Anti-immigrant rhetoric

[anna.]

Some immigrants are. No claim is made thatvall are.
But all should be properly vetted.
Or don't.

From over here, if the west chooses self immolation,
go for it.

From over here, where I live close to the border, life will go on as it has on land that once belonged to Mexico before it belonged to Spain before it belonged to the indigenous peoples and border crossing was fluid until the last century. No self immolation necessary.

 

[anna.]

What do people think about the ideas expressed here, by leading anti-immigration politicians (directed mainly at Italian and Irish immigrants)? In what way do the ideas expressed here differ from the current rhetoric of characters like Trump?

Excerpt from "Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States":​

"The most important act in the great drama of annihilating this Republic, is now performing. Foreigners are the principal actors; but, we must not deceive ourselves, there are native citizens also enlisted in the unholy work. In the mysterious movements of the political elements, it is our duty to be watchful. Our soil is already invaded, our homes are already polluted, the enemies of our liberties are already in the midst of us....They have their establishments, their schools, and their press; they are quietly, but effectually, moulding public sentiment in conformity to the views of their leaders. Under the specious pretext of charity, their wily emissaries are already at work to secure the confidence of the unsuspecting."


"They are cutthroats, murderers, and a pestilence to our great American city."
This sentiment was widespread, and Italians were often depicted as inherently criminal and associated with the Mafia.

"Irish papists will burn down our homes and our churches unless we drive them from our shores."

"The scum of the earth has found a haven in our land. Italians… are here to drain the blood of the American Republic."

Nativists and Know-Nothings.

Same belligerent beliefs and attitudes, different target groups and religions.

 

[Estro Felino]

That was a response to, "So, in your view, when Trump uses terms like animals, murderers, rapists, sub-human and so on, he is exclusively referring to those few people mentioned in those videos, or other people with actual convictions for violent crimes?"

You see no reason for thinking that Trump finds illegal aliens that want to come for a job and obey the laws apart from being in the States illegally acceptable, and mostly means human traffickers and drug smugglers when he refers to a border problem?

I see a very different person in Trump than you do. When he put people in cages and separated their children from them, do you think that those people were known to be human traffickers and drug smugglers? I don't. Most of those people were trying to escape desperate situations in their Central and South American countries, which is why their children were with them.

Yes, I know. You've said so before. I don't see that, and I haven't seen anybody on RF agree with you, so I don't know why you think that.

The tremendous repudiation of Trump that you see in about half of Americans and probably over half of people anywhere familiar with him is not about male sexuality nor insane. What's insane to me is to find that man acceptable. I can understand it in people who are so bitter that they want to see the earth scorched, or are so wealthy they want Trump to lower their taxes, deregulate their businesses, or are so theocratic that they support what they believe are his Handmaid's Tale values, although the white evangelicals are pretty upset that Trump says that a 6-week limit to abortion in Florida is too short, that he says he wants the individual states to decide about abortion rights rather than a national abortion ban, and that he wants IVF offered free of charge.

But they'll mostly vote for him anyway in the hope that he's lying about his intentions to try to appeal to moderates and women while campaigning, and then give them Gilead.

But I'll bet that you and most other Trump defenders and supporters posting in these threads are none of those things - bitter enough at the world to want to see other people harmed and suffer, a greedy and selfish captain of industry, or a religious zealot willing to make women incubators for the church - so it's a mystery to me what appeals about him to any of you.

So you see a serious psychiatric issue involving all American men that are repulsed by Trump? How about the women who hate Trump? How do you account for that?

Crooks suffered from sexuality? I don't think that's what you meant.

There may be sexual issue there, but I don't see his sexuality being a factor in shooting at Trump. When I look at the guy, I see a likely incel, whose anger issues are typically with women, but that's just a gestalt thing (gut feeling). I don't know his story and haven't been interested enough to find out what is known about him once I knew that he wasn't particular about who he shot at. He's just another American nut job with guns and a desire to kill. Those people are very important and very dangerous, but not very interesting.

I've got a joke for you:

A guy goes to a shrink who administers a series of Rorschach ink blot tests on him. "Tell me what you see here," says the doctor.

"I see a nude woman," replied the patient.

"And here?"

"I see a couple making love."

"And here?"

"I see an orgy."

"Sir, I think that you are overly preoccupied with sexual issues. You have a sex problem."

"*I* have a sex problem? You're the one with a desk full of dirty pictures."

Trump is hated because he didn't bow to the feminist dictatorship that wants to turn all heterosexual men into passive subservient husbands.

Freud would have written an entire essay on that.

