Early Retirement Extreme Forums

jacob, one point. I did not assert that identity politics is the root cause of the congressional divide/ineffectiveness, but rather as a growing impediment to any sort of meaningful, constructive dialog on problem solving versus an ongoing whipsaw of executive fiat (in the arena of politics) or the general lack of civility that gets in the way of much private discourse. Even here where the conversation is reasonable disdain can be sensed below the surface.

I've been able to borrow some vocabulary from Peterson and Weinstein and Rubin, et. al., which makes expressing things easier, but several things happened in 2015 and 2016 that were "game-changers" for me. It's anecdotal and my personal experience may be absolutely unique and anomalous but they forced me to rethink a lot of things. I'll not detail it all. A few things I've mentioned here or there in the past, the general theme being my getting singled out for less-then-dignified treatment because of my race/gender combination.

Two observations from that I cannot escape:

-For the most part, that stuff did not have it's origins in legislative gridlock. Most of the people I had those interactions with barely have a clue what's transpiring in national legislative politics, much less an overview going back decades.
-There is a real dynamic IRL that is not reflected in the MSM "framework", and presumably would not be reflected at all in a world where all the corporate media were in lock-step touting the company line, as it were. Having a homogeneous media would simplify things perhaps, but it may not improve them. For whatever it is worth, I think both sides in the US are egregiously distorted in their framing.

My amateur opinion: the street-level public discourse will have to right itself first, and the voters will have to do what they can to make the politicians follow. Looking for the government to be the corrective force is, I think, wrong. I know that's sort of the stereotypical American centrist way of thinking, but that's what I am. The stuff you've pointed out regarding how the gov't/system has contorted itself to the point of near uselessness is pretty spot on. We the voters have not incentivized them to fix it.

IlliniDave wrote:getting singled out for less-then-dignified treatment

Yeah, like being called a "Princess" because you do not wish to dispose of a large quantity of rat poison in a manner not in compliance with hazardous waste management protocol..., or maybe just because you made use of the word "protocol?"

Unfortunately, it is likely the case that when they come for the "Intelligentsia" nobody on this forum, even if they can produce evidence of grandmother being employed on assembly line during the Last Great War and/or name of debt-fleeing ancestor on the docket of the second voyage of the Mayflower, will be safe.

7Wannabe5 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:24 pm

IlliniDave wrote:getting singled out for less-then-dignified treatment

Yeah, like being called a "Princess" because you do not wish to dispose of a large quantity of rat poison in a manner not in compliance with hazardous waste management protocol..., or maybe just because you made use of the word "protocol?"

Unfortunately, it is likely the case that when they come for the "Intelligentsia" nobody on this forum, even if they can produce evidence of grandmother being employed on assembly line during the Last Great War and/or name of debt-fleeing ancestor on the docket of the second voyage of the Mayflower, will be safe.

Not exactly. I meant something specifically not based on my behavior, but based simply on my immutable group identifiers (gender and skin color) which, I was advised, cancel out any possible exculpatory past or future actions. The exception was admitting my political Independence, although somehow I was supposedly not entitled to have that independence because of the aforementioned immutable traits. It's not hard for me have strong sympathy with legitimate immigrants who fear analogous treatment. It's never a good thing. Nor is what happened to you.

I do wonder who might fill the role of the intelligentsia/bourgeois in any upcoming revolutions here, as unlikely as such a thing is in my belief.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/ ... ina-766609

This attitude is pretty questionable from the standpoint of the country's interests and my own (most of social circle, being on student/work visas, is feeling the heat). Though, I do have to say that since at least 70% of the solid state physics/materials people are foreign, extreme nativism is really going to help my own bottom line.

Curiously, most of the Indians I know who have expressed an opinion are somewhat supportive of Trump, particularly his xenophobic tendencies. I've also had the same attitude from a Chinese student. I don't believe the Western take on this situation is all that universal.

jacob wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:15 am

My point is that one's vote (or lack of vote) needs to be congruent with accepting the consequences of that vote (or non-vote).

1.what does DLj suggest humans do? is the answer "vote Democrat"?
2.does DLj really believe voting will change anything? especially if the humans here vote?
3.this country has incarcerated 2.25 million humans, most of them citizens. how weird does it really seem that it would make bad decisions regarding immigrants?

