The Politics Megathread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dex-chan lover
Joined
Dec 31, 2018
Messages
866
@readingsit
And YOU are nothing but a walking bag of starbucks hipster stereotypes puked out onto the 'the little red book', disguised as a NPC. Good grief you're ridiculous.

Hah! Pathetic. If you're going to try to ape my insults, you could at least put a little more effort into it.
 
Double-page supporter
Joined
Jun 3, 2020
Messages
3,251
@Kaldrak I suggest Turing back now and now looking back. The socialism spirit princess is their version of liberal. As for the whole kids separated from families. They see immigrants as criminals and to them criminals apparently forfeit their human rights. at least,that that’s the only logical consistent way I can arrive at the conclusion that separating people from their children is okay.
 
Dex-chan lover
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
365
@immortalartisan
They see immigrants as criminals and to them criminals apparently forfeit their human rights

you do realize that the separation is extremely temporary right? its only until 1: they have been confirmed to be the parents and 2: their asylum case has ended. once number 1 is confirmed the parent only needs to say "you know what, screw this i wanna go home" and the kid would be returned to them immediately and they would be released. if both have been completed they are either granted asylum and they enter with their children or denied and sent back home with their children

also this is a very ironic statement considering all the countries where 'forfeit their human rights' really is the way they treat illegal immigrants. but im sure holding family members separatly during a trial is equal to execution to you so disregard this statement

some other examples of "forfeiting their human rights":
a coal miner is denied bringing their child into the mine
a police officer is not allowed to bring their kid to the scene of a crime
an astronaut cant bring his kid into space(the kid was really sad about that one)
a member of the military cant bring his kid to the battlefield
a spy cant bring his kid into an al-qaeda base
and so on

link in case you want to claim that illegally immigrating isnt dangerous
 
Double-page supporter
Joined
Jun 3, 2020
Messages
3,251
@readingsit you could separate a criminals who are wife no husband as a form of emotional torture. You could also starve them to death as both a way to physically torture them. Or you could do the most humane thing and just execute them right away. Basically I’m speaking as a complete utilitarian molarity wise.

Also I would call them more holding pens. Even I would at least make sure the area they were kept in is comfortable and not just some mats and a fence. If it’s just a temporary place for the to stay until asylum cases are handled then shouldn’t the area they keep children be something more like a large lobby then a dog pen?

Also I feel like keeping your child near to your during

Well let’s say.

A court case is considered okay.
Airplane is considered normal

You pointing to jobs which Are a different thing here

Also illegally immigrating shouldn’t even need to be a thing. Immigration and asylum seeking should always be simple as filling out 2 sheets of paper. WHEN THE HELL DID I SAY ILLEGALLY IMMIGRATING WAS SAFE? IM TALKING ABOUT KEEPING YOUR CHILDREN NEAR YOU DURING ASLYUM SEEKING.
 
Dex-chan lover
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
10,562
Did you just...excuse the human right's violation of separating kids a the border from their families?

Which right is being violated here? I'm curious.

Also, is the potential harm from violating that right better or worse than NOT separating kids in order to process any adults they are being accompanied with in order to verify that they are actually who they claim they are? What if they're grooming or trafficking the kid in question? Should we just let groomers go unquestioned without ensuring the safety of the kid?

Also, they have broken the law, which is normally enough to separate a child from their family in question for citizens. The fact the length of time is so short before the kid is returned if the adult is fully processed also needs to be considered. If it were months long, that would be one issue, but it's less than a week, which is incredibly short all things considered.


Yeah, I think I'm done with you. It's very clear to me that we are not on the same page morally, ethically, or logically.
So, does that not mean we can't have a discussion to hammer out those moral, ethical, or logical disagreements?

It's not like I justified the Holocaust, but instead I laid out a series of contentions I had with your framing of the border situation which seems to undermine the issue of human trafficking, which seems to me to be a much bigger human rights violation than temporarily denying people who illegally crossed the border from seeing their kids until we are certain they do not pose a danger to said child.

Also, it's interesting that you threw in the towel on my first argument of that post and did not address the others because I feel those are much more solid than the first one. I wish you would engage with those arguments and tried to discuss the point in good faith instead of brow beating me over this relatively insignificant contention.

@kaldrak

Basically I’m speaking as a complete utilitarian molarity[sic] wise.

I have a lot of issues with utilitarianism because it can be used to justify a lot of atrocious shit. (The go-to example is that if five people need organs to live, and one person has all those organs and is compatible, the utilitarian justification would be that he should die in order for all of his organs to go to those people. This hypothetical highlights the biggest problem with utilitarianism in that it not only negates the idea that you can't violate a person's rights, but that all humans are able to do a cost/benefit analysis through consequentialism by knowing the outcomes and picking the best ones before they occur, which is impossible) But that's not really important to this conversation, because I want to reiterate a point:

As a utilitarian, which is more unethical: passively facilitating human trafficking or temporarily removing kids from their families before returning them a short time later in order to vet them?

The answer is simple if you know anything about utilitarianism.

Also illegally immigrating shouldn’t even need to be a thing.

You need to be able to control who goes into your country and who is allowed to vote and receive government benefits. If they respect the laws and customs of your nation, they can do it the legal way, rather than simply violating the law and inserting themselves into the country, which is unfair to the legal immigrants and means that you don't know who is entering your country for what business and for what reasons.

To use your philosophy against you again:

Would you rather deny some people access to your country because they came in without permission OR allow a potentially unlimited amount of people to come in, drive down wages for poor, unskilled workers, put a burden on the social programs and tax systems, and potentially risk them not integrating into the culture, which could cause social unrest and conflict?

