Saw this all over FB. Let the discussion begin

I just meant that we destroyed several entire tribes of indigenous people, and got away with it. So I mean, it happened already, there's no question over whether we could, we already have.

Give us some credit, we put up a hell of a fight!

These ten stages of genocide are actually from a real scale developed by a renowned expert and researcher on genocide. The stages alone aren’t necessarily representative of genocide and can also represent politicide- destruction or elimination of a group based on political ideas.

Risk actors for a country to commit genocide may include- historical commission of genocide, especially where a country got a way with it. Sealed borders- the restriction of all travel or targeting of specific groups attempting to travel or immigrate/emigrate, and the rejection of people, cultures, or trade. Another risk factor is political instability or divided society- either a weak government or a strong government which had deep and fundamental divides of stark contrast in ideologies between officials or groups of society with power. Mass violations of human rights is another risk factor, as is exclusionary ideology.

It’s also critical to note this isn’t a “check list” where a society proceeds from 1 to 2 to 3 and so on. The list is non linear. That means that these things can happen in any order or simultaneously, with the occurrence of any single item, especially combined with one or more noted risk factors, meaning there is risk of genocide. The more things happen and the more factors are in place- the higher the risk tends to be. Genocide can occur without all or even many of the 8 items or any risk factors being satisfied- but the more there are the higher the risk is compared to historic precedent.

So while more items increased risk- you must think of it like any other cumulative risk. Smoking increases or exacerbated many of the same health risks as a diet that contributes to high blood pressure and poor cardiovascular health, as does a sedentary lifestyle, as does drinking. Doing any one of these things just once raises your risks of a fatal event- and all together raises risk significantly. But a person can suffer a fatal event from doing any one just once, or can live to be over 100 doing all of them heavily and regularly. RISK, not certainty.

That said- being on the road to genocide or most any “cide” should already cause introspection- and wether it’s realistic or not to say the United States is on the road to genocide is irrelevant. We shouldn’t base our ethical bar on “genocide.” Long before you get so severe as genocide you have already caused suffering and trampled the human rights of people. You’ve already ruined lives of people who they than some little detail are just like you- could be you if the cosmic dice landed just a little different. Could STILL be you someday if one coin toss of the universe too many lands against you. So wether we are or aren’t on track for genocide is irrelevant since we’ve already crossed the line of ethical and moral treatment of human beings.

I would only agree that a symbolic clock is as nourishing to the intellect as a photograph of oxygen to a drowning man. -Dr. Manhattan

We can't release them into the US, and nobody breaks into a concentration camp.

You’re right, no one breaks into concentration camps. They’re forced in. Just like how they’re forcing people crossing the border into the camps, and kidnapping people to force them in.

There was literally a child kidnapped and held for two days in detainment because she was Mexican. Surprise though, she was a legal citizen!

What are we supposed to do with criminals? Let them in after they pinky swear to come to their hearing?
As for the kid, I've heard of children being bought or "rented" to cover someone else trying to sneak in. If that isn't the case with the kid, then ICE ought to investigate the officer and his chain of command and compensate the kid. You'd almost think LEOs are machines with how many people are demanding perfection from them.

Are you saying every Mexican trying to get into this country is a criminal?

No, just the ones trying to do it illegally. Especially those trying to fraudulently claim refugee status, as those jerks are hurting the chances of actual refugees.

Even then, they dont deserve to be treated the way they currently are

You don’t put people seeking help in concentration camps! That shouldn’t have to be said! There was multiple incidents of kidnapping and ICE agents abusing and attacking not only people trapped inside the camps, but also the people LEGALLY protesting (which is a constitutional right, but I’m sure you only care about those when it protects your guns). You’re in denial, and you’re defending dehumanizing acts committed by a toxic regiment

But if we don't take Mexican refugees, how do they claim refugee status? Just curious

It's not about who deserves what, reality doesn't care about that. Fact is, the holding facilities would be fine if there weren't hundreds of thousands of people trying to invade.
They are meant to hold refugees while their status is being verified, to avoid inviting gangsters, terrorists, biohazards,
fugitives, etc., but the system is severely overwhelmed. Things break down when they are overwhelmed.
And there's a huge difference between protesting and harboring criminals, attacking government installations, and threatening law enforcement personnel. I won't waste my sympathy on fire starters who raise a foreign flag over an American installation.