ZAFCorrection wrote: Curiously, most of the Indians I know who have expressed an opinion are somewhat supportive of Trump, particularly his xenophobic tendencies. I've also had the same attitude from a Chinese student.

this so much

@brute -

1) To break the partisanship/attack politics, humans need to stop voting "against the other". While a strategy of unifying "Us" to be against "Them" works for the Cubs and the White Sox, it has no place in a democracy(*). Humans need to level up from simple-minded tribalism and pick their party^H^H^H^H^Hpolitician based on their ideology rather than their ideology based on their party. This requires actually developing an ideology and understanding one's political beliefs and then finding a politician who represents those beliefs. Most humans currently seem to have a hard time doing that.

(*) Why? Because a democracy is about governing one people. Not about dividing into two peoples and competing for a trophy.

I realize that some humans will be able to develop a more sophisticated understanding than others, but all adult humans should be able to grok that there's more to democracy than #winning a game of sportsball.

The current strategies from the political parties are predicated on the observation than enough Americans apparently do not understand the difference between watching sports and participating in a democracy.

2) Yes, voting can change a lot. Even if it does not change the result, it creates a stakeholder relationship between the citizen and their government via their politicians. This in turn should enhance the development of actual political beliefs and decrease the link to rah-rah shirt-colors.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... countries/

3) In light of the above, not weird at all. Add this to how a majority (~70%) of people don't care about anything that happens to other people until it happens to themselves.

jacob wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 10, 2018 7:11 am

I realize that some humans will be able to develop a more sophisticated understanding than others, but all adult humans should be able to grok that there's more to democracy than #winning a game of sportsball.

Some venn diagrams regarding "those who don't have a strong need for intellectual consistency":

https://www.aei.org/publication/celebra ... -diagrams/

Here's something that's REAL. My brother-in-law has been living in the United States for more than 25 years and is on TPS status. He did not get married, so he has had no path to citizenship. Now that TPS has been officially cancelled, he is going to be forced to leave the place where he has lived, worked, and paid taxes, committed zero crimes, for a quarter of a century. Forced to go back to some place where he currently has no ties to. Real enough? It's no bullshit, I assure you.

chicago81 wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:54 am

.. he is going to be forced to leave the place where he has lived, worked, and paid taxes, committed zero crimes, for a quarter of a century. Forced to go back to some place where he currently has no ties to. Real enough? It's no bullshit, I assure you.

I'm an immigrant myself. I often have the following discussion with my fellow Hispanic immigrants when discussing illegal immigration and refugees. I caution calling illegal immigrants "undocumented immigrants" and refugees "migrants" since it mistakenly implies a legal status that doesn't exist and could be revoked via executive fiat at any moment. It harmfully lulls those with no legal or permanent immigration status into believing their situation isn't critical and that the magic wand of governance will suddenly make them permanent residents. This isn't to imply that they are getting what they deserve - far from it.

When I hear of situations like what your brother-in-law is going through, I wonder what efforts he might have taken if he had he known the true precarious nature of his US residency. I hope he finds an avenue that will allow him to stay in the USA - he sound like a good man.

@Campitor:

The same rule of thumb applies to expectations people have surrounding marital contract and divorce. So, Venn Diagram construction as linked above could also apply to how some people think about their own bad divorce vs. other guy's bad deportation.*

*Also certain aspects of my business relationship with my arch-nemesis J.Bozo.

7Wannabe5 wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 10, 2018 10:29 am

@Campitor:

The same rule of thumb applies to expectations people have surrounding marital contract and divorce. So, Venn Diagram construction as linked above could also apply to how some people think about their own bad divorce vs. other guy's bad deportation.*

*Also certain aspects of my business relationship with my arch-nemesis J.Bozo.

I'm not sure if there really is a "good" deportation. A divorce can be mutually agreeable and resolved amicably. A mutually agreeable deportation is really someone voluntarily packing their bags and leaving the country - that's called traveling or immigrating.

A deportation is ICE showing up, zipping your wrists together, and locking you up in a detention center until they find the cheapest mode of transportation back to your country of origin. I'd love to find someone who thinks this is a "good" deportation.

PS - Is J.Bozo the guy who defaulted on the payments for the books you shipped?

@chicago81

Before the thread gets too far off topic, I just want to say, sorry about your family situation, I hope it is able to come to a positive resolution.

