Because most liberals fell for the border control issue, and would push back against the more progressive “we didn’t cross the bkrder, the border crossed us” ethos (in favour of “systems need rules based order for nations to have money/sovereignty”…
The backside of border control is immigration and deportation.
…so the ideas of the Neo-Liberal strands of liberalism (the kinds you get in establishment dems) aren’t fully coherent, thought through, or compatible with progressive “respect the people, not the nation” ethics…
But the Neo-Liberal view of borders being a necessary evil for nations, citizenships, laws, and rights - does remain compatible with fascism… Which is what the post is pointing out.
Speaking to a crowd in Atlanta on Tuesday, Harris reiterated her support for a border bill that would increase funding for ICE detention beds, border patrol agents, asylum officers and immigration judges. It also would also reinforce new restrictions on migrants seeking asylum, alongside other reforms.
This is a casual forum, not an academic debate. If you want to start demanding sources for things, show that you’ve put some good faith effort into disproving the claim. If you just want to reply casually, that’s fine. That’s what most discussion here is. But when you start demanding a higher level of rigor, it’s only polite to demonstrate that level of rigor yourself first.
Yeah, not sure what “liberals”, hell anyone on the left, would’ve been able to do to stop this fascism, besides voting, which posts like this seem hell bent on getting us to disagree with each other about.
Let’s just pretend Biden didn’t have 2 years of near congressional control to prevent the fascist takeover I guess. Or at the very least impede its effect. Never forget Biden never shut down the whole kids in cages shit, or ended the border wall construction outright.
That’s not an answer to my question, but in any case you do still need a trial and conviction. Did you forget about the multiple trials he was facing that were only dropped because he was inaugurated?
They didn’t even start the process until two years in to the Biden administration. Biden sent the nation to Hell through the oldest liberal failing - seeking to compromise with Republicans. He appointed a Republican as his attorney general. Did you forget that? And then Garland proceeded to slow-walk the Trump prosecution. They only moved forward at all after the House investigatory committees forced their hand.
They could have EASILY put Trump in prison. There are SO MANY documented crimes he has committed. They actively chose not to because they are controlled opposition owned by the rich.
Maybe the person might be from Europe where liberals is used to refer to people on the right (liberal in terms of letting companies do what they want, no regulations etc)
Many Democratic politicians, such as Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and former Vice President Kamala Harris of California, believe that ICE should be reformed rather than abolished. Harris stated that Democrats should “critically re-examine ICE” and “think about starting from scratch” with American immigration policy, while Senator Bernie Sanders stated that Democrats should instead encourage Trump to work with them on “a national program which deals with this serious issue.”
Liberals where the pearl-clutchers.
Sorting political affiliations into liberals/conservatives is a false dichotomy that basically only happens in the US (due to the two party system). There are other political movements, though. Otherwise, Occupy, BLM, Stop Cop City, Defund the police, etc. would be considered liberal movements, even if they oppose liberal (DNC) politicians.
OOP (the person posting the tweet/toot/notlearningtheblueskylingo) is an explicit leftist, so he makes that distinction.
Word of advice: The dictionary is a horrible source of authority when it comes to political discussions. You’re gonna have a bad time using it, since it ignores political and historical context.
Nevertheless: OOP is correct.
The literal definition of Liberal, now and forever, yes.
Have fun never having any fruitful political discussions with that attitude. /s
deleted by creator
The American Immigration Council:
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/report/still-no-action-taken-complaints-against-border-patrol-agents-continue-go-unanswered/
Behind The Bastards episodes on Border Patrol (including the complaint it has no one overseeing or restricting it):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdStIvC8WeE
deleted by creator
It doesn’t. That’s the whole point of satirizing the OP by simply reposting their BS whinge.
Because most liberals fell for the border control issue, and would push back against the more progressive “we didn’t cross the bkrder, the border crossed us” ethos (in favour of “systems need rules based order for nations to have money/sovereignty”…
The backside of border control is immigration and deportation.