There’s a video showing a truck running over protesters just sitting on the ground. You’re either a really dedicated troll, or you’re brainwashed. Either way, you don’t have empathy and you need to re-evaluate yourself and your views

Just sitting on the ground? No extenuating circumstances, no provocation, no obstruction, and no warnings?
Then the driver ought be investigated and handled accordingly.
Now are you going to keep trying to make a strawman of me, or do you have an arguement that isn't dependent on outrage or whataboutism?

people, stop feeding the idiot troll

I'll take that as a no.

You know, I’ve been on here for 8 years, under different accounts, and every time I’ve ever seen you get in a discussion with someone, and they call you out for what you are, you cry strawman and play victim. You are disgusting, and I hope you figure out how to have simple human compassion

Still no response. It isn't complicated, just explain to me why the United States shouldn't enforce our borders. Without appealing to sob stories, because I guarantee you that I have far more horror stories.
I am not being unreasonable by any margin, nothing I've said is unconventional on the national or global stage.
So put the petty insults and caricatures aside, and address the actual issue. Please and thank you.

They should enforce our borders, but they shouldn’t be separating people into concentration camps with multiple fatalities to date. They also shouldn’t be going after legal migrants of Mexican descent, and attacking protestors. There’s a difference between protecting the borders and being dangerous new-age nazis

Can't very well send them to prison, or worse, Motel 6.
Legal migrants should go to court and get their due, and protesters need to police eachother to avoid threatening, harassing, or obstructing law enforcement officers conducting their duties.

The sad but true fact that everyone knows on some level but is ashamed to admit- We are greedy. It’s that simple. If there’s 10 of us and 10 cupcakes, we could each have one. But what if one person wants 3 and tells their strong pal they’ll make sure they 2 if they help? Well- that leaves 5 cupcakes for 8 people. Of those 8 a couple will split cupcakes, one or 2 will demand they get a whole one, and then the rest will eat crumbs or chew the discarded wrappers. That’s the world. America uses the bulk of the worlds resources by population. You may feel poor but in a developed western nation you’re doing better than the majority of people on earth when it comes to the resources you have access to.

People don’t want to share. They don’t want to only get one cup cake so that someone eating crumbs can have one too. And if we are being honest- most people including whoever is reading this likely doesn’t want to give up what they have to someone with less. If you did- you could at any point go donate half or more what you own to those with less, share your living space, your car etc. with them. Few people do these things.

Regardless of borders it’s simple and prudent security in a world where technology allows a single person to command the ability to cause mass catastrophe and death to have some sort of occasional oversight. All that is practical and the way things are.

But- here’s the but- I don’t need sob stories and I don’t need strawmen. The border. The border of The United States Of America. You want to protect that border. For there to be a border of the United States of America there must BE a United States of America. This country is not just one that speaks of dreams and has them central to its cultural identity- but one which its foundations- the origins of its conception and of its legal system, are written for all to read, with the principals of The United States of America outlined clearly.

These documents promise certain things to American citizens. They are very clear to say when they make that distinction “citizen.” However the MAJORITY of what they promise is to ALL MEN. There is a CLEAR distinction made that the United States of America promises to uphold certain values and rights inherent to ALL MEN regardless of wether they are citizens. Freedoms, protections, and basic treatment.

It has been a justification and a battle cry of almost every major war in our history. We rebooted against the crown because we were so sure that these basic liberties were more important than obeying they laws and loyalty to the crown and country. We had brother fight brother in a civil war where each side claimed the other as oppressors seeking to take the liberties of men. We cried it out as we aided in both world wars- that beyond a possible future threat to our nation- that we as Americans could not tolerate the actions of the axis which flew in the face of these basic values America holds above ALL ELSE.

We involved ourselves in a Korean and Vietnamese civil war and said while we may have been unleashed to act by aggression against our forces, that our purpose was a moral one in the upholding of democracy for a people far removed geographically, historically, and culturally from us. We went into Afghanistan and Iraq and into the African Genocides and civil wars and into South America crying out that we belonged there because wrong was being done. “Hearts and minds..” “liberate the people..” “end the tyranny...” and so on.