Before the thread gets too far off topic, I just want to say, sorry about your family situation, I hope it is able to come to a positive resolution.

Yes, you have all our best wishes. It's a ridiculously short-sighted and inhumane policy. The first step away from a civil society governed by rule of law is actually draconian administration of letter of law due to reality or perception of dwindling resources.

While the déportation of immigrants might be detrimental to American, being in America as à foreigner is à privilege granted by americans. I don't understand the outrage when this privilege is getting revoked. One might convice americans that they have interests in keeping immigrants in, but has long as they have might and legitimacy to deport immigrants, showing an entitlement to stay wont change anything. Am i missing something?

@Jean

This is an immigrant country, insofar as the original “natives” make up a very small number at this point. Our allowance of the “right” immigrants is why the country is great. It’s why Elon Musk came here.

What we are seeing now is the pendulum swinging in a direction that’s unfair to immigrants who have played by the rules, after a period where the pendulum allowed a lot of abuses by immigrants not playing by the rules.

The abusive immigrants not playing by the rules have been playing off the empathy of natives. This incurs the wrath of many of the disagreeable natives, and now this is to the detriment of the law-abiding immigrants.

It’s a wave function.

As I have no worries about being deported, it’s very easy for me to dispassionately look at it as a wave function. For @chicago81, it’s all too real, and simply unfair.

Jean wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:21 pm

While the déportation of immigrants might be detrimental to American, being in America as à foreigner is à privilege granted by americans. I don't understand the outrage when this privilege is getting revoked. One might convice americans that they have interests in keeping immigrants in, but has long as they have might and legitimacy to deport immigrants, showing an entitlement to stay wont change anything. Am i missing something?

Sovereignty of borders and a comprehensive immigration policy is certainly the privilege of the host nation to decide and enforce. I think the problem is with deporting immigrants who arrived legally and have obeyed the law but are now being penalized for reputably obtaining government assistance. Had they known there was going to be a "bait and switch" so to speak, they may have decided to make other choices. It's really not fair. It's akin to driving 65MPH on 65MPH highway only to receive a speeding ticket 2 years down the road when the speed limit is lowered to 55MPH and the penalty for speeding is applied retroactively.

On a related note, I've heard from friends on NAFTA visas that they are having a hard time renewing, while in the past it was just routine. Some have failed to secure them and are returning to Canada. At least they always knew it was a possibility with the renewal process.

What I mean, is that the outrage should come come from americans because those mesures are unfair and carried in their names. Outrages from non-americans looks like entitlement to me, because they have no right to chose what laws are.
Today's american legitimacy comes from the use of superior forces over previous americans. If you show outrage because of a law from a country your not par of the souverain, basicaly, you're threatening to make it change by force.

@Jean - Some people have more rights (e.g. citizens have the most) than others but all people have some rights (e.g. tourists or I suppose "enemy combatants" have the least). Most understand that the morality of such rights go somewhat beyond who wields the bigger stick. Going beyond the law of the jungle, there's a moral and legal framework delineating how people can and should behave and how many rights different people have. Everybody in the US (even non-citizens) actually have a legal right (freedom of speech) to criticize or express outrage without the government coming after them (First Amendment).

Prior to 1971 women in Switzerland still had a lot of rights even if they couldn't vote. I do not know the details, but the right to vote might have been the only difference in the catalog of rights(*). If men (over 18) had decided to reduce women's rights, women would justifiably be outraged even if they couldn't do a thing about it. Similarly, children can not vote. However, if we (the adult voters) made a law reinstating child slave labor, the children would have every right to be pissed about it. Neither of those objections would look like entitlement to me insofar those affected objected to it.

This [immigration] situation is similar. For this thread, it's a situation where we have a class of legal immigrants where certain rights have been earned by following the rules and paying taxes, etc. These rights are now being taken away in a rather outrageous manner (no warning, no grandfathering, possibly retroactively,... ).

(*) Incidentally, the difference in rights a legal permanent resident (LPR) and a US citizen are similarly small. LPRs have to carry ID everywhere, inform the government where they live, and they can't vote. US citizens, in turn, have to pay US taxes even if they move out of the US.

This mega effort to keep migrants out and deport anybody they can is bizarre, especially in the face of the severe shortage of workers we are experiencing. In my area you get hired if you can fog a mirror.