5 ms·

It’s fascinating that people still see these things as new or unique to our current administration. This has been an issue for decades that were often ignored o

It’s fascinating that people still see these things as new or unique to our current administration. This has been an issue for decades that were often ignored or minimized because it only affected smaller more marginalized groups of people. For example conferences involving HIV/AIDS had to contend with these issues for decades due to the blanket ban on HIV+ individuals from entering the country, even for a scientific conference. Often the conferences would continue leading to schisms in the communities and competing conferences that would ultimately disagree on fundamental principles in science and policy.

ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y ago
It seems new and unique, given that conferences (and scientists) are leaving?
- mlindner 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - rcpt 1y ago
    Do you have some statistics? Because there really does seem to be a change in immigration enforcement lately and multiple universities have issued guidance accordingly.
- ygjb 1y ago
  You know how if you pile lots of flammable things in the corner of your garage and it's fine for years, and then a toddler strolls through with a book of matches, then suddenly you get a new and unique fire? The conferences and scientists leaving are the results of decades of policy undermining education and human rights, coupled with the rise of the alt-right, normalization of racism and misogyny, with a soupçon of neo-nazism that allowed a populist regime to rise to power. All of that was the pile of flammable things. The extrajudicial deportations, conferences and scientists leaving, and tourism crashing are the first tendrils of smoke rising in the corner. It's not too late for America to fix it.
  - whatshisface 1y ago
    The system in the US is capable of running on nothing but hope because of the availability of lending and investment. "Unfortunately" that means the average person won't receive an impossible to ignore signal that something is going bad until bankers and investors lose hope. By that point, something would have had to have happened that can't be fixed in the short term by a reversal or a sudden period of sobriety. For a concrete example, the stock market is going up and down every time the tariff threats change tone, but the layoffs that the tariffs will make inevitable won't be done until companies run out of financiers who can be convinced the setbacks are only temporary.
- illiac786 1y ago
  I think the point is, people are leaving because it seems new to them, while it in fact is not. I’m not saying I agree, just clarifying the point of the previous comment.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
b59831 1y ago
[dead]
mattnewton 1y ago
It’s a question of degree
- roenxi 1y ago
  Has anyone done the legwork to demonstrate the degree? The linked article is lists around 6 conferences. Which is not a huge number, in the grand scheme of things, given how anti-Trump the US academy seems to be. More than 5, less than 10 and I assume conferences move around fairly regularly. It is annoyingly typical that they managed to interview a "historian who studies international conferences" yet fail to contextualise how large 6 conferences is in the scheme of things. Thanks to the Magic of the Internet [0] I can see that hundreds of thousands of conferences have taken place since their first appearance in the late eighteenth century which isn't that informative (averages to >333/year over 3 centuries I suppose). [0] https://www.bbk.ac.uk/our-staff/profile/8008585/jessica-reinisch https://www.bbk.ac.uk/our-staff/profile/8008585/jessica-rein... & https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/52195/1/BJH2300063_R.pdf https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/52195/1/BJH2300063_R.pdf
  - jltsiren 1y ago
    It's far too early to say. You can't move a conference to a different country on a short notice. You can only hold it with whatever audience you can get, postpone it, or cancel it. For larger events, it's already too late to move events scheduled for 2026, and possibly even for 2027. Maybe there will be some data in a couple of years, but until then, anecdotes and informed guesses are the best you can have.
    - psychoslave 1y ago
      It's harder of a choice the closer the event date is, but sometime it's just the most responsible thing to do. You won't see many people coming to your event if it's now in a war zone for an extreme example.
      - illiac786 1y ago
tbrownaw 1y ago
> leading to schisms in the communities and competing conferences that would ultimately disagree on fundamental principles in science and policy. Ignoring the original topic and the rest of the comment, this part sounds like actually a useful thing? If the different groups don't converge, that suggests that at least one of the consensuses is being driven by something other than verifiable facts (groupthink? conflicts of interest? politics?). Which I'd think is a useful thing to bring to the surface like that.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
EasyMark 1y ago
this is on a much larger scale and supported by ~40% of the USA who think Trump can do no wrong, and agree with his racism and unconstitutional imprisonment of brown people who are here to just visit or get an education. Basically now if you're not white, you are a suspect if you are coming/going internationally. I'm pretty sure some heroic person will eventually whistleblow a tape recording/email/memo that cites this as the new operating norm for the current regime.
freen 1y ago
Full throated and enthusiastic ethno-fascism is new. Africaaners are enthusiastically welcomed and coming in droves, everyone else, quite the opposite. Should tell you everything you need to know.
tim333 1y ago
The shipping people off for indefinite imprisonment in El Salvador without due process or appeal is new. I realise the people they've shipped are not conference delegates but it's still a bit off putting.
- TheCoelacanth 1y ago
  They've also started detaining people at the border for some minor visa violations where they normally would just refuse entry. That's a very real concern for conference travellers.

ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y ago

It seems new and unique, given that conferences (and scientists) are leaving?

mlindner 1y ago
[flagged]
- rcpt 1y ago
  Do you have some statistics? Because there really does seem to be a change in immigration enforcement lately and multiple universities have issued guidance accordingly.
ygjb 1y ago
You know how if you pile lots of flammable things in the corner of your garage and it's fine for years, and then a toddler strolls through with a book of matches, then suddenly you get a new and unique fire? The conferences and scientists leaving are the results of decades of policy undermining education and human rights, coupled with the rise of the alt-right, normalization of racism and misogyny, with a soupçon of neo-nazism that allowed a populist regime to rise to power. All of that was the pile of flammable things. The extrajudicial deportations, conferences and scientists leaving, and tourism crashing are the first tendrils of smoke rising in the corner. It's not too late for America to fix it.
- whatshisface 1y ago
  The system in the US is capable of running on nothing but hope because of the availability of lending and investment. "Unfortunately" that means the average person won't receive an impossible to ignore signal that something is going bad until bankers and investors lose hope. By that point, something would have had to have happened that can't be fixed in the short term by a reversal or a sudden period of sobriety. For a concrete example, the stock market is going up and down every time the tariff threats change tone, but the layoffs that the tariffs will make inevitable won't be done until companies run out of financiers who can be convinced the setbacks are only temporary.
illiac786 1y ago
I think the point is, people are leaving because it seems new to them, while it in fact is not. I’m not saying I agree, just clarifying the point of the previous comment.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

b59831 1y ago

[dead]

mattnewton 1y ago

It’s a question of degree

roenxi 1y ago
Has anyone done the legwork to demonstrate the degree? The linked article is lists around 6 conferences. Which is not a huge number, in the grand scheme of things, given how anti-Trump the US academy seems to be. More than 5, less than 10 and I assume conferences move around fairly regularly. It is annoyingly typical that they managed to interview a "historian who studies international conferences" yet fail to contextualise how large 6 conferences is in the scheme of things. Thanks to the Magic of the Internet [0] I can see that hundreds of thousands of conferences have taken place since their first appearance in the late eighteenth century which isn't that informative (averages to >333/year over 3 centuries I suppose). [0] https://www.bbk.ac.uk/our-staff/profile/8008585/jessica-reinisch https://www.bbk.ac.uk/our-staff/profile/8008585/jessica-rein... & https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/52195/1/BJH2300063_R.pdf https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/52195/1/BJH2300063_R.pdf
- jltsiren 1y ago
  It's far too early to say. You can't move a conference to a different country on a short notice. You can only hold it with whatever audience you can get, postpone it, or cancel it. For larger events, it's already too late to move events scheduled for 2026, and possibly even for 2027. Maybe there will be some data in a couple of years, but until then, anecdotes and informed guesses are the best you can have.
  - psychoslave 1y ago
    It's harder of a choice the closer the event date is, but sometime it's just the most responsible thing to do. You won't see many people coming to your event if it's now in a war zone for an extreme example.
    - illiac786 1y ago

tbrownaw 1y ago

> leading to schisms in the communities and competing conferences that would ultimately disagree on fundamental principles in science and policy. Ignoring the original topic and the rest of the comment, this part sounds like actually a useful thing? If the different groups don't converge, that suggests that at least one of the consensuses is being driven by something other than verifiable facts (groupthink? conflicts of interest? politics?). Which I'd think is a useful thing to bring to the surface like that.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

EasyMark 1y ago

this is on a much larger scale and supported by ~40% of the USA who think Trump can do no wrong, and agree with his racism and unconstitutional imprisonment of brown people who are here to just visit or get an education. Basically now if you're not white, you are a suspect if you are coming/going internationally. I'm pretty sure some heroic person will eventually whistleblow a tape recording/email/memo that cites this as the new operating norm for the current regime.

freen 1y ago

Full throated and enthusiastic ethno-fascism is new. Africaaners are enthusiastically welcomed and coming in droves, everyone else, quite the opposite. Should tell you everything you need to know.

tim333 1y ago

The shipping people off for indefinite imprisonment in El Salvador without due process or appeal is new. I realise the people they've shipped are not conference delegates but it's still a bit off putting.

TheCoelacanth 1y ago
They've also started detaining people at the border for some minor visa violations where they normally would just refuse entry. That's a very real concern for conference travellers.