Crime Why is the term "Illegal immigrant" or "illegals" no longer appropriate? (vs "undocumented worker)

[ShadowRun]

Hey who cares about the details here, I’m outraged the word illegal was used

 

[Mr Holmes]

Hey who cares about the details here, I’m outraged the word illegal was used

Damn, Abbott tweeted that?

 

[nhbbear]

As I said, "illegals" is used so that people won't see them as fully human. You're just trying to explain why people should hate them. Just own it. You're certainly within your rights, but others are within their rights to think less of you for it. Freedom goes both ways, which is something rightists don't seem to understand.

Jesus, where to start.

First, I am not a “rightest.” I have about as much love for them as I do for leftists. I perfectly well understand that you can call someone a name or label them in a certain way and people will be able to do the same to you. I am just saying you’re fucking weak for doing so. Threatening to slander someone with a hate label if they don’t conform to your definitions or terminology is completely bitchmade, and political aspects aside, is pretty fascist (a term you leftists love to lobby about) because you are trying to suppress opposing opinions through fear.

Second, I am not trying to explain why people should hate them. I don’t hate them, so why would I try to convince others to do so? I hate people that try to claim your racist or any other “ist/ism” for pointing out that people that cross the border in the dead of the night, illegally, are illegal immigrants. “Illegal aliens” I might agree with you. Calling a person that illegally immigrates to a country an “illegal immigrant” is not trying to see them as not “fully human.” It’s an accurate label.

This debate mirrors the ones about two genders. You either have/were born with a penis, which makes you a male with he/him pronouns or you were born with/have a vagina and that makes you female with she/her pronouns. A tiny fraction were born with both, otherwise you a. Have a penis b. Don’t have a penis. When I argue with some twat on twitter about why males shouldn’t compete with females because of increased muscle mass, bone density, ligament strength, lower body fat percentage, being naturally stronger, faster, and other advantages-but to speak of this makes you a transphobe. It’s the same tired bullshit. Speak against our wishes and we will call you damaging names to try and scare you, harm your reputation, and try to fuck with your job.

Again, fuck that

 

[nhbbear]

It isn't. None of them are actually being sincere when they say that. It's just a way to mock the OP for talking about something they don't like. It's very plausible in today's atmosphere that this happened. I've seen plenty of instances just like it.

As have I. Did social work in 2020. Had to attend zoom conferences and it was a constant battle from people asking me to list my pronouns to having to bite my tongue so hard it almost bled to avoid speaking my truth at the cost of a shitty job.

My favorite was a course called “how to be an ally” and most of it was to stand back and rescind your white privilege and give poc the floor and “yield your voice” and let poc speak first and often. Allow them to present their ideas and credit them with coming up with solutions to problems so that they may get ahead. It was so disgusting to listen to

 

[Jack V Savage]

Jesus, where to start.

First, I am not a “rightest.” I have about as much love for them as I do for leftists. I perfectly well understand that you can call someone a name or label them in a certain way and people will be able to do the same to you. I am just saying you’re fucking weak for doing so. Threatening to slander someone with a hate label if they don’t conform to your definitions or terminology is completely bitchmade, and political aspects aside, is pretty fascist (a term you leftists love to lobby about) because you are trying to suppress opposing opinions through fear.

Second, I am not trying to explain why people should hate them. I don’t hate them, so why would I try to convince others to do so? I hate people that try to claim your racist or any other “ist/ism” for pointing out that people that cross the border in the dead of the night, illegally, are illegal immigrants. “Illegal aliens” I might agree with you. Calling a person that illegally immigrates to a country an “illegal immigrant” is not trying to see them as not “fully human.” It’s an accurate label.

This debate mirrors the ones about two genders. You either have/were born with a penis, which makes you a male with he/him pronouns or you were born with/have a vagina and that makes you female with she/her pronouns. A tiny fraction were born with both, otherwise you a. Have a penis b. Don’t have a penis. When I argue with some twat on twitter about why males shouldn’t compete with females because of increased muscle mass, bone density, ligament strength, lower body fat percentage, being naturally stronger, faster, and other advantages-but to speak of this makes you a transphobe. It’s the same tired bullshit. Speak against our wishes and we will call you damaging names to try and scare you, harm your reputation, and try to fuck with your job.