Utilitarianism is definitely not on your side, my dude.

@immortalartisan
 
Active member
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
940
NkHjGQ8.png

tl;dr K-pop, K-drama, C-drama, J-drama and J-pop and white female teenagers.

The FBI says that most (the overwhelming majority) hate crimes against Asians come from black people.

The only recent incidence spikeage would've been from the coof, which was semi-understandable. New pathogen, only a certain group carried it initially, made a little bit of sense to ostracize/whatever some people were doing that wasn't violent.

@tamerlane
Fun Fact: The UN has no definition of "stateless."
The UN says nations are free to do whatever they want to stateless individuals.
The UN says they have no human rights or international protections.
The US is well within its rights to declare migrants and asylum seekers as stateless and therefore do whatever it wants to them.
The US can also do this to citizens, if you were curious.

>bu-buh its just an intermediary
Of which the US has veto power in the human rights council.
No one would go to war with the US over poor people breaking the law, they'd be glassed and drone'd the moment they declared it.

This has been a PSA by your local friendly neighborhood retard.
 
Dex-chan lover
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
365
@immortalartisan
you could separate a criminals who are wife no husband as a form of emotional torture. You could also starve them to death as both a way to physically torture them. Or you could do the most humane thing and just execute them right away. Basically I’m speaking as a complete utilitarian molarity wise.
im not sure what your going for with this im afraid so ill move on

Also I would call them more holding pens. Even I would at least make sure the area they were kept in is comfortable and not just some mats and a fence

remember that we've been in the midst of a migrant crises for almost a decade and the facilities they are being held at probably are only supposed to have one kid per cell but since sending funding to the border is taboo and voted against 100% of the time by democrats trying to expand the facilities hasnt been a possibility

Also I feel like keeping your child near to your during
Well let’s say.
A court case is considered okay.
Airplane is considered normal
my father once went on trial for facebook posts made by other people. during that case i was not allowed to be with my father. if a case over facebook posts separates a US citizen from their child why would an illegal immigrant be granted special priviledge?

and for the airplane: you mean after the case is decided? when they are either granted asylum or sent home? because in that circumstance they are allowed to be with their kid

You pointing to jobs which Are a different thing here
how? in all the examples they are forcibly separated from their kid for the kids safety.

Also illegally immigrating shouldn’t even need to be a thing. Immigration and asylum seeking should always be simple as filling out 2 sheets of paper
the government is slow. my family has been in and out of a courtroom for the past decade over about 3 or so cases only 1 of which is currently over. the fact it only takes a couple of weeks to confirm the identity of somone who may have never before seen before by the american government is amazing imo. and a court case is needed to decide if your asylum case is justified. Venezuelans and cubans are likely justified, mexicans are not. mexico wont put you on trial or outright execute you if you are returned, Venezuela and cuba will

and for the argument that immigration should be simplified believe it or not i actually agree with you but as i said earlier in this thread there are 2 positions that can be held that are sustainable:
almost completely open borders and 0 government hand-out/safety nets
or
strictly enforced borders and some government hand-out/safety nets

i prefer the first option: end food-stamps, welfare, medicare, medicade, etc and let all of the non-spies and non-terrorists in. but thats not realistic so instead we're stuck with the second option and even then our sustainability is in question.

WHEN THE HELL DID I SAY ILLEGALLY IMMIGRATING WAS SAFE?
i was just countering an argument before it was made. you didnt make it so dont worry about it
 
Group Leader
Joined
Apr 20, 2019
Messages
2,332
It's easy to say "immigration for all" when you don't have to pay the bills and take care of them. Germany is starting to regret that.

@wowfucktron Can you link me that FBI stat so I can use it in the future?
 
Active member
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
940
@bigtiddyoneesan
I've never thought Asians to be particularly hateful or anything.
Have you ever listened to Asians talk about each other? It’s comical the lengths they go to shit on each other nonstop.

But this was about Asians feeling in danger.

Coof caused a minor blip of crime against them, the perps were almost always black but the ones committed by whites were the only ones that ever made the news. :thinking emoji:
 
Dex-chan lover
Joined
Mar 17, 2019
Messages
9,686
@wowfucktron
But this was about Asians feeling in danger.
Dw, I know. I was joking that I misunderstood #StopAsianHate as 'stop Asians being hateful' instead of 'stop hate against Asians.' (Bad habit of text-based sarcasm I guess.)

I was already aware of the statistics of the crimes. Really does make u :thonk: tbh huh
 
Dex-chan lover
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
10,562
I think Kaldrak has officially disowned us given she’s (or he’s) usually pretty quick on the uptake.

Either way I’m still disappointed she/he gave up after disagreement about one point.
 
Active member
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
940
>be me, retard
>get into an argument on some lefty forum I’m trying to subvert
>mods got paranoid over an innocuous N-bomb
>dumbass mod said “EvErYtHiNg Is PoLiTiCaL” before banning me
This is for you jackass.

*cough*
*cough*
*ahem*
*ting ting*
Gather around ladies and gentlemen, I have an important message for all of you.

Everything is political you say? Well riddle me this, Batman: how is me taking a shit political?

Oh, I got your answer right here, buckaroo. Me taking a shit is political because I’m literally ejecting something brown from my body.

According to critical race theory, every person on the planet needs to engage in fecal retention and must constantly dehydrate themselves because their piss is too successful.

Therefore taking a shit is racist.
 
Dex-chan lover
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
365
@Tamerlane
a person whos been spoon-fed policy positions by their inane ideology can only tolerate so much disagreement before they run back to their echo-chamber insulted by the very concept that disagreement exists so dont feel too bad my man

@wowfucktron
an interesting take, i'll give it that
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top