No problem! 
Those are the only two choices? 
I’m curious: In your opinion, how can these facilities be fixed in order for you to stop calling them concentration camps?
Once you take “fix the concentration camps” out, yes. I mean you explicitly said “They are concentration camps that need to be torn down.” What are the other choices we have if we accept that the US is running concentration camps?
Beds. Blankets. Heat. Medical Care. Toothpaste. Toothbrush. Soap. Due process. Exercise. Let independent investigators in. Turn the fucking lights down at night to allow proper sleep. School for the children. Proper nutrition. Lessening of the constant demonization of those detained.
These steps would be a start in the right direction, but to actually fix this inhuman mess of a situation you have to be willing to examine the reason the are there in the first place.
Build detention centers that are designed to temporarily hold those that pose a danger until they can be properly processed. What we have now cannot in my personal opinion be changed into anything close to what human decency demands.
By the definition in the first link in the first post of this thread, if you did all this, they would still be “concentration camps”
AFAIK, that is exactly how these buildings were designed – they just aren’t being used that way.
Did you forget the final sentence in that post?
So, there is nothing that can be done to these facilities that would cause you to no longer deem them “concentration camps”?
I’ll take George Takei’s word for it (Twitter account). He calls them concentration camps and he should know, since he spent WWII detained in a camp. Furthermore, he states that the conditions he was held in were in many ways better than the current ones.
As far as food goes, why not contract it out to McDonald’s? Sounds like they would do a far better job for less money than what is currently being offered. Two bologna sandwiches over four days? Still frozen food or rice? Sounds like an extreme season of Survivor to me.
What the fuck would convince you that they are what they are, and that their purpose isn’t benign? Our own government is claiming that soap, toothbrushes, beds and blankets aren’t necessary for the health and safety of children, that schooling isn’t necessary for children, that turning the lights down at night isn’t necessary for the health and safety of children, that proper nutrition isn’t necessary for the health and safety of children. I am under no obligation to accept the spinned terminology of those that would treat children this way, any more then I would accept the term “discipline” from those who beat spouses, and I certainly wouldn’t bother to discuss exactly how hard and where a person can be hit and still fall under the definition of “discipline” especially when the hitting is still going on. Stop this shit before more families are destroyed and more children die, and then we can have a leisurely discussion about what to call these hellholes, o.k.?
As far as quantifying the persuasiveness of the term, I could invite you to look at the responses AOC has received, and, you know, most of this thread. Even people who basically agree with you are in here trying to convince you that the term does more harm than good.
But the “they were never listening anyway” comment is kind of hard for me to understand. I mean, don’t you want them to? Do you honestly think EVERY person out there already knows all there is to know about this issue? There’s nobody who maybe hasn’t paid much attention or who might have been getting spoon-fed the other side’s talking points? Sure, there certainly are minds completely closed that were never going to listen, but do you think handing those same people an *easy *way to dismiss you and all your arguments is a wise course of action?
But hey, if you are truly not interested in convincing anyone who doesn’t already agree with you, I will simply leave you to preaching to the choir, shaking your fists at the heavens, or whatever other metaphor you’d like to employ.
Finally, yes I am the one very emphatically and purposefully NOT having an immigration policy debate here. I’m not even remotely interested in having that off-topic discussion. I was offering my opinion on both the substance of the OP, (the effect on Trump’s re-election) and the language employed by the OP (and subsequently debated strenuously.)
I’ve already listed what would convince me.
But, let’s pretend I agree with you. My next question would be (and is) “What can we do with these facilities to stop them be concentration camps”
List the things that need to be done and that if these things were done, you’d stop calling them concentration camps. You’ve listed a few, sure. But if everything you have already listed was done, these places would still be “concentration camps” as defined by the historians in the first link in this thread.
There doesn’t seem to be any way to build a facility that doesn’t fall under the definition of “concentration camp” that you guys are using.
You know what, I’ve come around a bit. I personally think it’s better soft peddled as “these are becoming concentration camps” but I no longer think the comparison is out of line. The piling evidence of the disregard for the basic humanity of asylum seekers and immigrants can’t be brushed away with budget excuses.
Not to speak for them but part of the problem is that it’s what they are holding all these people for. Asylum seekers have a legal right to make their petition. There is plenty of evidence that someone following that legal path will show up for court. If nervous at all, we have solid ankle bracelet technology. So, holding all these people in jail seems mighty suspicious. And we aren’t talking about a kerfuffle in the Saudi family where we can hold all the suspects in a five star hotel. When you decide you are going to imprison thousand and thousands of people, the conditions are always going to be kinda shitty.
I’m sure. I’d be fine with tearing it all down and utilizing the system I and others mentioned before: Thanks for applying, here’s your court date, here’s some numbers of lawyers and charity groups in Mexico to help you, come back on your court date.
There’d be no need for these facilities.
But border crossings are about 1/4 what they were in 2000 when they topped 1.5 million, Manson. Why the sudden shift in policy? What is the actual problem? I doubt you think they are all a bunch of diseased, gang banging rapists asking for asylum.
Ah…I see the disconnect now. Thanks for this post, it helps to see where you are coming from. So, you think that all the holding camps (detention centers, Nazi Concentration Camps(tm…arr), whatever) need to go away. And then what? This doesn’t seem like a very good idea, since we still have, you know, thousands of people a day flooding into the US from Central America. What do you propose we do with those people? Even if we want to let them all in, they STILL need to be processed. They need to be vetted, checked for disease, probably given some sort of orientation. Kind of what every other country that is taking in masses of people do all the time. I recall some people calling the current German processing centers for the flood of refugees they were getting from the ME as ‘Concentration Camps’ too, yet they still had to do it because…reality.
Myself, I think we need to fix the short term issue, not try and do away with it then…something vague. We need those centers. We need them staffed better, funded better, with better facilities and a more streamline processing system. Not like we’ve never done this sort of thing before…in the past we could take this volume of people (and, guess what? We had processing centers for them to do all that stuff I mentioned). The issue is we are unprepared and no one is discussing the reality of what is needed, logistically, to do this properly. Instead, we are fighting about terms and trying to score points. As you continue to do, instead of talk about real solutions. Because after these sort of band-aid fixes go in (which are going to cost billions btw), we need to address the root cause for all of this and start dealing with the real issue here. This could be a great opportunity for the US, and instead we are fucking up…as usual. And fighting about stupid, silly shit instead of working on solutions.
Because the administration and the people who voted for him hate poor brown people. I thought that was obvious?