5 ms·

The Japanese were interned during WWII, illegals are in camps now, and the Chinese will likely be soon. Puerto Ricans STILL can't vote. Its important to build

by bobbyz 6y ago

The Japanese were interned during WWII, illegals are in camps now, and the Chinese will likely be soon. Puerto Ricans STILL can't vote. Its important to build your argument from sturdy facts, so that big bad reality can't huff and puff and blow it all down!

jjcon 6y ago
‘Illegals’ are not in forced labor camps and that sort of equivalence is just gross. Immigrants to Europe and the US need a place to stay while their cases are processed, with the increases in immigration (especially in Europe) it is difficult to keep up with. Does the west need to do better? Absolutely but stating that these immigrant camps are like forced labor camps is deliberately misleading and just flat out wrong. Additionally - it hasn’t been until recently that Puerto Rico has favored statehood (over free association).
- bobbyz 6y ago
  What is the difference in real terms between the border camps and forced labour camps? The labour? Taking bets that these camps introduce forced labour like the Nazi camps did. Odds stop at the decade. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/border-facilities/593239/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/border-fac...
  - golergka 6y ago
    The difference is the reason to be in the camps. Breaking country's laws is generally viewed as legitimate reason to send someone to prison or camp, while being of a certain ethnicity is not. Of course, there's an issue of laws that are by themselves are morally reprehensible, like the Nuremberg laws in Nazi Germany. However, immigration laws are clearly moral and expected to exist in some form or another in any modern country. I have to say, this distinction is so obvious I'm very surprised that somebody asks this kind of question at all.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      > However, immigration laws are clearly moral... This is not, in fact, universally agreed upon.
      - jariel 6y ago
        It's a question of civics - entering the country is illegal, migrants do that knowingly. FYI they can leave anytime they want, there is a 72 hour clearing process. They are detained due to a transgression of the law, much like anything else. Where we can disagree mostly is the nature of the incarceration etc. - but this is besides the point - China's detention of citizens, arbitrarily, due to their ethnicity or because they simply want to 'move them into another job' is not remotely comparable to the detention of citizens who have broken very clear and stated laws, and of course can leave said detention as they chose. It's reasonable that some degree of moral relativism can be made WRT China, but on these threads, there is no such thing. China's arbitrary incarceration of citizens based on their ethnicity is beyond pale, the President should be bringing it up at every occasion, and it should be a pillar of our relations with China, including trade.
        ceejayoz 6y ago
        > It's a question of civics - entering the country is illegal, migrants do that knowingly. So was rescuing Jews from the Holocaust, and China's acts against Tibetans and Uighurs. Let's not mistake what's moral with what's legal; they often overlap in a decent society, but that's by no means guaranteed. You can make a case for "immigration laws are moral", but "they're moral because they're the law" isn't that case.
        jariel 6y ago
        Morality and legality are deeply intertwined. Conflating the fact that some people face basic detainment (which they can leave quickly at any time by merely choosing to return home) for breaking clear laws ... with 'Putting millions of Jews in Gas Chambers' is not helping the cause. If we are so deeply concerned about 'legality vs. morality' then I'd imagine the very first issue coming to mind would be the issue of Uyghurs being put in concentration camps by the 100's of thousands, possibly millions, for no reason at all, other than the fact they are Uyghur. Especially those dying, having their organs harvested and sent to Chinese elite. [1] [2] [3] Their arbitrary detention due to ethnicity, and the conditions imposed upon them, I think make a very good corollary to the Nazi / Jewish holocaust, worthy of intellectual consideration. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/china-harvesting-organs-of-uighur-muslims-china-tribunal-tells-un-2019-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/china-harvesting-organs-of-u... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-religious-ethnic-minorities-uighur-muslim-harvest-organs-un-human-rights-a9117911.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-religiou... [3] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/china-is-harvesting-thousands-of-human-organs-from-its-uighur-muslim-minority-un-human-rights-body-hears/ar-AAHPctL https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/china-is-harvesting-tho...
  - jjcon 6y ago
    One is the result of excess immigration - where immigrants fleeing their countries come to hope for a better life in the EU or US. Immigrants are eventually granted asylum or are turned away. Forced labor camps are created through force or threat of force and can detain people for decades with no recourse.