In many of these conflicts we had scores to settle or interest to secure- but those weren’t the primary reasons given- especially for our staying. When money was needed from congress these wars were sold as in American interests- but to the people and in politics they were sold as conflicts which we had a MORAL duty as Americans to see through because the very nature of our country demands that we not allow such abuse to ANY MAN, ANY WHERE.

So no sob story here. Just a question of how we can justify a century long struggle to bring democracy and the values of freedom, human rights, and American liberty to so much of the world when we can’t be troubled to apply those at home when we feel we have to much on the line?

A question about how can we protect the Borders of The United States of America if the methods we use erode the very core of what the United States is? Is the goal here to discourage immigration to the land of freedom and American values by demonstrating to the world that we destroyed those, don’t believe in them any more, that the United States of America founded in 1776 is a memory and a new nation with new values stands on its place- the kind of nation that makes people NOT want to come here so bad they’d risk death, but a nation which instead says that if you come here, you may risk death at our hands? Have matters of efficient practicality replaced the ideals of democracy and human rights that define the United States of America? Is it now the land of “much for few if you make the cut..” When did we stop being the Melting pot and become a country club?

We can't just leave the doors open. Doing that will cost us everything. Not just our wealth, but our culture, our laws, and many of our lives.
Open the flood gates and then watch as liberty, republicanism, democracy, and everything to come with them, are swept away and drowned.

So then we cannot trust the people to run a democracy? Or is it that we can’t trust foreigners to run an American democracy? Considering that none of the founders of America were American citizens that seems a bit odd doesn’t it? How does that work with a 50yo foreigner who becomes a citizen legally? Did a couple years with a US address and a visa and then a test undo 50 years of culture and perspective of his homeland?

How does that work when a born American is raised surrounded by another culture besides “American culture” such as a child growing up in a family which is strongly Jewish and lives predominantly in the Jewish community? I was under the impression that Jewish people were American, and that American values were defined by the people who make up America and not that America was about making sure that the people followed the values we told them to?

What if a born citizen spends most of their time abroad? Living in another country? To what degree does that endanger their ability to uphold American values, and how should they be restricted as a citizen who is a risk to American values from imperiling our democratic system through their participation?

I’m very curious as to how the same person crossing a border one mile over would transform them from a recognized asset to a scourge of democracy. I’m also very curious how the process of filling out paperwork and taking a quiz would transform a threat to American democracy into a certified participant in the system. I wonder why we don’t just air drop this quiz over hostile nations and covert them to our way of thinking if it is so profoundly effective?

To be clear- I’m not saying that the vetting of security risks and known dangerous criminals isn’t effective nor debating the prudence if that. I’m saying specifically when we discuss the fact that changing the cultural make up of the country would somehow destroy it- how do these things pertain to that?

Change it? Most certainly. And given the way minorities are and have been treated even under the American banner of “equality for all” I can certainly understand that a majority group traditionally benefited by this imbalance would be worries about being made a minority. Certainly a system where institutionalized racism and bias has been eliminated and where all people truly have and are promised equality is one where it wouldn’t matter if you’re a minority though right?

So perhaps you can see the quandary I have with the idea? I am inclined to draw the conclusion when I see such defenses used, that what is truly at issue but not wanting to be said isn’t a fear of the destruction of America- but a fear of a cultural or racial identity one is able to benefit from and one is comfortable and familiar with would be changed- and that in such a case that bias which has worked to their favor would suddenly be in someone else’s favor. Perhaps now it becomes more clear why I try to champion a system which defends the rights of those with the least standing or most danger?

Everyone says “someday it could be you...” when talking of rights- but it never really sinks in unless we find ourselves actually faced with that possibility no? Unless the United States sinks into isolationism- it is inevitable that the majority status quo racial and cultural make up of the country will be changed in the future. Even with closed borders. We are a diverse nation and assimilation is a two way street. There wasn’t a such thing as nation wide “Mexican inspired food” chains until the 1970’s. Now find me someone who hasn’t had a taco. Not too many years ago most people didn’t know what a mosque was. That’s why it’s called “the melting pot.”

