Wanting to deport someone for the color of their skin is fundamentally racist, because immigration, broadly, is a victimless crime.
What is “illegal” is not necessarily always immoral, and with the evidence we have available to us surrounding the effects of immigration, they create more jobs, spend more in the economy, produce more tax revenue, do less crime, and take less benefits.
Deporting “illegals” harms the economy, breaks apart communities, and punishes people for a victimless crime, all because some people are afraid that their neighbor might have a little more pigment in their skin, or use different words sometimes.
Since when are illegals the only people who don’t speak English?
They’re not.
So if you think deporting “illegals” will mean you don’t have to hear any Spanish etc, you are actually conflating this with deporting basically all foreigners and that is racist. All foreigners are not “illegals”
It’s not even foreigners necessarily. There are millions of people who were born in the US that speak a non-English language as their primary language. In fact many of these communities have been here longer than English speakers have been, including native people and the Spanish-speaking inhabitants of territory the US annexed from Mexico, which includes the entire southwest region.
But even ignoring the hyperbole (ie never again = much less) it is still clearly implying that people who don’t speak English are illegals. Of course that is dehumanizing. And obviously false, designed to conflate non English speakers with people who crossed the border illegally.
Are you ok with people reducing him to that and only referring to him as an “illegal fornicater”?
If someone crosses the border illegally, that has nothing to do with immigration which is a legal process.
Reducing it to “illegal immigrants” makes people question any immigration
And if you think “illegal fornicater” sounds stupid, yeah, that’s what the point is. “Illegal immigrants” doesn’t make any logical sense if you know what both words mean.
Unfortunately, that’s not the strong suit of most of the people who use it. And since the only other group is outright racists…
Well, I was about to say someone who uses that label should be able to understand why people have trouble figuring out which group they’re in.
But that would require a shred of empathy and understanding how others think…
Since when deporting illegals is racist?
English no good speak like caveman /s
Wanting to deport someone for the color of their skin is fundamentally racist, because immigration, broadly, is a victimless crime.
What is “illegal” is not necessarily always immoral, and with the evidence we have available to us surrounding the effects of immigration, they create more jobs, spend more in the economy, produce more tax revenue, do less crime, and take less benefits.
Deporting “illegals” harms the economy, breaks apart communities, and punishes people for a victimless crime, all because some people are afraid that their neighbor might have a little more pigment in their skin, or use different words sometimes.
Since when are illegals the only people who don’t speak English?
They’re not.
So if you think deporting “illegals” will mean you don’t have to hear any Spanish etc, you are actually conflating this with deporting basically all foreigners and that is racist. All foreigners are not “illegals”
It’s not even foreigners necessarily. There are millions of people who were born in the US that speak a non-English language as their primary language. In fact many of these communities have been here longer than English speakers have been, including native people and the Spanish-speaking inhabitants of territory the US annexed from Mexico, which includes the entire southwest region.
Jesus he used a hyperbole. Is this too subtle?
We understand, you’re a racist. Ya don’t need to keep blowing the whistle
hey look, you’re doing the backpedaling for him!
It’s not hyperbole, it’s a dog whistle. Are you too stupid?
Says the person who doesn’t understand the dehumanizing connotation of calling people “illegals”
There’s nothing dehumanizing in it. If you crossed the border illegally, then you’re illegal [immigrant].
Plain and simple. No hidden context here
temporary protected status is NOT illegal, neither is applying for amnesty.
Proceeds to put hidden context in brackets.
That’s the point of dehumanizing language chief, you intentionally leave the part out that they’re human beings.
But even ignoring the hyperbole (ie never again = much less) it is still clearly implying that people who don’t speak English are illegals. Of course that is dehumanizing. And obviously false, designed to conflate non English speakers with people who crossed the border illegally.
Also many (most?) of them crossed the border legally. They just stayed here illegally.
Sure, then: Designed to conflate non English speakers with illegal immigrants. Still racist.
trump’s been legally found to be a rapist…
Are you ok with people reducing him to that and only referring to him as an “illegal fornicater”?
If someone crosses the border illegally, that has nothing to do with immigration which is a legal process.
Reducing it to “illegal immigrants” makes people question any immigration
And if you think “illegal fornicater” sounds stupid, yeah, that’s what the point is. “Illegal immigrants” doesn’t make any logical sense if you know what both words mean.
Unfortunately, that’s not the strong suit of most of the people who use it. And since the only other group is outright racists…
Well, I was about to say someone who uses that label should be able to understand why people have trouble figuring out which group they’re in.
But that would require a shred of empathy and understanding how others think…