• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Xenophobes, Racists & Illegal Immigration

Spartacus FPV said:
Then what am I?!?!?
Click to expand...

Heck if I know. Hispanic is such a goofy classification, isn't it. 50 years ago I believe the definition was someone with a "Spanish" surname, such as Garcia or who was from a predominately "Spanish" culture. I was born in Durango, Colorado (La Plata County) in the area owned by Mexico until it was stolen by the US in the Mexican War so I may be Hispanic. There was a strong Spanish culture and history there.
Today Hispanic is, I guess, a culture although there is considerable cultural difference between a Cuban, Puerto Rican, Tejanos, people like Martin Sheen who had one parent from Spain, and a MesoAmerican from Mexico. I have Swiss American cousins who have lived all their lives in Santiago, Chile (blue eyed, blond hair). And a Mexican friend named Wolfgang Schmidt. The President of Peru was Fujimoro. I guess all of those are Hispanic.
I would think that if we limited Hispanic (or whatever word you choose) to only include people with a strong Mesoamerican/Mayan/Aztec/"Native Peoples"/amerindian it would have more significance and meaning and actually be useful in fighting against race based discrimination. What we used to call mestizo or Indio.
 
Empirica said:
As anyone who has ever noticed my Signature knows, I am a fervent supporter of enforcing and even ramping up existing Immigration Laws and closing loopholes that entice&solicit foreign nationals to break those laws.

And because I and millions of other American Citizens believe this to be a major US problem, we are accused of being xenophobes and even racists based on nothing but a political position.

I'm well aware that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants are Central and South American Latinos but why does the left insist on believing that race is the basis of our position?

I assure you that for the great majority of us, this position is rooted in nothing more than support for the law of the land and the US Constitution regardless of the nationality or skin color of the offenders.

Although; I'm sure there are those among us who are indeed motivated by racism, xenophobia and just plain ole hate but I also know that this group is a tiny insignificant minority in 21st Century America.

So why can't the liberal and lefty community just accept this reality and stop with the incessant accusations of "racist" and "xenophobe" and realize that our positions on this issue are simply at odds? :blink: ?
Click to expand...

Because it's frequently not that simple. Hard-line right anti-immigration policy often shows an ignorance of immigration reality, and also, well, straight-up racism. It just does. :shrug:

I mean, explain to me why else my legal, permanent resident Argentinian friend was basically chased out of a shooting range because the white people there didn't like "the Mexican" shooting with them? Explain to me why all of those people seem to believe Latinos are just a bunch of violent psychos, when the reality is that they're actually less crime-prone than white people are?

And on the ignorance issue, look... I'm an immigrant, ok? More specifically, I'm an immigrant living in a country that is also currently going through an anti-immigrant sentiment.

I have to keep myself constantly updated -- as in every couple weeks -- to keep myself legal, because **** is constantly changing. Constantly. It's so much work that some months, it would qualify as a full-time job. Fortunately I am educated enough and wealthy enough that I can afford to be constantly re-adjusting my status to conform to the ever-changing immigration landscape, and the total whimsy of whomever I'm dealing with that day (anyone who's an immigrant knows that there's the letter of the law, and then there's the asshole at the embassy that you just happen to be dealing with on any given day, and often times the two have nothing to do with each other).

It is entirely possible to not even know whether you're legal or not, it gets so insane. I actually don't know what my exact status is at the moment, and I will probably need to hire a lawyer to figure it out for me. I know I'm legal, but with how much everything's changed even since 2014, I don't know what category of settlement I fall into, which I need to figure out in order to do my PR paperwork, and nothing in the government literature is giving me a straight answer.

I am a highly educated and privileged person with an extensive background in research, who is also a native speaker of the language of the country I immigrated to, and even I haven't been able to figure out what the **** my status is right now. A person with half my education who's still learning English doesn't have a ****ing chance. That's how crazy being an immigrant is. Ok?

The reality is that being an immigrant is insanely difficult, and also subjects you to a lot of constant abuse. The reality is that it's so confusing that you might not even know what your status is sometimes. The reality is that, especially in America, a lot of people think they're legal who aren't if they were immigrated as young children. The reality is, it's just a lot more complicated than "those evil Mexicans raping everyone and selling all the drugs." Most immigrants, both legal and not, are trying their best to navigate a system that is intentionally trying to kick them out, even if they have done their best to follow the law, as the vast majority of them do.
 
