half of the thread saying the use of “concentration camp” wasn’t specifically to draw a Hitler/Holocaust comparison, only uneducated people think concentration camps=holocaust. Guess he was out of the loop.
I don’t think this is an accurate representation of my arguments. The use of this phrase is meant to invoke the emotional reaction that it should – that these are horrifying abuses of human rights. There are many, many instances of horrifying abuses of human rights beyond the Holocaust alone.
The, um, international linguistic experts have been weighing in on this as an exact definition of ‘Concentration Camps’? 
Just for shits and giggles, I looked up the definition:
Yeah, your experts really need to work on this. I’m looking over several definitions of the term and, you know, none of they really fit. All of them mention the basic points above. So…yeah, it’s political. There aren’t any people " who are qualified to speak on the matter have been calling them concentration camps" because that isn’t even a thing.
Sure it is, chief.
He…heheheh…BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHHA! Seriously? You thought I was using an exact term? Perhaps you thought I got that from the counter linguistic group to the experts you think are weighing in on this saying these are definitely Concentration Camps? Good grief. Yeah man…I made that up. I took a real thing (i.e. detention camps’) and put ‘transitory’ in front of it because, you know, they ARE transitory. We aren’t putting these people in these camps on a permanent basis…kind of what makes them NOT Concentration Camps (well, one of a host of things). They are there merely until we can ship them back to their home countries. I seem to recall the average is around 90 days.
Well, what exactly are you asking me to cite here? I didn’t say the conditions were good or that families weren’t being ‘seperated’(sic) or that the process for seeking asylum had bee changed. You made all that up, so I don’t feel compelled to defend any of that horseshit. Are you what you quoted there was that there have been repeat people caught (i.e. they were caught, sent back, and caught trying again). Do you want me to cite that? I’m happy to though you can easily google that yourself, and you can even use not government sources if you like.
I read the cites. I’m unconvinced, especially since most of the ones I’ve seen have a pretty obvious political ax to grind. It is, I concede debatable. But I think it’s wrong to go there. It detracts from actual concentration camps in the past and dilutes the meaning…and, really, as I’ve said, it’s more about scoring points than anything. One could talk about the horrible conditions in the detention camps on the border without using the deliberately charged language. Also, I don’t see AOC or anyone else actually doing squat about it. I did a quick search, and I don’t see any large appropriations being requested to alleviate the issue. Basically, the issue isn’t that the US is evil, it’s that there have been a flood of refugees from central America (not Mexico) that have overwhelmed the system. We literally are having logistics issues feeding, housing and processing so many people trying to flood into the US. Money, facilities, personnel need to be expanded…rapidly. Show me someone doing that and focused on that, instead of focused on fucking work games and scoring who is the Nazi points and I’ll take things more seriously.
No chief, I won’t. For one thing, it’s clear you haven’t got a fucking clue WHERE I stand on this. Just reading your post is bemusing to me as you have no idea. For another, no one is covering themselves with glory here. The Dems in the obvious attempt to play with words and score points aren’t…they are, IMHO, hurting the cause and worsening the situation, not helping. The Pubs, of course, are fucking clueless idiots and aren’t doing shit about it. And, so, nothing is being done on the scale it needs to. Both sides are fucking up…as usual.
Of course you don’t. You never think an unflattering description of your arguments is accurate because your arguments are so awesome they couldn’t possibly be accurately described in an unflattering manner. We did have this exchange though:
Wait did Pelosi say something about this?
Biden?
Booker?
Schiff?
Bennie Thompson? Lauren Underwood? (Chair and vice-chair of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security, who have oversight power over DHS.)
Literally any sitting (or running) democrat other than AOC?
Because if so that’s certainly germane to the question in the OP.
If not, consider that we have already had this very silly conversation and that this is coming from historians, not the DNC. Any claim that this is first and foremost about partisan gamesmanship should wait until the political party that would benefit from it has maybe a bit more than one member sounding the alarm.
That’s a bit different than what you said. But thanks for the personal shot! It lets me know you’re not really that interested in discussion with me here.
I guess I’ve seen you type “that’s not an accurate representation of my argument” so many times, I snapped. Sorry about that, old bean.
No, you are right…as far as I know, only AOC has pushed this. I shouldn’t have said Dems, since, afaik, most Dems have condemned this. My bad. I’m just riled. Also, I haven’t seen the Dems pushing for more funding and expansion of services. Congress can do that, seeing as how they control the purse strings. And the Dems SHOULD be pushing for it. Hell, I think at least some Pubs would be behind it. We need to be spending several billion more on fixing this issue and expanding our abilities as this flood isn’t going to stop any time soon. And we SHOULD be looking at ways to address the core issue, namely the domino effect happening because Venezuela is melting down, millions are fleeing to neighboring countries and those countries were shaky economically already. The US needs to be bolstering those countries, offering aid and funding, and doing a lot more. Not much we can do about Venezuela as I see it, but there is a lot we could do for the other nations affected by this cluster fuck.
Justice Department thinks that soap, toothbrushes beds or blankets for detained children aren’t necessary. A government lawyer argued that sleeping on a cold concrete floor with the lights on is “safe and sanitary”.
What name would you choose over “concentration camp” for shit like this? What name would make you feel better?
It’s not about making me feel better. Know what I want? For someone to actually do something, instead of playing word games. That would make me feel better. Funding, expansion of personnel and facilities, perhaps efforts to address the core issue. Instead of fucking stupid word games. But it’s all about those points, right? And silly crap about making me feel better, as if that’s the real problem. Just have to package the term right because XT points out how stupid it is. Let’s not worry about the actual issue, after all…just need to get him to agree it really is a ‘concentration camp’ and stop being so silly! :rolleyes:
They are concentration camps that need to be torn down. Letting them be called anything else allows those that support them to say that the problem isn’t as bad as it really is, which isn’t what you want, is it? This isn’t a time to softpedal what is going on. This isn’t a time to make what is actually happening to men, women and children seem less dire than it actually is.
Close the concentration camps.
Misguided or not, I think the use of the term ‘concentration camp’ is meant to spur action. It starts with professors X, Y and Z making some stuffy pronouncements, and nerdy liberal freshman congresspeople causing a flap. Hopefully it doesn’t end with breathless History channel documentaries 20 years from now about the Trump Death Camps.
Food supplier for Government detention centers-Lucrative
Food supplier for concentration camps-Potential Career Killer
The same goes for construction companies, guard companies, soldiers and(if they have a shred of decency left in their bodies) lawyers.
Strange, since I pulled that definition from the link that iiandyiiii provided in post #91.
So, you think it would be a good thing if only food suppliers who don’t care about their reputation will take the contract?
I get what you’re suggesting, I think - that calling them out as concentration camps will discourage people from participating. There’s two problems with that. One is that many of these people are already on the payroll. That lawyer in the HuffPo article you linked didn’t just get hired for this case. Maybe there’ll be attrition over this, I guess. But the other problem is that it discourages good people from trying to fix it, because good people don’t want to “fix” concentration camps. But maybe the second issue is a feature not a bug for you, as it requires good people to make a stark choice: no detention at all or the current system.