←back to thread

896 points coloneltcb | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.203s | source
Show context
sgnelson ◴[] No.43800493[source]
Serious question, after the past few months, how can anyone deny that America is heading in a totalitarian direction? Those of you who believe that all of the many actions that have happened in the past few weeks are "okay", please explain your perspective without resorting to "whataboutism" or cherry picking only one or two of the things that have occurred lately. Because from what I'm sitting, this is not behavior of a government based on democratic ideals.
replies(4): >>43800540 #>>43801268 #>>43802597 #>>43804662 #
Tycho[dead post] ◴[] No.43800540[source]
[flagged]
Riverheart ◴[] No.43802617[source]
A systematic effort to dismantle the federal government bypassing the legislature entirely, replacing federal employees with people who pledge loyalty to the president over the constitution, firing anybody who would hold him accountable, undermining the separation of powers in favor of an all powerful executive who treats executive orders as law, attacking media outlets and judges they disagree with and threatening to either remove their access to the White House press room or revoke their license or fire them, deporting people without due process, threatening to invade Greenland, threatening to withhold congressionally approved funding as a cudgel, and invoking the friggin Alien Enemies Act of 1798 in a time of peace is not “pushing back a little”.

But if you haven’t realized that yet it’s obvious you never will till it’s too late and sure, maybe that’s harsh to say but as trump himself said “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters” because that’s precisely how much y’all care what he does. Gimme your downvotes but don’t pretend you’re standing on moral high ground, you’d justify anything he does.

The whole anti-DEI sweep across the government where people who don’t remove “let’s treat people nice” posters risk getting fired and attacking people using the office of the president is so obviously deplatforming and censorship that your criticism of democrats is laughable. When’s the last time Biden threatened to revoke Fox News license? Republicans even a tiny bit critical of Trump get exiled for daring to step out of line. You don’t hate censorship and deplatforming, you love it, can’t get enough of it, you just hate it when it happens to people you like.

replies(1): >>43803252 #
Tycho ◴[] No.43803252[source]
Consider the illegal immigration question. Tens of millions of people are in the country, knowingly in violation of the law. Many foreign criminal gangs are operating in the country. Yet the federal government was prevented from even constructing a simple wall to stop the situation getting worse. Not only that, but other authorities in the country are even declaring “sanctuary cities”, openly contravening the efforts of federal law enforcement. Latest thing we hear is district judges harbouring illegal immigrant gang members in their home. We are at a point of complete absurdity. So, yes, invoking the “Alien Enemies” act is quite reasonable, given the circumstances. We are not starting from a point of normality.
replies(2): >>43803296 #>>43803511 #
Riverheart ◴[] No.43803511[source]
The wall was a waste of tax payer money and purely theatric since it hasn’t helped. Saying illegal immigration is a problem today basically acknowledges as much if it weren’t also backed up by statistics.

https://www.cato.org/blog/border-wall-didnt-work

No, illegal immigration is not the same as an invasion by another nation.

I don’t condone harboring criminals but if they are indeed criminals they should be tried in a court of law because that is the American way. On the other hand if these illegal immigrants are fleeing violence rather than creating it, have lived here for years and/or have kids born and raised in the US, then I can understand the grace afforded them by sanctuary cities as deporting them is not illegal but ethically questionable. Deporting someone who has never known anything but living in this country to another one they have no connection to because their parents brought or birthed them here illegally would be legal but would it be justice? I don’t think it would, I think it’s more complicated.

The true absurdity is thinking due process is optional in this country. How the party that purports an unwavering belief in the founding fathers, constitution, law, and American exceptionalism compromised so hard on a fundamental right is beyond the pale.

If it’s optional for these immigrants then it’s optional for every citizen if Trump deems it so; the precedent is set, just call someone the enemy and you’re good. Your only defense that this couldn’t happen to US citizens would be the courts and an adherence to societal and legal norms both of which Trump has shown clear indifference to.

Addendum:

Amazing, it already happened and got posted to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43801959

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/ice-deports-3-u-s-citize...

“New Orleans, LA - Today, in the early hours of the morning, the New Orleans Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Field Office deported at least two families, including two mothers and their minor children – three of whom are U.S. citizen children aged 2, 4, and 7. One of the mothers is currently pregnant. The families, who had lived in the United States for years and had deep ties to their communities, were deported from the U.S. under deeply troubling circumstances that raise serious due process concerns.

In the case of the other family, a U.S. citizen child suffering from a rare form of metastatic cancer was deported without medication or the ability to consult with their treating physicians–despite ICE being notified in advance of the child’s urgent medical needs.“

Truly, justice in action, protecting us from criminal pregnant women and children with cancer. Probably MS13 gang members. What a great and powerful country we’ve become, Jesus would be proud /s

Look I’m not against law enforcement, I’m sure we have common ground somewhere, but how can I take the illegal immigration rhetoric seriously, take a hardline stance, if this is part of reality?

replies(1): >>43808077 #
Tycho ◴[] No.43808077[source]
If you take a step back, your position is basically that it is ok to let people break the law, ok to help them break the law even, and if you want to enforce the law, you should only do it to a degree that amounts to futility, not with any serious chance of preventing tens of millions of people getting away with illegally inhabiting the country.
replies(1): >>43809728 #
1. Riverheart ◴[] No.43809728[source]
I’m no anarchist, I simply acknowledge that civil disobedience exists. People are responsible for the risks they take in violating the laws they feel are unjust. Frankly, I have little reason to believe a city, state, or person would take that risk to protect people who would harm them so I don’t worry much about it. In my mind, the ones committing crimes will be caught committing those crimes and those aren’t the ones people are trying to protect.

I don’t support the wall for reasons I’ve already given but I do support border control as I think most of these people do, it’s just different with folks already here.

Even if I was worried about illegal immigrants more-so than other current issues, I’d still take issue with the cruelty in which it seems to be carried out such as in the story I posted. Surely you realize that stories like that promote civil disobedience because even if they committed a crime they aren’t all hardened criminals, some are just people looking for a better life. Not everyone believes they’re all murderers and gang members simply because Trump thinks so and especially not women and children.

In terms of the Alien Enemies act it is not the role of the executive branch to interpret the law and one could argue they are breaking the law by taking a non-literal reading of the words ”invasion” and “predatory incursion” to avoid due process for these individuals. They may argue and win in court that the interpretation should change but that doesn’t excuse them from taking liberties in the first place.

All that said. I’m going to leave it here, you’re free to respond if you wish but I don’t think we’ll change each other’s minds. I do appreciate your civil discussion despite the controversy of the topic.