We are not fixing the root cause here even if you believe that immigration is bad for the country. It’s just a farce.
The recent ICE shenanigans (which don’t get me wrong - are awful and badly executed) are just performative bullshit to please the voter base. In fact I’d argue they are intentionally executed badly to attract media attention so they can all say they are being tough on immigrants.
They want people to stop coming here, and the threat of being sent to some torture camp in the third world won’t deter a Haitian (whose daily life already meets that description) but it will deter people from less atrocious locations.
I don't know much about him but aren't his grand parents Belarusians who came over to the US?
pulling up the ladder behind you isn't a new concept
How'd that work out for those native americans again? Maybe I'm a little reluctant to let things play out the way it did for them.
To the extent that it is comparable we would be absolutely justified in regulating immigration because the implication would be that the same thing that we did to the native americans is going to happen to us.
Its also not in any way reasonable to use the sins of the distant ancestor to delegitimize the nation's right to self-determination. Even if i accept your premise that my ancestors are comparable to immigrants i myself am not. If the argument is that the nation has no rights to control its own borders because that would constitute some sort of "generational hypocrisy" that would also mean we have an obligation to accommodate slavery and genocide because our ancestors committed and benefitted from both of those.
> The USA can tolerate one of these two things. A system of no welfare, no social services, no socialized medicine, food or housing with open borders. OR. No open boarders and highly limited, highly controlled, assimilating immigration policy. We cannot have both. When the USA had unlimited immigration over 100 years ago, we did not have Government supporting immigrants with welfare, medical services, housing, food etc.
I don't agree with Mr. Gallo here - I'm just sharing what a popular RW response is on this.
The policy in my red state is to spend public funds to treat unliked immigrants as harshly as possible, deny social welfare to citizens in need and prioritize gov resources for admin loyalists. At least it is now that courts are sufficiently captured.
Public policy discussions always get boiled down to some simple wording that isn't strictly accurate.
These people aren't anti-immigrant because of issues with immigration. They're anti-immigrant because they're hateful.
It's truly saddening that such a stance can still work when it's likely the average citizen will not encounter an immigrant in their day to day life. a million immigrants is not threatening the jobs of 300m Japanese people.
You are correct that we do not threaten jobs either. A large majority of the foreign population is working low/unskilled jobs. Generally, the native population is not wanting those jobs.
Tourists are short-term visitors who are there exclusively to spend their money in Japan and leave it with its citizens. If the Japanese do not want that because the tourists don't come fully prepared for living in Japan, then you should just deny tourist entries to the country. It would be win-win for everyone, because there are plenty of other countries who would gladly take those tourists instead.
They get blamed for a lot of crime; idk if that's true or not but it probably is, in part because American culture has less respect for authority, in part because American culture has more respect for individual liberties, and in part because any time you have a large enclave of foreigners (regardless of where they come from or which host nation they're in) they always end up committing more crime than the native population. They also get blamed for driving up prices in the real-estate market (this is definitely true, the US Navy owns 20% of Okinawa).
Blaming "immigrants" instead of specifically blaming the US military is also very convenient for both the US and Japanese government because both governments are largely in-favor of continuing the status quo so it's not surprising that politicians would obfuscate the source of the problem by blaming immigrants as a whole.
Not really. Her mother is Japanese and they moved back when she was one year old.
There is definitely a phenomenon of people sometimes supporting candidates on the basis that their ethnicity won't be used to criticize their policies but they're addressing a complaint that would be made otherwise. It also denies the agency of minorities by requiring them to be monolithic entities wherein all members agree with whatever you think their opinions should be. Would you really be satisfied if the entire trump administration was white Christian males over the age of 40?
One of the criticisms of the pro-life side of the abortion debate has always been that men are over-represented in the US federal government yet they're able to regulate an issue in which they are not directly effected. I don't know if you agree with this specific criticism or not but a lot of people do and I don't think it's fair to then complain about "tokenism" when somebody like Amy Coney Barrett who is immune to this argument gets appointed.
Bad people aren't limited to one race or anything. But far end politicians love propping up a minority on TV because then they can have an excuse whenever they're compared to historically bad political movements.
You're the only one bringing up white Christian males here, which kind of proves my point. You seem to think that for some reason I care if a politician is white or Christian. Extremist Islamic parties love propping up Christian minorities on TV and saying they'll defend them (they won't). Right wing western parties really, really love propping up a Jewish party member because they can say "we're not Nazis!!! All Nazis hated Jews and we love them!!!" Because the average person really thinks nazism was really only about killing Jewish people, when the reality was they only got around to that after several years of other awful stuff.