Because while largely influenced and originating in European culture- “American culture” is a combination of assimilated aspects of diverse peoples. In modern history isolationism has only ever brought stagnation and ultimately harm. We don’t need “open borders” as that concept precludes a reason to have borders- but likewise some abstract fear of unwashed hordes decimating our country is preposterous.

just a random thing, "we cant trust the people to run the democracy?"
that is exactly true, exactly the reason we dont have a democracy but a Representative republic with democratic trappings. The government was designed how it is to prevent mob rule as well as monarchy/dictatorship

I was hoping someone would pick that up. We ARE a representative republic- but we ARE also a democracy. Common misconception as the two aren’t mutually exclusive. We do not practice DIRECT DEMOCRACY- it’s a false dichotomy to assume one precludes the other. Our system functions with aspects of these systems each- and ultimately on the principals of BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE. From the local and state levels many things are determined by the people. Many political positions are also appointed by popular vote- but not all.

Our representatives are elected, or appointed by elected representatives- as “experts.” Their primary job is to take the will of the people and enact that in the manner most consistent with the spirit of our system and the good of all as only their expertise and not simply any inexperienced or uneducated Joe off the street could.

We are a representative republic AND a democracy because that is a system which gives a voice to the people without letting the children run the day care. Because if we allowed direct democracy most crimes would end by the will of a nod and not the processes of justice that protect the American people. So what that comes down to is wether or not one favors a dictatorship or some sort of fascism or “father knows best state” or not.

And what is crucial to the subject at hand is that while only citizens are promised full participation and benefits in our democratic process- ALL MEN are to be treated by the guiding principals and laws of our republic.

"Under different accounts" by mofo attacking our homie @famousone LMMFAO go fuck yourself you little bitch. At least stand by what you say.

Also, not gonna lie, I wanna watch "Reboot".

I can't post URL's but I also wanna sing "Don't Stop Believin" for ya'llz <3

oh yea and on the subject of "under different accounts"
having read the responses i basically just see a bunch of strawmen and resorting to personal attacks from lack of an actual point. It doesnt matter who you are, you are not exempt from the basic rules of a debate. You dont get to resort to logical fallacy just because you think famousone is an asshole. Your lack of argument, simply spending 4ish comments fallacy-ing it up followed by using the fact that famousone doesnt tolerate and never has tolerated use of logical fallacy in debate as somehow being a detracting point to him (which in of itself is a fallacy, further attacks instead of an actual point), is not only laughable but a good indicator to the idea that actually reading anything you say in a moderately serious conversation is a waste of time.
another thing you might notice is that, without a horse in the race, none of what i said is a fallacy as personal attacks without a debate to fight for is just personal attacks.

In fairness, I have knowingly utilized and accepted fallacies, but that's exclusively while joking or debating nonsense.
Not nonsense as in "I don't agree, so you're stupid", but nonsense like "Clearly a platypus could kick your ass because you're a cat lover, making you inferior to myself, a dog lover. That's why your family likes me better, you can't-beat-a-weird-animal lil midget".
Shit gets heated in the Ops Room.

man, if a platypus couldnt kick someone's ass it would be a sad day for duck billed beaver kind

However keeping the Mexicans, if they’re not from the US, in what I can only describe as a concentration camp, is just fucked up

Nobody breaks into a concentration camp.

They're talking about the actual holding camps, no one's deliberately breaking into those, there's people illegally trying to get into America. There's a difference.

Tbh I feel bad for America because there's a humanitarian crisis no matter which way you spin in. The country can, in fact, only hold so many people and maintain any quality of life for them. This is true regardless of where they come from or the color of their skin. It also shouldn't necessarily fall on America's shoulders to pick up the pieces when other countries don't bother giving a crap about their own people.
.
On the other hand a lot of these people are literally fleeing for their lives with the barest hope of ANYTHING better than where they come from. Many can't afford to wait or get denied or whatever else. But A lot of them are hard workers and do their best to contribute more than even some natural citizens do. Plus I feel the wall creates issues above and beyond the usual, and for species outside of humans as well.
.
Basically this is a pointless comment that has no actual solutions to offer. Just saying it sucks all around no matter how you spin it

I'll take the suck that has minimal impact on my people, thank you very much.

