4 ms·

It has started. The Posobiec book (foreword by Steve Bannon) makes the case that anyone to the left of Mussolini is a "secret communist revolutionary" and ratio

It has started. The Posobiec book (foreword by Steve Bannon) makes the case that anyone to the left of Mussolini is a "secret communist revolutionary" and rationalizes doing anything to "crush" us. https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/unhumans https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/unhumans This is a popular book. I found my own mother reading it. I took the title at face value at first and found the skull disturbing but not threatening what with not being a communist or anything close to it. But then I started reading and I realized that it's not a matter of if they pull the trigger but when, and when they pull the trigger that they would be completely comfortable calling my mild liberal beliefs communist, and that my mother would probably believe them as they stripped me of citizenship and sent me to a labor camp in El Salvador.

pmarreck 2y ago
[flagged]
- smallmancontrov 2y ago
  The "nothing ever changes" heuristic fails catastrophically on occasion. It's better to be prepared.
  - pmarreck 2y ago
    Yes. I'm well-aware of the analogy of the slowly boiled frog, etc. But it's also the slippery-slope fallacy, so... Why are we assuming facts here before we know of them? She is a Turkish national on a student visa. Those folks do NOT (like it or not) have the same rights as citizens. You cannot, for example, support (not saying she's done this, just saying this is the law) an organization designated as an FTO, as a "green card" holder; you CAN (sigh) as a citizen. /shrug sees downvotes ... Um, excuse me? Am I not allowed to have a valid dissenting opinion here, now? Why the downvotes, folks? Give me a valid reason please
    - smallmancontrov 2y ago
      Because it's not a slow boil, not anymore. The executive is flaunting TROs, conducting deportations without due process, openly flirting with the idea of stripping citizenship and talking about a third term. Anyone who should have payed attention to Project 2025 but "remained calm" instead should now pay attention to the McCarthy II plan from the same source. They are telling us who they are and we should listen to them.
    - etchalon 2y ago
      Visa holders have all of what most would consider "foundational rights" as any citizen. They have freedom of speech, assembly, religion, due process, etc. The government revoking a visa based on categories of behavior which are protected by those foundational rights is appalling.
      - pmarreck 2y ago
        I have looked into the legal basis of this. As a visa holder, you are enjoying a privilege, not a right. And to keep holding that privilege, you cannot openly support enemies of the state. Whether this is actually enforced or not is immaterial- that's the law as it currently stands. As a citizen, you can verbally support enemies of the state, but you cannot financially support them. INA § 237(a)(4)(A): If a visa holder engages in activities that endanger public safety or national security, including endorsing terrorist organizations or inciting violence, they can be deported. Material Support Clause (INA § 212(a)(3)(B)): Even verbal or symbolic support of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) can count as “material support,” which is grounds for both inadmissibility and deportation. Overstay or Status Violation: If someone is already skating close to the edge (e.g., questionable employment, status lapse), political speech supporting enemies of the state can provide the cherry on top for ICE to act. Discretionary Revocation: The U.S. can revoke a visa for virtually any reason, especially if the person’s presence is deemed “contrary to U.S. interests.” That doesn't require proof of a crime—just bureaucratic will. It's always been like this... But now it's controversial, apparently.
        etchalon 2y ago

pmarreck 2y ago

[flagged]

smallmancontrov 2y ago
The "nothing ever changes" heuristic fails catastrophically on occasion. It's better to be prepared.
- pmarreck 2y ago
  Yes. I'm well-aware of the analogy of the slowly boiled frog, etc. But it's also the slippery-slope fallacy, so... Why are we assuming facts here before we know of them? She is a Turkish national on a student visa. Those folks do NOT (like it or not) have the same rights as citizens. You cannot, for example, support (not saying she's done this, just saying this is the law) an organization designated as an FTO, as a "green card" holder; you CAN (sigh) as a citizen. /shrug sees downvotes ... Um, excuse me? Am I not allowed to have a valid dissenting opinion here, now? Why the downvotes, folks? Give me a valid reason please
  - smallmancontrov 2y ago
    Because it's not a slow boil, not anymore. The executive is flaunting TROs, conducting deportations without due process, openly flirting with the idea of stripping citizenship and talking about a third term. Anyone who should have payed attention to Project 2025 but "remained calm" instead should now pay attention to the McCarthy II plan from the same source. They are telling us who they are and we should listen to them.
  - etchalon 2y ago
    Visa holders have all of what most would consider "foundational rights" as any citizen. They have freedom of speech, assembly, religion, due process, etc. The government revoking a visa based on categories of behavior which are protected by those foundational rights is appalling.
    - pmarreck 2y ago
      I have looked into the legal basis of this. As a visa holder, you are enjoying a privilege, not a right. And to keep holding that privilege, you cannot openly support enemies of the state. Whether this is actually enforced or not is immaterial- that's the law as it currently stands. As a citizen, you can verbally support enemies of the state, but you cannot financially support them. INA § 237(a)(4)(A): If a visa holder engages in activities that endanger public safety or national security, including endorsing terrorist organizations or inciting violence, they can be deported. Material Support Clause (INA § 212(a)(3)(B)): Even verbal or symbolic support of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) can count as “material support,” which is grounds for both inadmissibility and deportation. Overstay or Status Violation: If someone is already skating close to the edge (e.g., questionable employment, status lapse), political speech supporting enemies of the state can provide the cherry on top for ICE to act. Discretionary Revocation: The U.S. can revoke a visa for virtually any reason, especially if the person’s presence is deemed “contrary to U.S. interests.” That doesn't require proof of a crime—just bureaucratic will. It's always been like this... But now it's controversial, apparently.
      - etchalon 2y ago