4 ms·

Would you also like me to not tell you that the president will sign an executive order banning people from "Muslim" countries? I do agree that it is extremely

by vostok 10y ago

Would you also like me to not tell you that the president will sign an executive order banning people from "Muslim" countries? I do agree that it is extremely unlikely that my citizenship will be taken away. Being denied naturalization does not seem out of the realm of possibility with the way things are going. More specifically, I bet that the probability is high enough that making a donation to the ACLU has negative expected value.

orsenthil 10y ago
> ACLU has negative expected value. Welcome to the Internet. Anyone is free to have an opinion. Live in fear and do nothing.
pvg 10y ago
That's not much of an argument and equating all bad things is not a very useful way to think about things (but again, you're welcome to it, it just doesn't make for much of a conversation). The president can't change laws with executive orders.
- hackuser 10y ago
  I think you are overestimating the power of laws and the strength of institutions like the courts. All those people were lynched for a century in the south, and it was illegal every time. Americans of Japanese ancestry were put in camps in WWII, no thanks to the courts. Under GW Bush, the NSA conducted illegal surveillance and the U.S. government illegally kidnapped and tortured people.
  - pvg 10y ago
    I'm not. And again, this is equating every conceivable bad thing. It's a deeply naive (never mind disempowering) way to think. Yes, governments do illegal things. Yes, of course, it's possible that the Trump or some other administration will try to constrain naturalization in some way. It's not going to be over ACLU donations, if they do.
    - hackuser 10y ago
      In fact U.S. immigration / customs has a long history of testing political beliefs. The comment above makes confident statements and throws in some hyperbole, but provides no basis to believe them.
      - pvg 10y ago
        Hang on, you brought up lynchings and internment when we were talking about ACLU donations and naturalization and I am engaging in hyperbole? Also, we're not talking about immigration or customs but specifically about naturalization. Take a look at the lengthy wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_restrictions_on_naturalization_in_U.S._law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_restrictions_on_na... In its worst excesses, during wars, anarchist and red scares, I can't find anything in there remotely close to 'donated to ACLU, denied naturalization'. Someone even managed to get a favourable court ruling after admitting to being a communist. In 1943. What is your basis for believing an ACLU donation (not even membership, a mere donation) is going to ruin your chances of naturalization. 'The US government has done and continues to do bad things' is not sufficient basis.

by vostok 10y ago

orsenthil 10y ago

> ACLU has negative expected value. Welcome to the Internet. Anyone is free to have an opinion. Live in fear and do nothing.

pvg 10y ago

That's not much of an argument and equating all bad things is not a very useful way to think about things (but again, you're welcome to it, it just doesn't make for much of a conversation). The president can't change laws with executive orders.

hackuser 10y ago
I think you are overestimating the power of laws and the strength of institutions like the courts. All those people were lynched for a century in the south, and it was illegal every time. Americans of Japanese ancestry were put in camps in WWII, no thanks to the courts. Under GW Bush, the NSA conducted illegal surveillance and the U.S. government illegally kidnapped and tortured people.
- pvg 10y ago
  I'm not. And again, this is equating every conceivable bad thing. It's a deeply naive (never mind disempowering) way to think. Yes, governments do illegal things. Yes, of course, it's possible that the Trump or some other administration will try to constrain naturalization in some way. It's not going to be over ACLU donations, if they do.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    In fact U.S. immigration / customs has a long history of testing political beliefs. The comment above makes confident statements and throws in some hyperbole, but provides no basis to believe them.
    - pvg 10y ago
      Hang on, you brought up lynchings and internment when we were talking about ACLU donations and naturalization and I am engaging in hyperbole? Also, we're not talking about immigration or customs but specifically about naturalization. Take a look at the lengthy wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_restrictions_on_naturalization_in_U.S._law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_restrictions_on_na... In its worst excesses, during wars, anarchist and red scares, I can't find anything in there remotely close to 'donated to ACLU, denied naturalization'. Someone even managed to get a favourable court ruling after admitting to being a communist. In 1943. What is your basis for believing an ACLU donation (not even membership, a mere donation) is going to ruin your chances of naturalization. 'The US government has done and continues to do bad things' is not sufficient basis.