I gotta say "contempt for black people" is very much a real thing. There were Jim Crow laws for a century after our Civil War. Have you ever been to Savannah, GA? In some ways variations of those laws still fucking exist there.. which is a shame, because it's actually a lovely place if one only concerns themselves with the architecture.

Shit, I stopped to get some gas near the TX/LA border and my life was threatened because I was "riding with chinks". Like... what the fuck? That fucker knew none of us and then literally threatens us? Why? He's a racist asshole is why. He had no logic behind it, it just is what he is and it was what it was.

Alright, I’m gonna jump into this foray. @famousone quick question: you keep saying “no one breaks into concentration camps”, what do you mean by that? Like, have there been incidents with people trying to infiltrate the concentration camps? I genuinely don’t understand what you mean and would like so see a linked source. Also, during WWII there were many resistance fighters and spies who did break into concentration camps to smuggle people out, collect intel, etc. Google Witold Pilecki

Another thing @famousone, another issue is that many of the people being detained, AREN’T coming here illegally. They’re requesting asylum at a port of entry and then being detained in these concentration camps. If you google US immigration process, you literally have to be physically present in the US or at a point of entry to apply for asylum. This is why so many people are outraged because these people AREN’T illegal immigrants but they’re being treated so inhumanely

@famousone trump has literally been sued for denying black people housing at his rental properties in the 70s. He’s also repeatedly called for re-incarceration and execution for the Central Park five who have long been exonerated for their crimes. His policies and rhetoric towards minorities has literally inspired multiple mass shootings. See the Walmart Shooter’s manifesto. Sure, maybe in his heart of hearts trump doesn’t really hate minorities, but the things he says and the policies he puts in place have systematically made many minorities lives harder and have inspired evil people to harm and kill racial and religious minorities.

Nobody breaks in meaning that they are being put into camps trying to infiltrate the US. If any of them are "resistance", all the more reason to keep them in one place.
A lot of these people are not arriving at points of entry, but are caught trying to sneak in, and when well over 95% of asylum claims are rejected when investigated, it's a pretty safe bet that the vast majority of them aren't refugees.
Trump has been given the Ellis award, rubbed shoulders with the likes of Muhammad Ali and Al Sharpton, had pushed desegregation, and personally helped minorities himself. His policies have led to historically low unemployment for blacks in particular, and the things he's said are twisted by a hostile media so often and so loudly that people hearing the soundbites can't know what his actual message was. Such as the prevailing belief that he hasn't denounced White Supremacists, when he actually has on several occasions.
You can blame CNN for those cowardly miscreants long before you can

President Trump. Nevermind the documented false flags carried out by his opposition, and the crimes against whites and Right wing members that backed the likes of Sanders, Warren, Clinton, etc. But I'm not blaming them, I will always hold the shooters solely responsible unless someone else does something evil, like calls for violence, doxxes their own constituents, or backs actual terror groups. Oh, wait... that's all been done, and not by Trump.

So are there similarities between Nazi germany and America? Sure. Pick a period that isn’t true. The founding fathers of America used charismatic speeches and the equivalent of beer hall putsch’s to rally a people into treason. They seized land from other peoples and nations by force to gain “breathing room” for their growing nation. They defied arms agreements and created a new flag and displaced the legal government and then rallied a people behind nationalism to their cause.

Pick almost any country and we can play this game. Same with Hitler. We can sit here and point out similarities between almost any world leader and Hitler. Some things are just pretty effective and pretty common when it comes to countries and leaders. But- we could also spend all day discussing fundamental differences as well.

State sponsored Book burnings, mass genocide, work camps, suppression of religion and thought, open and wide spread ethnic cleansing, the socialist factor- etc. etc. while it’s important to note there is a slippery slope and it’s prudent to avoid sliding down it and far easier to stop it before it’s in full swing- it also is alarmist and extreme to declare on superficial grounds that the United States is approaching Nazi Germany. We are not seeing an escalation on the scale that was seen there. We should be mindful that we stop such things before they start- but on the grounds of their own repugnance and not simply because they are something that MIGHT bear similarity to the the Nazis. Nazis also had social welfare too- should we shy away from such things because they bear some resemblance to actions taken in Nazi germany, or should we vote them in context to a whole?

can we not throw around nazi as a slur?