2 ms·

We are in agreement that we should change immigration policy. We are not in agreement that "cruelty is the point". When I look at those pictures it doesn't cau

We are in agreement that we should change immigration policy. We are not in agreement that "cruelty is the point". When I look at those pictures it doesn't cause a visceral reaction. It looks pretty much exactly how I imagine it would look. They're dealing with hundreds of thousands of people flooding across the border illegally. That seems like a reasonable way to house them until they can be sent back or processed. We're also not in agreement on who's fault it is that those people ended up like that. To me and many others, it is 100% their own fault. They took the risk and now they have to pay the price for getting caught. That's not cruel, it's just sensible. Advocate for legal change, don't break the law if you can't handle the consequences.

shadowgovt 7y ago
I don't really care about fault regarding the immigration waves any more than I care about fault for a natural disaster. On the one hand, we have people arriving with the clothes on their back. On the other, we have a country with a federal tax revenue of $3.6 trillion gross. It's obvious where the power balance lies in that relationship. To be blunt, "they took the risk and now they have to pay the price" sounds a lot like justice without mercy, and most schools of faith and philosophy I'm familiar with would call that "cruelty." It doesn't breed positive outcomes; it breeds resentment. Nobody knows all the rules of the games they're playing by; we only get by globally as a species by being merciful when we can afford it. And we can afford it, collectively, if we get creative. Three point six trillion dollars. This Congress and administration passed a big tax cut package. I believe you did agree the cruelty was the point; that it was intentionally a harsh process to deter further attempts at illegal immigration. Apologies if I misunderstood you and am putting words in your mouth.

shadowgovt 7y ago

I don't really care about fault regarding the immigration waves any more than I care about fault for a natural disaster. On the one hand, we have people arriving with the clothes on their back. On the other, we have a country with a federal tax revenue of $3.6 trillion gross. It's obvious where the power balance lies in that relationship. To be blunt, "they took the risk and now they have to pay the price" sounds a lot like justice without mercy, and most schools of faith and philosophy I'm familiar with would call that "cruelty." It doesn't breed positive outcomes; it breeds resentment. Nobody knows all the rules of the games they're playing by; we only get by globally as a species by being merciful when we can afford it. And we can afford it, collectively, if we get creative. Three point six trillion dollars. This Congress and administration passed a big tax cut package. I believe you did agree the cruelty was the point; that it was intentionally a harsh process to deter further attempts at illegal immigration. Apologies if I misunderstood you and am putting words in your mouth.