The LDP is propping up their 100% foreign born, foreign citizenship politician so they can say "see? We can't be anti-foreigner because the lady controlling this is a foreigner." The optics are transparent and it's even what they're astroturfing their message on social media as. Japanese politics are all about image. They don't pick a foreigner who illegally held dual citizenship to head anti-foreigner policies by accident.
People have been worrying about "ecofascism" well then why aren't you concerned about an administration whose policy is measles outbreaks for the misinformed of their constituency? Whose health minister is a rich environmental lawyer who just so happens to be a huge fan of letting disease rip?
The answer is the business owners are their constituents. They cannot afford to piss them off. If they lose their support the wheels will fall off this farcical performance.
I grew up in Florida, and I remember the sugar plantation “raids” they used to stage. They were a complete dog and pony show. They would announce them in advance so the plantations could hide most of their undocumented workers. Then they would round up just enough people for the photo op to prove they were being “tough on immigration.”
This is the same thing but on a grander and more dangerous scale.
Here's one that happened near me last month: https://cnycentral.com/news/local/breakdown-ice-detains-work... - and there are more happening in other places.
"That is outside the scope of this investigation." Nothing ever happened.
At Hormel, complaining about all sorts of strange diseases and health conditions, possibly from inhaling aerosolized pig brain all day long? Oh, look, another raid.
"Won't someone rid me of these meddlesome workers?"
Just a theory but it seems highly plausible in both these cases that the companies and ICE colluded... stage a big photo op, get rid of problematic undocumented workers and oh, hey, wouldn't you know, no plans to investigate the company?
This is also your friendly reminder that visa overstays are a misdemeanor, but for an employer, assisting or knowingly hiring undocumented workers is a felony. Tough on crime, indeed.
Is it (R) or (M) for MAGA.
I used to joke "Hello to the NSA analyst reading this!" when talking about "sensitive stuff" in private messages, but I guess that needs to be updated to "Hello to the LLM!"
Because immigration stuff isn't the primary purpose at this time. The primary purpose is to normalize a police state, to invoke feelings of fear in the general population and to build up a bigger infrastructure to do more authoritarian things.
"The purpose of a system is what it does", not what it claims to do. Today it looks like that purpose includes mass surveillance of social media.
For the most part, they've been targeting visa overstays by those who have been charged with and/or convicted of other crimes in the US. Not significantly different than under Obama. It's only that the visibility has been turned up to 11 along with ramped up protests and state/city sanctioned resistance in some locations.
As to the ramp-up in scale.. that's what happens when you let 5x the amount of people legally allowed entry to come into a nation in a relatively short period of time illegally. over 90% of asylum claims are invalid and fraudulent... there is almost no legitimate reason for crossing into the country outside a recognized port of entry.
I say this as someone who feels that immigration should generally be tied to "do you have a source of income and a place to stay?" at its' core... combined with a multiple of minimum wage as an income baseline with hefty employer side taxes to go along with. Arguments against doing so are very similar in my mind to having slavery... it's not okay, not good for the nation. I have similar feelings that "free trade" should only occur when similar quality of life or safety measures are in place. I'm optimistically libertarian minded, but recognize reality.
Just because the grunts are dead serious doesn't mean the initiative is dead serious.
Even then, serious doesn't equal competent. They are still trying to deport Abrego Garcia. Spending millions in legal fees and transport to deport a single man is not pratical in the slightest.
Turns out cruelty is very expensive to maintain, though. And we certainly do not have the economy to keep accommodating the narrative as real citizens starve and lose jobs. Something's going to break.
But you're in denial if you really think certain driven individuals in all three branches of the us government aren't dead ass serious about taking this stuff to misanthropic ends.
But their message isn't directly saying "spend 1 trillion dollars to be bigoted"
Silver linings…
I've seen some conspiracy theories that RFK, Jr, et al, want to start labor camps for autistic kids and just about anyone else his bunch can get tagged as defective or deficient or whatever, but I don't think that's going to work out like someone hopes it will.
Turns out Americans don't want to move out to rural areas to be paid minimum wage to do hard farm labor. Who knew?
That's the only real upside to this gig economy. Their competition isn't just flipping burgers, but anyone who has a car that can sign up to an app to make some quick cash.
A Reuters poll on the White House demolitions had a 63% approval for one question and a 40% approval rating for another question - from Republican voters.
As long as there exists a content economy on the right that does’t have to pay their dues to reality, you will not stop a political machine which is based upon fantasy.
The only thing that will cut through the noise is a recession, because that cannot be spun. Even then - that would just be a speed bump; eventually the recession will pass.
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20251008104110/https://prospect....
It has a chilling effect on what people say and do.