Last edited:
Empirica said:
As anyone who has ever noticed my Signature knows, I am a fervent supporter of enforcing and even ramping up existing Immigration Laws and closing loopholes that entice&solicit foreign nationals to break those laws.

And because I and millions of other American Citizens believe this to be a major US problem, we are accused of being xenophobes and even racists based on nothing but a political position.

I'm well aware that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants are Central and South American Latinos but why does the left insist on believing that race is the basis of our position?

I assure you that for the great majority of us, this position is rooted in nothing more than support for the law of the land and the US Constitution regardless of the nationality or skin color of the offenders.

Although; I'm sure there are those among us who are indeed motivated by racism, xenophobia and just plain ole hate but I also know that this group is a tiny insignificant minority in 21st Century America.

So why can't the liberal and lefty community just accept this reality and stop with the incessant accusations of "racist" and "xenophobe" and realize that our positions on this issue are simply at odds? :blink: ?
Click to expand...

I certainly agree with that part of your signature, when a crime is ignored it becomes flagrant, and when a crime is rewarded it becomes epidemic.

We have many examples of that in the last decade or so. The system does not punish those in high office for their flagrant violations of US statutes and the US Constitution.

The immigration laws are a mess. Interesting that Obama just ended a 50 year old exception for Cuban immigrants. Good move Barack, but I'll be happy when you're gone.
 
Empirica said:
As anyone who has ever noticed my Signature knows, I am a fervent supporter of enforcing and even ramping up existing Immigration Laws and closing loopholes that entice&solicit foreign nationals to break those laws.

And because I and millions of other American Citizens believe this to be a major US problem, we are accused of being xenophobes and even racists based on nothing but a political position.

I'm well aware that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants are Central and South American Latinos but why does the left insist on believing that race is the basis of our position?

I assure you that for the great majority of us, this position is rooted in nothing more than support for the law of the land and the US Constitution regardless of the nationality or skin color of the offenders.

Although; I'm sure there are those among us who are indeed motivated by racism, xenophobia and just plain ole hate but I also know that this group is a tiny insignificant minority in 21st Century America.

So why can't the liberal and lefty community just accept this reality and stop with the incessant accusations of "racist" and "xenophobe" and realize that our positions on this issue are simply at odds? :blink: ?
Click to expand...

You are probably a racist by the ever encompassing definition that the left has morphed the words racist and racism into. It now seems to be Racist, noun. Anyone who disagrees with some action or opinion of a member of the minority class.
 
Eric7216 said:
After living a large chunk of my life with white guilt I am way past that now. It has become too comical and too common to throw that racist epithet and I have been ignoring it for years now. It is much more a reflection on the name caller than anything to do with reality or me.

And it is so sad that it my lifetime we have gone from a belief (shared by almost everyone I dealt with the 60s) that it was horribly wrong to treat people differently because of race to the current thinking that, no, it is expected to treat people differently because of race as long as we are talking about the "correct" races. And the bizarre belief other races are completely justified in their demonization of white people. There is little sympathy for the millions of poor whites in this country or the immigrants from Eastern Europe who have struggled most of their lives before coming to the US only to be condemned by some for being "privileged". And, no, that is not a personal whine, just compassion for people low on the economic scale regardless of their race.

FWIW, race is pseudo science with no clear delineations. Hispanics are not a race. Muslims are not a race. Somalis are not a race. And neither are Africans. And xenophobia is simply fear of that which is foreign or strange. All those people screaming about the 63 million people who voted for Trump could easily be called xenophobes because they are actively against those people who they find strange and do not understand. I suspect that the Trump voters who could be called xenophobes is less that the anti-Trump ranters as there was numerous reasons for their vote that may have had nothing to do with xenophobia.
Click to expand...

Well said Eric. Your last para gets it exactly right: there are no such things as 'races'. 'Race' as a concept has been entirely destroyed by modern - that is post DNA - genetics. It is very sad that this disastrous error lingers on.
 
Thoreau72 said:
The immigration laws are a mess. Interesting that Obama just ended a 50 year old exception for Cuban immigrants. Good move Barack, but I'll be happy when you're gone.
Click to expand...

I find it ironic that given the outrage of the left over people wanting to enforce immigration laws, I have yet to see any negative comments on Obama shutting down the exception given to Cuban refugees fleeing a country rife with human rights violations......it couldn't possibly be that they voted Republican could it?
 
Nap said:
I find it ironic that given the outrage of the left over people wanting to enforce immigration laws, I have yet to see any negative comments on Obama shutting down the exception given to Cuban refugees fleeing a country rife with human rights violations......it couldn't possibly be that they voted Republican could it?
Click to expand...