by bobbyz 6y ago

jjcon 6y ago

‘Illegals’ are not in forced labor camps and that sort of equivalence is just gross. Immigrants to Europe and the US need a place to stay while their cases are processed, with the increases in immigration (especially in Europe) it is difficult to keep up with. Does the west need to do better? Absolutely but stating that these immigrant camps are like forced labor camps is deliberately misleading and just flat out wrong. Additionally - it hasn’t been until recently that Puerto Rico has favored statehood (over free association).

bobbyz 6y ago
What is the difference in real terms between the border camps and forced labour camps? The labour? Taking bets that these camps introduce forced labour like the Nazi camps did. Odds stop at the decade. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/border-facilities/593239/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/border-fac...
- golergka 6y ago
  The difference is the reason to be in the camps. Breaking country's laws is generally viewed as legitimate reason to send someone to prison or camp, while being of a certain ethnicity is not. Of course, there's an issue of laws that are by themselves are morally reprehensible, like the Nuremberg laws in Nazi Germany. However, immigration laws are clearly moral and expected to exist in some form or another in any modern country. I have to say, this distinction is so obvious I'm very surprised that somebody asks this kind of question at all.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    > However, immigration laws are clearly moral... This is not, in fact, universally agreed upon.
    - jariel 6y ago
      It's a question of civics - entering the country is illegal, migrants do that knowingly. FYI they can leave anytime they want, there is a 72 hour clearing process. They are detained due to a transgression of the law, much like anything else. Where we can disagree mostly is the nature of the incarceration etc. - but this is besides the point - China's detention of citizens, arbitrarily, due to their ethnicity or because they simply want to 'move them into another job' is not remotely comparable to the detention of citizens who have broken very clear and stated laws, and of course can leave said detention as they chose. It's reasonable that some degree of moral relativism can be made WRT China, but on these threads, there is no such thing. China's arbitrary incarceration of citizens based on their ethnicity is beyond pale, the President should be bringing it up at every occasion, and it should be a pillar of our relations with China, including trade.
      - ceejayoz 6y ago
        > It's a question of civics - entering the country is illegal, migrants do that knowingly. So was rescuing Jews from the Holocaust, and China's acts against Tibetans and Uighurs. Let's not mistake what's moral with what's legal; they often overlap in a decent society, but that's by no means guaranteed. You can make a case for "immigration laws are moral", but "they're moral because they're the law" isn't that case.
        jariel 6y ago
        Morality and legality are deeply intertwined. Conflating the fact that some people face basic detainment (which they can leave quickly at any time by merely choosing to return home) for breaking clear laws ... with 'Putting millions of Jews in Gas Chambers' is not helping the cause. If we are so deeply concerned about 'legality vs. morality' then I'd imagine the very first issue coming to mind would be the issue of Uyghurs being put in concentration camps by the 100's of thousands, possibly millions, for no reason at all, other than the fact they are Uyghur. Especially those dying, having their organs harvested and sent to Chinese elite. [1] [2] [3] Their arbitrary detention due to ethnicity, and the conditions imposed upon them, I think make a very good corollary to the Nazi / Jewish holocaust, worthy of intellectual consideration. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/china-harvesting-organs-of-uighur-muslims-china-tribunal-tells-un-2019-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/china-harvesting-organs-of-u... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-religious-ethnic-minorities-uighur-muslim-harvest-organs-un-human-rights-a9117911.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-religiou... [3] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/china-is-harvesting-thousands-of-human-organs-from-its-uighur-muslim-minority-un-human-rights-body-hears/ar-AAHPctL https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/china-is-harvesting-tho...
- jjcon 6y ago
  One is the result of excess immigration - where immigrants fleeing their countries come to hope for a better life in the EU or US. Immigrants are eventually granted asylum or are turned away. Forced labor camps are created through force or threat of force and can detain people for decades with no recourse.