…so the ideas of the Neo-Liberal strands of liberalism (the kinds you get in establishment dems) aren’t fully coherent, thought through, or compatible with progressive “respect the people, not the nation” ethics…
But the Neo-Liberal view of borders being a necessary evil for nations, citizenships, laws, and rights - does remain compatible with fascism… Which is what the post is pointing out.
Before demanding sources, please provide you own. What research have you done so far, so others can help you find what you’re struggling with?
deleted by creator
My point is, you never even bothered to google Kamala ICE policy. If you did, you would have found this article:
https://www.wvtm13.com/article/fact-checking-kamala-harris-border-security/61780748
From 2024.
This is a casual forum, not an academic debate. If you want to start demanding sources for things, show that you’ve put some good faith effort into disproving the claim. If you just want to reply casually, that’s fine. That’s what most discussion here is. But when you start demanding a higher level of rigor, it’s only polite to demonstrate that level of rigor yourself first.
deleted by creator
Yeah, not sure what “liberals”, hell anyone on the left, would’ve been able to do to stop this fascism, besides voting, which posts like this seem hell bent on getting us to disagree with each other about.
Let’s just pretend Biden didn’t have 2 years of near congressional control to prevent the fascist takeover I guess. Or at the very least impede its effect. Never forget Biden never shut down the whole kids in cages shit, or ended the border wall construction outright.
deleted by creator
They had 51 for 4 years before this current congress. So I’m not really sure you’re right.
deleted by creator
What I’m getting out of this is that Americans haven’t been craving the D in 10 years.
deleted by creator
I guess that’s fair. Even though the 2 independents caucus with the Dems.
Baseless claims don’t fly far with an audience that reads like it’s second nature. 🤷🏼♂️
What is “near congressional control”? That just sounds like a disingenuous way to say “didn’t have congressional control”.
You don’t need congress to send felons to prison.
That’s not an answer to my question, but in any case you do still need a trial and conviction. Did you forget about the multiple trials he was facing that were only dropped because he was inaugurated?
Why were all those trials slow-walked?
Were they? It seemed to me more like Trump doing the one thing he’s actually good at: dragging out trials.
They didn’t even start the process until two years in to the Biden administration. Biden sent the nation to Hell through the oldest liberal failing - seeking to compromise with Republicans. He appointed a Republican as his attorney general. Did you forget that? And then Garland proceeded to slow-walk the Trump prosecution. They only moved forward at all after the House investigatory committees forced their hand.
Biden was in the Senate for 50 years. he layed the groundwork for Trump.
lol the twisted logic
it’s pretty straightforward logic
They could have EASILY put Trump in prison. There are SO MANY documented crimes he has committed. They actively chose not to because they are controlled opposition owned by the rich.
Not funded ICE, at all.
Maybe the person might be from Europe where liberals is used to refer to people on the right (liberal in terms of letting companies do what they want, no regulations etc)
surprising to see people on Lemmy who still.don’t know the word ‘liberal’
No, that’s Daniel Baryon a.k.a “Anark”. He’s in the so-called US.
That’s still what he means, though.
deleted by creator
Here you go
deleted by creator
No
Liberals where the pearl-clutchers.
Sorting political affiliations into liberals/conservatives is a false dichotomy that basically only happens in the US (due to the two party system). There are other political movements, though. Otherwise, Occupy, BLM, Stop Cop City, Defund the police, etc. would be considered liberal movements, even if they oppose liberal (DNC) politicians.
OOP (the person posting the tweet/toot/notlearningtheblueskylingo) is an explicit leftist, so he makes that distinction.
deleted by creator
Maybe with the philosophical definition. Not with the political definition, though.
OP means the political definition.
deleted by creator
Word of advice: The dictionary is a horrible source of authority when it comes to political discussions. You’re gonna have a bad time using it, since it ignores political and historical context.
Nevertheless: OOP is correct.
Have fun never having any fruitful political discussions with that attitude. /s
https://www.amazon.com/Apprentices-Sorcerer-Tradition-Critical-Sciences/dp/1608462021