Besides mine, have you seen any positive comments regarding his actions?
 
Nap said:
Actually no, it has been relatively quiet on this topic.
Click to expand...

Which suggests the people's radar is turned off.

Permanently or temporarily? ;)
 
Thoreau72 said:
Which suggests the people's radar is turned off.

Permanently or temporarily? ;)
Click to expand...

As soon as Trump takes office I wouldn't put it past people to try and blame him for it. I doubt it ever gets brought up again though.
 
americanwoman said:
You have no idea what the child's situation is that ended up with them at the border. Maybe they don't even have parents, what's your excuse then?
Click to expand...

A few dead children sends the message, "Don't cross the border uninvited". It saves more children and their families.
 
PirateMk1 said:
A few dead children sends the message, "Don't cross the border uninvited". It saves more children and their families.
Click to expand...

The end doesn't justify the means. And I hope you aren't really this callous.
 
nota bene said:
The end doesn't justify the means. And I hope you aren't really this callous.
Click to expand...

Sometimes cruelty is the right course of action. The ends justifies the means. The question is one of balance and proportion. How many children die attempting to cross the border now versus how many you kill in public and ruthless fashion. The objective is prevent children from dying in the attempt to cross the border, and to preserve border integrity. If I kill tens of children ruthlessly and publicly, but save hundreds of children in the process, then I would say to you, YES the ends DO justify the means, because I saved far more children than would have otherwise died. Is it crueler to have hundreds of children die brutally from heat and the environment and smugglers and drug lords only to end up as virtual slaves, or to shoot tens of children killing most of them ruthlessly and quick in order to dissuade others from even attempting to cross in the first place. So what is the right choice?
 
So killing a few children, whether "ruthlessly and publicly" or "gently and privately" is justified because this will allegedly save so many more. This doesn't work for me.
 
PirateMk1 said:
A few dead children sends the message, "Don't cross the border uninvited". It saves more children and their families.
Click to expand...

That's not going to stop anyone desperate enough to try to cross in the first place, and it goes against everything the United States stands for.

If you give shoot to kill orders, people are going to rebel against killing women and kids sooner or later, with the emphasis on sooner.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Sometimes cruelty is the right course of action. The ends justifies the means. The question is one of balance and proportion. How many children die attempting to cross the border now versus how many you kill in public and ruthless fashion. The objective is prevent children from dying in the attempt to cross the border, and to preserve border integrity. If I kill tens of children ruthlessly and publicly, but save hundreds of children in the process, then I would say to you, YES the ends DO justify the means, because I saved far more children than would have otherwise died. Is it crueler to have hundreds of children die brutally from heat and the environment and smugglers and drug lords only to end up as virtual slaves, or to shoot tens of children killing most of them ruthlessly and quick in order to dissuade others from even attempting to cross in the first place. So what is the right choice?
Click to expand...

No offense intended, but this post makes you sound like a raving lunatic.
 
Absentglare said:
What issue? That you get really upset when people appropriately characterize xenophobic ideology as xenophobic?
Click to expand...
I have 2 questions and would very much love to hear an honest in-depth answer for each.

(1) Isn't Labeling someone "xenophobic" for supporting Immigration Laws, akin to labeling someone "dikephobic" for not supporting Immigration Laws?

(2) What would you label a naturalized Hispanic-American citizen that supports the enforcement of immigration Laws?

(and yes; such people do indeed exist)
 
Empirica said:
I have 2 questions and would very much love to hear an honest in-depth answer for each.

(1) Isn't Labeling someone "xenophobic" for supporting Immigration Laws, akin to labeling someone "dikephobic" for not supporting Immigration Laws?

(2) What would you label a naturalized Hispanic-American citizen that supports the enforcement of immigration Laws?

(and yes; such people do indeed exist)
Click to expand...

Xenophobic simply means having some sort of fear of foreigners, and of course "immigration laws" deal with foreigners in admitting them to the country.

Many today who favor strict enforcement of immigration quotas and laws rationalize that by claiming that they are more interested in the rule of law than they are in keeping foreigners out. I don't buy into their argument, simply because there are many examples of the government "breaking the law", and they say nothing about that, only about the quasi-sacred notion of "foreigners not obeying our laws".

I suspect that most immigrants would greatly prefer to be legal and law-abiding immigrants, but the bureaucracy is simply unable to process their applications in any meaningful way. Quotas set by Congress, while legal, are arbitrary and capricious, another strike against the rule of law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom