site banner
ZorbaTHut  2yr ago (text post)   35551 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 19, 2022

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.

33
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Desantis's campaign coordinator said they were all given brochures of Massachusetts and info on Martha's Vineyard. Seems like if that's true then your points are completely moot. Hard to argue that you tricked somebody if you gave them a pamphlet of their destination in advance.

"Not only that, they all signed consent forms to go. And then the vendor that is doing this for Florida provided them with a packet that had a map of Martha's Vineyard," said DeSantis.

"It had the numbers for different services on Martha's Vineyard. And then it had numbers for the overall agencies in Massachusetts that handle things involving immigration and refugees. So it was clearly voluntary."

If true, this doesn't cover any and all accusation of deception but it does cover the ones you listed above.

So, from my newly conservative POV, I have to say that this looks like lawfare, which has become a favorite tactic of blue team in the last five years. The point being that it doesn't matter if the investigation is grounded on any kind of probably cause so long as it can be used in media stories as part of the "wrap up smear" technique explained by Nancy Pelosi.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Desantis's campaign coordinator said they were all given brochures of Massachusetts and info on Martha's Vineyard. Seems like if that's true then your points are completely moot. Hard to argue that you tricked somebody if you gave them a pamphlet of their destination in advance.

What if the pamphlet contained information that was false?

From the complaint:

On information and belief, the brochure was manufactured by Defendants. The brochure echoed the type of false representation that had been given orally, including statements such as: “During the first 90 days after a refugee’s arrival in Massachusetts, resettlement agencies provide basic needs support including...assistance with housing...furnishings, food, and other basic necessities...clothing, and transportation to job interviews and job training...assistance in applying for Social Security cards...registering children for school....” The brochure had a separate section entitled “Refugee Cash Assistance (RCA),” which stated: “Provides up to 8 months of cash assistance for income-eligible refugees without dependent children, who reside in Massachusetts.” It had other sections that described “targeted services for . . . employment.”

On information and belief, this brochure was not prepared by the Massachusetts Office for Refugees and Immigrants, or any other Massachusetts agency or immigration services organization.

On information and belief, Defendants manufactured the official-looking brochure— lifting language from the Massachusetts Refugee Resettlement Program, a governmental program with highly specific eligibility requirements for which no members of the putative class are eligible—in order to buttress their false oral representations to Plaintiffs in furtherance of the conspiracy described throughout this complaint.

The complaint also alleges that the migrants were told they were going to Boston and only learned they were going to Martha's Vineyard after boarding the plane:

Before the flight, class members were told they were heading to Boston, Massachusetts or Washington, D.C. But right before landing, they were informed they were in fact going to Martha’s Vineyard, an isolated Massachusetts island just south of Cape Cod, reachable only by plane or boat.

So DeSantis' agents lied to the migrants about where they were going and what would be available to them when they got to their destination. The migrants relied on these false representations for their "consent" to go.

"Not only that, they all signed consent forms to go. And then the vendor that is doing this for Florida provided them with a packet that had a map of Martha's Vineyard," said DeSantis.

"It had the numbers for different services on Martha's Vineyard. And then it had numbers for the overall agencies in Massachusetts that handle things involving immigration and refugees. So it was clearly voluntary."

The fact of signing a consent inform is irrelevant if the reason you signed is because someone deceived you about what you were consenting to. Similarly the fact that the packet had a map or certain phone numbers does not establish that their consent to being transported was not based on lies.

Well, if this is false representation, then they should be suing the coyotes who got them to cross the border illegally. "Oh yes, the USA is a rich country that will provide you with great jobs and welfare, all you have to say is that you are a refugee!"

Ok, sounds like a good plan.

I'm sure such a plaintiff would win on the merits. Assuming, of course, that a case involving no US citizens or entities somehow made it into the courts at all.

The fact of signing a consent inform is irrelevant if the reason you signed is because someone deceived you about what you were consenting to.

Yes and no. While there can be exceptional circumstances, the presumption usually is that any signed document would take precedence over verbal discussions. If I sign a bill of sale, I can not allege fraud because I thought we had agreed on a different price.

So DeSantis' agents lied to the migrants about where they were going and what would be available to them when they got to their destination.

Or they told the truth, and the non English speaking migrants didn't understand, so they said something like "you're going to Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts. You know, near Boston?" and the immigrants only got 'Boston' out of it.

You should learn from the other side's mistakes here - when you are so upset you try to find a way to sue someone without any suspects or statutes in mind, just the burning desire to sue, you need to take a step back, because you are going to make mistakes.