Again, fuck that

You don't see the issue here? On the one hand, you're crying about labels being applied to you, on the other, you're dismissing anyone's concerns about labels. And on the one hand, you're insisting that unauthorized immigrants are bad people who should be given dehumanizing labels, and on the other, you're insisting that you're not giving them dehumanizing labels. "How DARE you suggest that I hate those people, even though I am right to hate them?" Literally everything you're crying about applies to your own actions.

 

[ferrisjso]

The same reason our military is called the Dept of Defense despite the fact we haven’t fought a defensive war ever… it’s propaganda used to obfuscate reality and keep people from acting accordingly.

Its actually hillarious.

Back when the US was isolationist it was called the Dept of War. The moment that changed it became the Dept of Defense. Its always opposite day.

 

[nhbbear]

You don't see the issue here? On the one hand, you're crying about labels being applied to you, on the other, you're dismissing anyone's concerns about labels. And on the one hand, you're insisting that unauthorized immigrants are bad people who should be given dehumanizing labels, and on the other, you're insisting that you're not giving them dehumanizing labels. "How DARE you suggest that I hate those people, even though I am right to hate them?" Literally everything you're crying about applies to your own actions.

Bullshit. Calling someone that violates the laws and border security to sneak into a country IS AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT. It’s not unfairly labeling them whereas calling someone that fairly calls them for what they are as someone filled with hate, a rightist, and dehumanizing is unfairly labeling someone. Do you see the difference? You are telling me that I hate them and that I should own my hate and racism trying to force me to accept the label you demand I accept. You’re doing that typical leftist bullshit where you try and label someone with an ist or ism for criticizing one of your beloved pet projects trying to use fear of such labels, which are very harmful personally, socially, and professionally, to get me to accept your language over my own.

I didn’t list reasons to hate them. I listed the reasons as to why they should be called out for sneaking into the country and how it is unfair for both citizens and legal immigrants. Having laws and not enforcing them and having no border weakens our country. I am not going to kiss their feet and thank them for breaking the laws and welcome them without any repercussions like you do.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Bullshit. Calling someone that violates the laws and border security to sneak into a country IS AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT. It’s not unfairly labeling them whereas calling someone that fairly calls them for what they are as someone filled with hate, a rightist, and dehumanizing is unfairly labeling someone. Do you see the difference?

First, we're discussing "illegals" as a noun. Second, yes! You're getting closer. You're saying that it's inherently wrong to notice when someone is being hateful, right? But you think using dehumanizing language to describe others is OK. My view is that people know what they're doing when they use the words they use, and it's contemptible to try to run from it. *Either* use neutral language *or* admit that your intention is to suggest that some people don't deserve empathy. Make your choice and stand by it.

You are telling me that I hate them and that I should own my hate and racism trying to force me to accept the label you demand I accept. You’re doing that typical leftist bullshit where you try and label someone with an ist or ism for criticizing one of your beloved pet projects trying to use fear of such labels, which are very harmful personally, socially, and professionally, to get me to accept your language over my own.

No. Use the language you want. Just be honest. My position here isn't left or right. It's just that communication should be clear and honest. You're doing that typical rightist bullshit where you try to simultaneously say something and deny you're saying it.

I didn’t list reasons to hate them. I listed the reasons as to why they should be called out for sneaking into the country and how it is unfair for both citizens and legal immigrants. Having laws and not enforcing them and having no border weakens our country. I am not going to kiss their feet and thank them for breaking the laws and welcome them without any repercussions like you do.

Dude, have some dignity here.

 

[Scheme]

It's a useful political tool used to minimize the actual problem and try to control the way the average person thinks about the problem.

They've done it with abortion: "reproductive health".
They've done it with racism: "affirmative action".
They've done it with sexism/racism/anti-straight: "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion".

And I think it works effectively. The average person isn't all caught up in politics. If they hear something like "reproductive health" or "diversity, equity and inclusion" they are more likely to agree with that than if we label it as "abortion" or "racism". So if they are coming into the topic a neutral party and a leftist is giving them their first viewpoints on the topic, they are more likely to be swayed to be left-leaning on the topic. And we know that the first opinion someone takes on a topic is the most important. Getting someone to change their opinion is much harder than planting the first opinion on that person.

I don't like to invoke 1984 much where it isn't needed but it is very reminiscent of Newspeak.

 

[nhbbear]

First, we're discussing "illegals" as a noun. Second, yes! You're getting closer. You're saying that it's inherently wrong to notice when someone is being hateful, right? But you think using dehumanizing language to describe others is OK. My view is that people know what they're doing when they use the words they use, and it's contemptible to try to run from it. *Either* use neutral language *or* admit that your intention is to suggest that some people don't deserve empathy. Make your choice and stand by it.


No. Use the language you want. Just be honest. My position here isn't left or right. It's just that communication should be clear and honest. You're doing that typical rightist bullshit where you try to simultaneously say something and deny you're saying it.

Dude, have some dignity here.

Again, trying to force me to make a choice-either you’re wrong or you’re wrong. Either you are dehumanizing people or you’re running like a coward. Fuck off. I will use the term “illegal immigrants” without any connotation of hatred, dehumanization, or being dishonest about my intentions. Jesus, you’re an arrogant fucker.

And, thank you for allowing me to use the language I wish to use, but fuck you for trying to tell me that I have to accept my “hatred and dehumanizing language” for appropriate terminology. They are in fact, illegal immigrants. They illegally entered and migrated to this country.

And finally, “typical rightist bullshit where you say something and then deny you say it.” No. Just no. You are attributing feelings of hatred to my accurate use of two words that fit together to accurately describe a person and their immigration status in this country. I don’t even know what soft ass term you want me to use “undocumented guests/workers” “asylum seekers” “future citizens” “future democrats” or my favorite “undocumented American”

Here are some quotes from articles that discuss the topic:

As José Mendoza put it, “the notion of illegality plays a large role in constructing, perpetuating, and solidifying whiteness … illegality, like race, has historically functioned as a signifier of nonwhiteness and thereby marks entire communities (e.g., Latino and Asian communities) as nonwhite.” The ways in which racist ideologies are bound up with U.S. immigration policies are unfortunately not just historical artifacts but continue to this day, as is evidenced by former President Trump’s comments referring to Haiti, El Salvador, and African countries as “shithole countries.”

If “illegal immigrant” is imprecise and racially problematic, what term should be used instead? Pro-immigrant liberals often prefer the term “undocumented immigrant.” The nonprofit Define American, in its criticism of phrases such as “illegal immigrant” and “illegal alien,” recommends “undocumented American.” But “undocumented immigrant” has its shortcomings too. For many conservatives, “undocumented immigrant” smacks of euphemism, which makes it seem as though the matter were simply a clerical or administrative error—as if some document was misplaced or not properly issued.

President Biden’s Executive Order 14012, Executive Order on Restoring Faith in Our Legal
Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans
(Feb. 2, 2021), affirms that the “Federal Government should develop welcoming strategies that
promote integration [and] inclusion.” That Executive Order and Executive Order 14010, Creating
a Comprehensive Regional Framework To Address the Causes of Migration, To Manage
Migration Throughout North and Central America, and To Provide Safe and Orderly Processing of
Asylum Seekers at the United States Border (Feb. 2, 2021), do not use the terms “alien” or “illegal
alien” to describe migrants.

 

[nhbbear]

It's a useful political tool used to minimize the actual problem and try to control the way the average person thinks about the problem.

They've done it with abortion: "reproductive health".
They've done it with racism: "affirmative action".
They've done it with sexism/racism/anti-straight: "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion".

And I think it works effectively. The average person isn't all caught up in politics. If they hear something like "reproductive health" or "diversity, equity and inclusion" they are more likely to agree with that than if we label it as "abortion" or "racism". So if they are coming into the topic a neutral party and a leftist is giving them their first viewpoints on the topic, they are more likely to be swayed to be left-leaning on the topic. And we know that the first opinion someone takes on a topic is the most important. Getting someone to change their opinion is much harder than planting the first opinion on that person.

I don't like to invoke 1984 much where it isn't needed but it is very reminiscent of Newspeak.

Newspeak it is. It is trying to change the opinion and narrative by changing the language used. They use the threats of labeling someone a racist or homophobe if you don’t dance to their music. I don’t hate illegal immigrants, as has been suggested by some(and he claims I should have some dignity and own my hatred, fucking clown), but I am done with the open border shit. I am done with Central American criminals being able to sneak in, bring in drugs and human smuggling, commit crimes with impunity.

So here’s what I suggest. Close the fucking border then work to get those already here documented and moving towards citizenship. Deport the criminals and those that refuse to come forward when prompted, and quit coddling and giving preferential treatment to those who entered illegally over actual citizens. I don’t want my tax dollars, which continue to increase through outright increases or through taxes on Goods such as gas, which increase the price of absolutely everything in order to pay for a myriad of things from foreign aid, crazy military budgets, and taking in and sheltering people that broke the laws.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Again, trying to force me to make a choice-either you’re wrong or you’re wrong. Either you are dehumanizing people or you’re running like a coward. Fuck off. I will use the term “illegal immigrants” without any connotation of hatred, dehumanization, or being dishonest about my intentions. Jesus, you’re an arrogant fucker.