You'll notice the same effect in other states that have armed people who turn up unexpectedly to make people disappear.
I’ve seen more people realize this since his Trump started beefing with Massie, but they still glaze him so hard as to not offend, that it’s basically meaningless.
You can't solve the problem at the "just regulate the employers" level because it invariably turns into a tighter regulatory capture further enriching the incumbents. Any reform will necessarily increase the competitive advantage of the current winners because they are the ones in a position to shape it.
Isn't that role of ICE? To police and enforce immigration? Doesn't ICE stand for "Immigration & Customs Enforcement"?
What am I missing here?
There is no need for a "secret police" when that is the intended, declared and funded function of their organization.
In America, immigration enforcement is not a criminal issue but a civil issue. So the proper (as in, according to the laws and norms of the last many decades) and appropriate channels through which the enforcement of immigration is meant to be resolved is the courts. The current usage of ICE as a gestapo is literally illegal (it deprives "suspects" of due process and civil/human rights), in violation of Geneva conventions, and so on.
Furthermore even if we accept the blatantly immoral and illegal idea that federal agents should be able to break and enter into homes and kidnap, traumatize, and traffic people without the slightest pretense of legal justfiability (warrants etc), the fact is that they are not even attempting to choose people by any discernable metric other than their skin color. So it is objectively not about the enforcement of the law, it is about stochastic terrorism and ethnic cleansing, as that is the only thing their actions consistently demonstrate.
It's exactly because this is not a criminal issue, the due process in immigration does not require court hearing, bails etc. The immigration court is not an Article 3 court, it could as well be named "immigration adjudication department" because it's an Executive office. If you believe you had been wronged in the immigration process then you can try to sue the government for the damages in an actual civil court, but the law does not require the government to sue you in order to enforce the immigration laws.
Your bad-faith argument does not merit a lengthy reply so I will simply say that the way this has been handled for DECADES has been to do so by sending formal notice, having court hearings to determine whether someone should be deported, THEN deporting them. The way things are being done now is the gestapo simply identify people with brown skin (now "legal" in a technical sense due to a corrupt SCOTUS ruling but ACTUALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL and IMMORAL in reality) and shipping them to concentration camps and/or countries they have no relation to, to be used as slave labor in quid-pro-quo arrangements with foreign entities. No due process in all of that equates to cruel and unusual extrajudicial punishment and in some cases, death. NOTE that the lack of due process or even warrants or reasonable search requirements means that this CAN HAPPEN and IS HAPPENING to US citizens - to whom immigration enforcement should never even apply. NOTE that the lack of guardrails granted by SCOTUS that empowers ICE (the "E" stands for enforcement) to act as in lieu of an actual JUDICIAL process.
Next time, try not to be a nazi. All people are equally deserving of basic human rights, and that includes not being racially profiled and rounded up like slave meat for the grinder just because of the color of their skin.
So transparent.
When a domestic law enforcement agency is spending 600% more year-over-year on weapons to point at people in frog costumes it's reasonable to wonder if that may reflect a de facto change in that organization.
So ICE, is in fact being shaped into a secret police that can be used to punish anyone speaking against the regime, under the guise of being a brutal anti-immigration force.
"A secret police force" there means "a direct enforcement tool for whatever the oligarchy wants to do, legal or not".
It was a bit weird for corrections to be arresting people in DC but a lot less weird for ICE to do it.
instead of assuming we want to stop illegal immigration and then asking why we don't do the obvious thing that would accomplish that goal (eliminating the incentive to hire illegally by punishing companies that do it such that it's not worth it on the balance sheet), look at what the situation actually is and ask yourself why people would want that. The situation right now is that there's a near-endless supply of labor that is 100% exempt from any and all labor protections by dint of if they complain the boss can just call immigration, who will disappear the laborers but not punish the company in any way. The occasional disruption due to unanticipated ice intervention is well worth the cost of being able to pay your laborers sub-minimum wage and not being responsible for workplace injuries or human rights violations.
This is where reporting and raid events from ICE come into play. That said, I'd like to see plenty of organizations actually have their leadership held accountable. The East Palestine, Ohio train derailment for example should have seen corporate executives and board members find their personal finances at risk because of the damage caused for example. The US has a very poor history of ever holding company executives accountable in general. "Too big to fail."
How does this make sense when cities and states have openly declared themselves "sanctuary cities" for illegal immigrants?
How does this work when so many of the prisons are already overflowing? So much so, judges and prosecutors are not capable of sending more people to prisons and instead use diversion programs, down charging, or dismissing more serious crimes to charge these people with lesser crimes specifically in order to avoid jail time? What about states like Minnesota that continually deviate from sentencing guidelines and allow people convicted of crimes to spend the majority of their sentence out of prison? Minnesota isn't the only state that does this either, its just in the top five who do this.
The evidence would overwhelming appear to directly contradict this theory.
A) They're building more prisons specifically to fill with immigrants
B) Sentencing trends don't really affect immigrants who are denied due process.
Correction: They're building more prisons specifically to fill with ILLEGAL immigrants. The vast majority of whom have committed crimes while here.
If you have a problem with criminals being put in jail then you have a much bigger problem with your moral compass.
Why are you advocating breaking the law by treating non-criminals like criminals?
How do you imagine such an enforcement effort would proceed? Paint me a picture please. Illustrate a hypothetical example, just one company. What would really happen is that you'd check these businesses, and all the paperwork's in order. Social security numbers for everyone (even if those aren't their own). Without probable cause though, wouldn't even get that far, would they? They'd need that for the search warrants... not that judges are very agreeable to signing those, not when they tend to help illegals flee out the back door of the courthouse so that ICE won't wait at the front door grab and deport them.
>We are not fixing the root cause here even if you believe that immigration is bad for the country.
Sometimes all you can do is treat the symptoms.
It would fix the "problem" of all American workers who fear their job can be taken away by someone who doesn't speak the language, possibly has little education, because a large company thinks it's more profitable to hire them illegally. Nobody actually cares if someone hires their cousin at the family owned restaurant that sends money back home to his family.
But the goal actually is to have a section of society scared to report employer abuses and willing to work below minimum wage. The farmers in Iowa want the cruelty in Chicago. There was a tiny bit of deportation raids in red states at the beginning because of racism, but that was shut down quick.
You explain how to punish them, not how to determine that they deserve punishment. This fixes absolutely nothing. "Social security" won't find anything, because everyone working for those businesses has a social security number (even if it's not their own). To determine those are fake or misused, the government would have to get access to the deep HR paperwork, which would require search warrants and subpoenas, in other words, it would require "probable cause". That isn't going to happen.
>But the goal actually is to have a section of society scared to report employer abuse
Yeh, probably. But nothing you've described could help to change that circumstance.
E-verify has existed for more than a decade. Social security card + your name on another form of official identification like a license or passport. It comes back whether they are valid and match. Its literally a plot point in Superstore. You're describing a problem that only exist when the employer willingly bypasses the system, like in Superstore.
If the DMV has issued a driver's license with the fake name thats the problem of another agency and someone there has committed a fireable offense or crime since there has been large pushes across the country since the 9/11 hijackers to lock that down.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/u-s-will-allow-south-kor...
> South Korean companies have been mostly relying on short-term visas or a visa waiver program called the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, or ESTA, to send workers needed to launch manufacturing sites and handle other setup tasks, a practice that had been largely tolerated for years.
It sounds to me like they had relied on a grey area. The most obvious conclusion is that pressure from the top down in ICE caused their agents to "hunt around" and look for "big arrests." When political pressure from South Korea mounted they had to reverse themselves.
Either way, if these were actually workers in the country temporarily and in good faith to set up manufacturing, then it would neither seem to be a particularly good crackdown on illegal immigration nor encouraging manufacturing to be set up in the US.
The entire article you posted just referenced short term visas after the raid and said nothing other than the nationals who were arrested were flown home. The article spent less than a sentence with what OP posted:
The announcement came weeks after South Korea flew home more than 300 of its nationals who had been detained in a massive immigration raid at a battery factory being built on Hyundai’s sprawling auto plant campus near Savannah, Georgia.
From September when the raid happened:
"This was not an immigration operation where agents went into the premises, rounded up folks and put them on buses," Steve Schrank, the special agent in charge of Homeland Security Investigations in Atlanta, said at a news conference on Friday.
"This has been a multi-month criminal investigation where we have developed evidence, conducted interviews gathered documents and presented that evidence... in order to obtain a judicial search warrant," Schrank added.
He said it was "the largest single-site enforcement operation in the history of homeland security investigations".
"These [workers] are people that came through with Biden. They came through illegally."
Some 475 people who were in the country illegally or working unlawfully were detained in the operation, immigration officials said.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj6xe5d6103o
>> frozen water gang
>> the current admin and the frozen water gang
Why do you have a problem using the term ICE??
>The statement was consistent with earlier remarks by South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun, who, after traveling to Washington to negotiate the workers’ release, said that U.S. officials had agreed to allow them to return later to complete their work.
You dont suddenly allow to return someone who was justifiably deported, regardless of what the agent in charge said in the immediate aftermath at a press conference.