4 ms·

Sounds like typical banter after securing a sale. In the same way people might use the wine bottle emoji when closing a deal with a brewery.

by cmcd 7y ago

minimuffins 7y ago
I agree. The banality of the way the company handles its relations with such a grotesque organization is pretty chilling.
- throwaway520215 7y ago
  Grotesque organization? I wasn't aware they contracted with MS-13 and the Sinaloa Cartel.
claudeganon 7y ago
Maybe the problem is also normalizing violence against migrants to the point where you’re celebrating sales to their persecutors with patriotic emojis.
- remarkEon 7y ago
  There is not a universal right to come to the United States. At some point your argument degrades into “everyone gets to come here and if you enforce or what enforced the existing law you’re [insert -ist here]”. It’s an effective rhetorical payload, I’ll give you that, but it is completely divorced from any kind of system of state sovereignty and integrity. In a way I agree with you, because “enforcing the law” really is “normalized violence” - philosophically speaking, since it’s the State that has the guns (or most of them).
  - claudeganon 7y ago
    Nor is there some universal standard or determination about who is allowed in. That’s entirely determined by who has power and how they choose to interpret the law or even adhere to it and what degree of violence they use in doing do. In the case of the current administration, that’s stripping children from their parents, keeping people in dangerous, overcrowded, disease-ridden conditions, allowing people to profit off this incarceration, and just generally deploying racist and genocidal rhetoric in doing so. People aren’t objecting to some abstract notion of enforcing laws, they’re objecting to how power is operating to do demonstrably vile and unnecessary to things migrants with the framework of “enforcement” as an excuse. Rule of law doesn’t exist outside of how it is materially made manifest.
    - remarkEon 7y ago
      >People aren’t objecting to ... enforcing laws You’re right about that, since they generally didn’t object to the same or similar levels of enforcement from the previous administration. It’s not completely clear why they didn’t, but it probably had to do with olive branch policies like DACA and a mostly compliant media apparatus. But what’s been the general theme here is that people actually don’t want these laws enforced at all. They have a fundamentally different view about state sovereignty and want that view made real in policy. As I said before, you have a useful rhetorical payload you get to deploy (“everyone who disagrees with me is a racist”) against those who think we should perhaps not just open the borders. Those who don’t want that have to make longer, more complex arguments about things that make states and societies function - which is only “abstract” until it isn’t.
      - claudeganon 7y ago
        I don’t think that everyone who disagrees with me is racist. I’m actually quite open to (but not entirely in agreement with) a left, labor-focused critique that mass immigration under the current circumstances of American Capitalism (widespread wage theft, union busting, lack of enforcement of labor laws) would be used by Capital owners to further undermine the existing working class. I personally believe that increased immigration should be done in tandem with mass protections for workers, including things like easier unionization, the abolishment of sector-wide bargaining bans, increased enforcement of wage and labor laws etc. What I don’t believe is that the current administration’s practices are anything other than a cynical, racist diversion of tensions and alienation created by Capitalism away from the wealthy and into the scapegoating of immigrants. Broader issues of statehood and sovereignty are not even in question because they’re not meaningful considerations to the people doing these things. They have no allegiance to anything other than what invests them with further wealth, power, and opportunity for cruelty. The Obama administration absolutely set this all in motion through their feckless, naive, and equally cynical use of immigration enforcement as some bargaining chip for a broader deal. And liberals who fail to acknowledge this should be hung out to dry with him for their hypocrisy.
        7y ago

Sounds like typical banter after securing a sale. In the same way people might use the wine bottle emoji when closing a deal with a brewery.

by cmcd 7y ago

Sounds like typical banter after securing a sale. In the same way people might use the wine bottle emoji when closing a deal with a brewery.

minimuffins 7y ago

I agree. The banality of the way the company handles its relations with such a grotesque organization is pretty chilling.

throwaway520215 7y ago
Grotesque organization? I wasn't aware they contracted with MS-13 and the Sinaloa Cartel.

claudeganon 7y ago

Maybe the problem is also normalizing violence against migrants to the point where you’re celebrating sales to their persecutors with patriotic emojis.

remarkEon 7y ago
There is not a universal right to come to the United States. At some point your argument degrades into “everyone gets to come here and if you enforce or what enforced the existing law you’re [insert -ist here]”. It’s an effective rhetorical payload, I’ll give you that, but it is completely divorced from any kind of system of state sovereignty and integrity. In a way I agree with you, because “enforcing the law” really is “normalized violence” - philosophically speaking, since it’s the State that has the guns (or most of them).
- claudeganon 7y ago
  Nor is there some universal standard or determination about who is allowed in. That’s entirely determined by who has power and how they choose to interpret the law or even adhere to it and what degree of violence they use in doing do. In the case of the current administration, that’s stripping children from their parents, keeping people in dangerous, overcrowded, disease-ridden conditions, allowing people to profit off this incarceration, and just generally deploying racist and genocidal rhetoric in doing so. People aren’t objecting to some abstract notion of enforcing laws, they’re objecting to how power is operating to do demonstrably vile and unnecessary to things migrants with the framework of “enforcement” as an excuse. Rule of law doesn’t exist outside of how it is materially made manifest.
  - remarkEon 7y ago
    >People aren’t objecting to ... enforcing laws You’re right about that, since they generally didn’t object to the same or similar levels of enforcement from the previous administration. It’s not completely clear why they didn’t, but it probably had to do with olive branch policies like DACA and a mostly compliant media apparatus. But what’s been the general theme here is that people actually don’t want these laws enforced at all. They have a fundamentally different view about state sovereignty and want that view made real in policy. As I said before, you have a useful rhetorical payload you get to deploy (“everyone who disagrees with me is a racist”) against those who think we should perhaps not just open the borders. Those who don’t want that have to make longer, more complex arguments about things that make states and societies function - which is only “abstract” until it isn’t.
    - claudeganon 7y ago
      I don’t think that everyone who disagrees with me is racist. I’m actually quite open to (but not entirely in agreement with) a left, labor-focused critique that mass immigration under the current circumstances of American Capitalism (widespread wage theft, union busting, lack of enforcement of labor laws) would be used by Capital owners to further undermine the existing working class. I personally believe that increased immigration should be done in tandem with mass protections for workers, including things like easier unionization, the abolishment of sector-wide bargaining bans, increased enforcement of wage and labor laws etc. What I don’t believe is that the current administration’s practices are anything other than a cynical, racist diversion of tensions and alienation created by Capitalism away from the wealthy and into the scapegoating of immigrants. Broader issues of statehood and sovereignty are not even in question because they’re not meaningful considerations to the people doing these things. They have no allegiance to anything other than what invests them with further wealth, power, and opportunity for cruelty. The Obama administration absolutely set this all in motion through their feckless, naive, and equally cynical use of immigration enforcement as some bargaining chip for a broader deal. And liberals who fail to acknowledge this should be hung out to dry with him for their hypocrisy.
      - 7y ago