5 ms·

so glad we have Red people running the country / ICE who obey every law on the books - phew…

scoofy 1y ago
So, is this what we are doing? Downvoting and non sequiturs that amount to deflection and whataboutism? Not caring about democratic results — when human rights are not at issue — is a very dangerous precedent. I absolutely hate the current administration. They are not responsible you the laws on the books. They were successful last election, in some part, exactly because this is a very relevant political issue.
- bdangubic 1y ago
  I don’t downvote people that have a different opinion so it ain’t me! > they are not responsible for the laws on the books so in 26/28 when Blue people take over they are free to disregard all laws because they are not “responsible for it”?
  - scoofy 1y ago
    > I don’t downvote people that have a different opinion so it ain’t me Totally fair. I’ve had a tough time with my good-faith, heterodox views on this issue lately. >>they are not responsible for the laws on the books >so in 26/28 when Blue people take over they are free to disregard all laws because they are not “responsible for it”? No, my only point is that some seem to try to argue that “Trump is different because he is acting in bad faith,” and I generally agree. The problem with that argument is that our immigration laws are decades old, and blue states nullification is also decades old. We’ve found ourselves dealing with federal enforcement of federal laws because of state nullification, we don’t like that enforcement — I don’t like that enforcement — but we could pretty much end all this escalation between blue states and the feds by just agreeing to enforce the laws on the books. No more flirting with literal civil war. Just dealing with the consequences of a losing position as humanely as possible, given the fact that it’s going to suck. Then we can fight to change those laws democratically.
    - mindslight 1y ago
      > we could pretty much end all this escalation between blue states and the feds by just agreeing to enforce the laws on the books This is incredibly naive. You've got an academic point in the context of rewinding the clock back twenty years, sure. But as to the current situation? Federal law-breaking forces are attacking citizens for simply exercising their first amendment rights to protest. Federal law-breaking forces are abducting people based on skin color and the declaration of a shoddy facial-recognition "app". Federal law-breaking forces are terrorizing entire apartment buildings by ransacking them in the middle of the night. Federal law-breaking forces are aggressively attacking people to seize control of situations that would otherwise be closer to even-party civil disputes (eg the woman who was violently kidnapped out of her own car because the jackboots crashed into her). Federal law-breaking forces are hiding their faces to avoid having their crimes documented and possibly facing justice. This is all a much stronger form of wanton illegality - anti-Constitutional, organized, criminal, and aggressively violent transgressions - than people being here illegally. This is not terribly surprising, because all signs point to the immigration issue being nothing more than a pretext for unleashing fascist paramilitary gangs on American civil society - specifically fundamentalist red state militias hopped up on social media delusions and pathetic revenge fantasies, ultimately serving nothing beyond naked autocratic power. So if you are earnestly concerned about the rule of law (and I agree we should be!), you should be focusing your current ire on those federal law-breaking forces. And no amount of "perhaps we did something to deserve this" navel gazing changes this.
      - scoofy 1y ago
        > So if you are earnestly concerned about the rule of law (and I agree we should be!), you should be focusing your current ire on those federal law-breaking forces. More whataboutism… always whataboutism.
        bdangubic 1y ago
        This is an easy way out... if you want to have a honest discussion you should read and address the opposing views. you are trying to oversimplify things like "states are nullifying federal laws" etc... you need to dig deeper that to see WHY that is - you think some State folk woke up one morning and went "shit, why don't we see which Federal Laws that are on the books we want to break today?" or you think perhaps there are other reason why we have sanctuary cities, what prompted that to begin with...? if you think someone just woke up and said "hell, why don't we just make this up for the heck of it...?" then maybe but none of this is all that simple...

So, is this what we are doing? Downvoting and non sequiturs that amount to deflection and whataboutism? Not caring about democratic results — when human rights are not at issue — is a very dangerous precedent. I absolutely hate the current administration. They are not responsible you the laws on the books. They were successful last election, in some part, exactly because this is a very relevant political issue.

bdangubic 1y ago
I don’t downvote people that have a different opinion so it ain’t me! > they are not responsible for the laws on the books so in 26/28 when Blue people take over they are free to disregard all laws because they are not “responsible for it”?
- scoofy 1y ago
  > I don’t downvote people that have a different opinion so it ain’t me Totally fair. I’ve had a tough time with my good-faith, heterodox views on this issue lately. >>they are not responsible for the laws on the books >so in 26/28 when Blue people take over they are free to disregard all laws because they are not “responsible for it”? No, my only point is that some seem to try to argue that “Trump is different because he is acting in bad faith,” and I generally agree. The problem with that argument is that our immigration laws are decades old, and blue states nullification is also decades old. We’ve found ourselves dealing with federal enforcement of federal laws because of state nullification, we don’t like that enforcement — I don’t like that enforcement — but we could pretty much end all this escalation between blue states and the feds by just agreeing to enforce the laws on the books. No more flirting with literal civil war. Just dealing with the consequences of a losing position as humanely as possible, given the fact that it’s going to suck. Then we can fight to change those laws democratically.
  - mindslight 1y ago
    > we could pretty much end all this escalation between blue states and the feds by just agreeing to enforce the laws on the books This is incredibly naive. You've got an academic point in the context of rewinding the clock back twenty years, sure. But as to the current situation? Federal law-breaking forces are attacking citizens for simply exercising their first amendment rights to protest. Federal law-breaking forces are abducting people based on skin color and the declaration of a shoddy facial-recognition "app". Federal law-breaking forces are terrorizing entire apartment buildings by ransacking them in the middle of the night. Federal law-breaking forces are aggressively attacking people to seize control of situations that would otherwise be closer to even-party civil disputes (eg the woman who was violently kidnapped out of her own car because the jackboots crashed into her). Federal law-breaking forces are hiding their faces to avoid having their crimes documented and possibly facing justice. This is all a much stronger form of wanton illegality - anti-Constitutional, organized, criminal, and aggressively violent transgressions - than people being here illegally. This is not terribly surprising, because all signs point to the immigration issue being nothing more than a pretext for unleashing fascist paramilitary gangs on American civil society - specifically fundamentalist red state militias hopped up on social media delusions and pathetic revenge fantasies, ultimately serving nothing beyond naked autocratic power. So if you are earnestly concerned about the rule of law (and I agree we should be!), you should be focusing your current ire on those federal law-breaking forces. And no amount of "perhaps we did something to deserve this" navel gazing changes this.
    - scoofy 1y ago
      > So if you are earnestly concerned about the rule of law (and I agree we should be!), you should be focusing your current ire on those federal law-breaking forces. More whataboutism… always whataboutism.
      - bdangubic 1y ago
        This is an easy way out... if you want to have a honest discussion you should read and address the opposing views. you are trying to oversimplify things like "states are nullifying federal laws" etc... you need to dig deeper that to see WHY that is - you think some State folk woke up one morning and went "shit, why don't we see which Federal Laws that are on the books we want to break today?" or you think perhaps there are other reason why we have sanctuary cities, what prompted that to begin with...? if you think someone just woke up and said "hell, why don't we just make this up for the heck of it...?" then maybe but none of this is all that simple...