Once again, we're talking about the word "illegal" as a noun. You keep backing off that one too. And, no, you know what you're doing when you call people "illegals." Own it or don't use it. It's a reasonable request--the basic minimum necessary for a serious discussion.

And finally, “typical rightist bullshit where you say something and then deny you say it.” No. Just no.

But actually yes. You're still doing it too.

If “illegal immigrant” is imprecise and racially problematic, what term should be used instead?

"Illegal" as a noun is what we're talking about. And "unauthorized immigrant" works fine.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Newspeak it is.

The level of drama in you hardcore rightists' heads is just insane. Like, I don't think it's healthy to walk around with your hair on fire all the time. Someone else ITT compared calls for civility to the Holocaust! And now this.

Here's something Orwell himself said:

Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, ‘I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so’. Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:

While freely conceding that the Soviet régime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigours which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.

Just say what you mean and stand behind it, if you really believe it. And if you're not willing to stand behind it, don't say it.

 

[nhbbear]

Once again, we're talking about the word "illegal" as a noun. You keep backing off that one too. And, no, you know what you're doing when you call people "illegals." Own it or don't use it. It's a reasonable request--the basic minimum necessary for a serious discussion.

But actually yes. You're still doing it too.


"Illegal" as a noun is what we're talking about. And "unauthorized immigrant" works fine.

Not once have I used the noun “illegals.” I have only used illegal immigrants, so no, I am not doing what you claim I am doing-but keep moving those goalposts.

And we are talking about you and your ilk trying to force your verbiage upon me and others OR ELSE. Or else I am labeled as a racist/anti-immigrant/rightist/xenophobe. I don’t have to own up to shit, especially simply because you say so. Who the fuck are you to me or anyone else? All you are to me is one of a group of “politically correct” bullies that try to threaten those that disagree with you by threatening to label me as some hate monger-that if it somehow flooded into my actual identity, could cause me harm.

I hate trump, but it’s people like you that give him power and legitimacy/relevance. It’s push-back about being told what to say and how to think that drives people to vote for people like him or Margery greene, who refuse to bow to such bullshit when few others(especially politicians or public figures) will stand up to it. You and your ilk are trying to bully people into using your language. Try to own it, though, you’re not bullying shit

 

[nhbbear]

The level of drama in you hardcore rightists' heads is just insane. Like, I don't think it's healthy to walk around with your hair on fire all the time. Someone else ITT compared calls for civility to the Holocaust! And now this.

Here's something Orwell himself said:



Just say what you mean and stand behind it, if you really believe it. And if you're not willing to stand behind it, don't say it.

Again, with the same shit. You’re trying to label me a “rightist” because you think it bothers or insults me. I am neither a rightist nor bothered by some random jackass in an anonymous forum. And again with the “say what you mean.” I am saying it. Illegal immigrants are immigrants that emigrated illegally. There’s no hatred behind it. No racism. Nothing to own up to and nothing to be ashamed over. Simply because you claim you know what I mean and that I don’t does not make it true or remotely accurate.

 

[WhiteMousse]

It should be illegal immigrants. That is the best blend of brevity and accuracy.

They're fucking illegals. Oh no. I'm such a racist. How dare I articulate reality.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Not once have I used the noun “illegals.” I have only used illegal immigrants, so no, I am not doing what you claim I am doing-but keep moving those goalposts.

This is what we're discussing, though.

And we are talking about you and your ilk trying to force your verbiage upon me and others OR ELSE. Or else I am labeled as a racist/anti-immigrant/rightist/xenophobe.

Your actions affect how people think of you. Welcome to Earth.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Again, with the same shit. You’re trying to label me a “rightist” because you think it bothers or insults me.

No, it's an accurate description. My concern is solely with accuracy.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It should be illegal immigrants. That is the best blend of brevity and accuracy.

They're fucking illegals. Oh no. I'm such a racist. How dare I articulate reality.

The issue is just defining your fellow humans as "illegals." Lots of people violate minor laws and aren't defined by it. It's not a forced choice. It's a decision you make to shrink the sphere of empathy.

 

[nhbbear]

No, it's an accurate description. My concern is solely with accuracy.

Nah, your concern is with semantics and trying to control how people think and speak