It was written in Spanish.

This is a blue politician in a red state trying to get a lucrative gig to run for higher office and lose.

Yes if the brochures had intentional lies then that would call it into question. But merely false information might not, since the false information could have simply been copied from MA website.

What doesn't make sense is why they are claiming they were told they were going to D.C. after being given pamphlets to Massachusetts. That sounds like somebody not getting their story straight of the kind that happens with lies, or when the truth is being twisted into a narrative. IF the brochure had a map of Martha's Vineyard, it doesn't add up to say that you weren't told about Martha's vineyard and thought you were going to D.C.

If I had to guess, this is informational warfare from team blue. Prima facie, if I give you a map and a plane ticket to Martha's vineyard and you sign a consent form, it seems ridiculous to claim that you thought you were going to DC. However it does make sense to me that DNC political operatives are repeatedly asking for and incentivizing such answers to their questions until they hear what they want. A kind of after-the-fact 3rd party Smolletting.

Just to add one of my usual tangential comments: for what it's worth, my first exposure to the existence of Martha's Vineyard was in X-Files, and it was where either Mulder or Scully's parents lived. Remember, those two characters live and work in D.C.. and they visited MV semi-frequently in the show. Now, my geographically-naive ass just assumed it really wasn't far from D.C., so perhaps a bunch of Venezuelans who've probably never really looked at a detailed map of the US might make a similar mistake.

What if I told you the brochures were only received after they had already boarded the flight?

Specifically, while on the plane, right before landing in Martha’s Vineyard, Defendants provided the individual Plaintiffs each with a shiny, red folder that included other official-looking materials, including: a brochure entitled “Massachusetts Refugee Benefits” and instructions for how to change an address with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a federal agency which oversees immigration, including USCIS Form AR-11, “Alien’s Change of Address Card.”

Here's what the order of events wasn't: DeSantis' agents gave the group of people physical documents about where they would be going and what services would be available when they got there and made sure this group of people understood what was in such documents.

Here's what did happen: DeSantis' agents made verbal promises to people about where they would be going (potentially giving different people different locations) and about what would be available when they got there. Then, after the people were on a plane and at their destination, gave them inaccurate information about where they were and what services would be available.

Prima facie, if I give you a map and a plane ticket to Martha's vineyard and you sign a consent form, it seems ridiculous to claim that you thought you were going to DC.

Lawsuit looks like a joke, but I doubt that these people were given tickets listing "MVY" for their chartered jet. Maybe don't attack straw.

Massachusetts Refugee Resettlement Program

One of the qualifiers is "Asylees".

An asylee is a person who meets the definition of refugee and is already present in the United States or is seeking admission at a port of entry.

So, were they falsely applying for asylum, or do they count?

"They used all direct quotes from our official government resources, but put it together into their own pamphlet so we'll pretend I just proved they lied" is some absolutely amazing logic. Here, try this one:

Another qualifier is "victims of human trafficking", which means that even if DeSantis criminally trafficked them, that makes them such victims, which post-facto justifies the claims!

Seriously, just take the L on this one.

The Massachusetts program doesn't apply to all asylum seekers though, only those that have been granted refugee status by the Department of Homeland Security. If I give you information about a real government program, which I know does not apply to you, but I present the information to you as if it does, for the purpose of inducing you to take some action, is that fraud? It sounds like it to me!

The Massachusetts program doesn't apply to all asylum seekers though, only those that have been granted refugee status by the Department of Homeland Security.

The Massachusetts programs include, by statute:

Individuals with the following statuses may be eligible for services and benefits under the MA Refugee Resettlement Program. For purposes of the program, "refugee" is used to describe anyone who falls within the following statuses. Also see 45 CFR § 400.43(a)(1) through (6):

(a) Individuals paroled as refugees or asylees under § 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

(b) Refugees admitted under § 207 of the INA.

(c) Asylees whose status was granted under § 208 of the INA.

For kinda stupid reasons, nearly all parolees from federal immigration services fall under 212(d)(5), including those who've submitted asylum requests but have not been processed.

Oh no! So help the people you've lured through 4000 miles of death traps and cartels to work through the process and qualify! Again, it is insanely rich logic to throw a hissy fit over a single plane load of refugees who don't meet a strict set of requirements when they're illegal immigrants falsely claiming asylum as cover for economic migration in the first place. The sheer audacity to try that line! Should we start charging the NGOs and immigration lawyers who are coaching people on what to say on asylum applications with human trafficking, too?

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats