This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
there are people that have no path to inmigrate legaly to the US, be that a 5-10 year wait list or 2 weeks, and that their only way forward is through fence hopping. Think gang members, non-skilled people, minors, etc. the only way to stop them is going to be enforcing the border one way or another.
I’m not suggesting don’t enforce the border. TBH I thought that was a given. But the point I’m making is that if that right now the standard for legal immigration is absurdly long, and not much of a real system. And I think it’s something that needs to be addressed. A sane immigration system will prevent people from trying to enter illegally because it’s plausible that one can do so legally. That doesn’t mean those who can’t won’t jump the fence and need to be deported. That’s going to be true, no matter what the system is.
My only point is that no matter what immigration policy you choose, unless it is open borders you will have people trying to immigrate illegaly no matter how sane you consider the immigration system and you are just adjusting the proportions with the criteria.
not everyone is going to be delusional enough to think they can immigrate as a single mother of four, with no skills or with an open warrant for their arrest.
I think we agree on that. But my issue with current policy is that the most reliable way to get into America is hopping the fence because the legal immigration process is pretty broken. Which increases the burden on the Border Patrol, ICE and law enforcement because of all the people who should be able to get in legally choosing to be illegal immigrants instead. I think it’s a Both And situation. You enforce the laws, but you also fix the system such that those who are employable and have no criminal record and a command of English can get in by legal immigration. Having a system — a sane, easy to understand system that doesn’t take a decade to get your visa — would tend to encourage people to use that system. I don’t think anyone is aspiring to be an illegals immigrant.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, I've always found it disingenuous the way some people act like their only problem with immigrants is that they are coming in illegally and jumping the queue instead of waiting their turn. The implication is that there is some kind of functional immigration process everyone can apply for and that the only reason not to do so is because you are too impatient to wait a few years or too dismissive of law and authority to bother going through the proper channels.
This is totally false. There is no path to immigration for the vast majority of people. If you support enforcing current immigration law, you support denying millions the chance to live and work in the U.S. for no other reason than they were born outside of it, condemning them to a much worse quality of life in countries full of poverty and violence, and you need to own that.
I support it, because allowing unlimited immigration combined with a welfare state and single-family zoning is unsustainable, but I'm not missing the proper mood; I feel bad about it, but it has to be done.
(Caplan would chime in with the keyhole solution of denying the immigrants welfare, but he's delusional)
Yeschad.jpg
Less flippantly, all but the most extreme open-borderers are comfortable with the idea that most people in the world won't be able to move to their country. To believe otherwise would be to be comfortable with the idea that billions of people could move from the poor world to the rich world just by patiently filling out a few forms. The fact that legal immigration is highly selective is the point.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link