Note that I did not capitalise ‘disappear’. In any case, I am not going to argue whether it’s OK for the government to make people disappear just because the government isn’t killing them.
Right, which makes it very hard to tell when you mean someone’s location is unknown to you and when you mean that someone underwent Enforced Disappearance, hence why I made the distinction.
I see we are moving on to this part:
Maybe you can quote where I argued that “it’s OK for the government to make people disappear just because the government isn’t killing them”? Or alternatively, you can admit that this was the world’s weakest strawman and withdraw it.
I’m not going to argue. Either accept the word the way I have explained it is being used, or don’t.
Great - so we are both agreed, it is NOT OK for Trump to make people “disappear” or “Disappear” whether or not he is killing those people, right?
We don’t even know if they’ve been deported or still sitting in a detention center somewhere.
That’s the point. Their location is unknown.
But God forbid we say they government made them disappear…
Moderating:
@Babale - you did a partial quote of @Johnny_L.A in a way that may well change their intended meaning, without a [snip] or other indication. I grant your reply is directly following, but it is far too close to misrepresenting another posters words, even if your intent was otherwise. As such, do not do this again. You may continue to disagree on definitions used, and either/both of you are free to not respond to the other of course.
Count me among those that interpret “disappeared” as potentially killed, but that the term is far more broad than that.
We don’t need a fiftieth simile for murder death kill.
It’s valuable to have a term for when the state has taken someone to places unknown for weeks, months or even years, with no human rights. “Unlawful detainment” doesn’t cover it because it doesn’t entail that they have no contact with a lawyer or family.