 

[metis]

I won't fall for this conhecture.

It's not "conjecture", so believe what you want to, I guess.

 

[metis]

Trump is hated because he didn't bow to the feminist dictatorship that wants to turn all heterosexual men into passive subservient husbands.

Freud would have written an entire essay on that.

And you really believe this???

 

[Twilight Hue]

Its his gish gallop make a bunch of contradictory claims and everybody that wants to support him for whatever reason can find what they want while it is impossible to refute them all simply due to time constraints. His supporters don't care that he is inconsistent only that he reinforces their emotions occasionally. They are not thinking rationally and so rational arguments cannot dissuade them.

Better than people running around deranged all the time obsessed with Trump and can't think very clearly themselves.

 

[Spice]

And yet it appears significant numbers of the Irish and Italians became police officers.........

In the big cities, especially NYC, the job of police officer was the lowest of the low until the Irish grabbed ahold and organized the forces. A novel entitled _The Gods of Gotham_ is book #1 of a terrific trilogy about the early days of NYPD.

 

[Spice]

Yeah sure...
A lunatic with a mimetic suit and a professional weapon.

What professional weapon? It was a 22 caliper rifle, that just happened to be an AR 15 style. AR does NOT stand for "assault rifle." AR stands for ArmaLite Rifle and is a "civilian semi-automatic" rifle.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I think maybe there is a comparison to made between the parallel ways that the Irish and Italians were treated in Europe, vs. how they were treated when they got here. Sure, unfortunately the Irish immigrants may have been indentured servants, and some Italian immigrants may have been the target of unfair characterization. Generalizations that target others are never good. But today they have risen in rank in american culture, as I think there plenty of high ranking officials and business people with Italian and irish surnames.. you know names like Bezos and Guliani come to mind... McCain.. Biden, I'm sure I could think of a few dozen if I sat here long enough

But in Britain, (and I'm not much of a historian of this) they had the relatively recent trouble in northern Ireland. The whole IRA thing happened. I'm rough on the details on how all of that resolved, but it seems to come up against more recent history. And there are probably people there who want persevere their language, and I don't know what the state of things are in regard to that

As to the Italians in Europe, one hears stuff about possible animosity between the northern and southern blocks of Europe, that people like the Italians and Greeks go into debt. That doesn't seem that fair. I don't live in europe, so I don't really know what the inter-cultural dynamics are though, I hope they aren't too bad

 

[Tomef]

Those anti people you talk about? Well they wouldn't have hired them as police officers and I doubt you'll have any kind of an explanation for that.

Meaning what? Some people became police officers, therefore anti-immigration politicians didn’t exist?

If you want to find out about basic history, there are plenty of ways to do that. What does your vague notion have to do with the OP, that’s the question; back to the point, what do you think is the difference between the kind of language used by some in the political sphere to refer to immigrants in the 1800s and the language used to refer to immigrants now by Trump?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Meaning what? Some people became police officers, therefore anti-immigration politicians didn’t exist?

If you want to find out about basic history, there are plenty of ways to do that. What does your vague notion have to do with the OP, that’s the question; back to the point, what do you think is the difference between the kind of language used by some in the political sphere to refer to immigrants in the 1800s and the language used to refer to immigrants now by Trump?

Of course there's the dishonesty perpetuated by the left by calling them 'immigrants' when in actuality , we're talking about illegals. Am I right on that?

 

[Tomef]

Of course there's the dishonesty perpetuated by the left by calling them 'immigrants' when in actuality , we're talking about illegals. Am I right on that?

Are you going to answer the question or just keep on making irrelevant comments?

 

[Tomef]

By "he put people in cages and separated their children from them", are you referring to Obama? Trump wasn't President back in 2014:

Leaked Images Reveal Children Warehoused in Crowded U.S. Cells, Border Patrol Overwhelmed

Breitbart Texas obtained internal federal government photos depicting the conditions of foreign children warehoused by authorities.

www.breitbart.com

Where do you see anything here about children being separated from their parents by US officials?

As you can easily find out, pre-Trump, children were only separated from their parents under unusual circumstances, namely if their parent or parents were being charged with certain crimes committed at the border (e.g. drug smuggling). Otherwise, children were not separated from their parents. Under Trump, separation of parents and their children became the norm, in some cases lasting months. No cogent system of keeping track of these kids was implemented, leading to all kinds of problems. Thousands of kids, including many infants and toddlers, were ‘detained’ in completely different locations.

Family separation – a timeline

Long before the Trump administration implemented its “zero tolerance” immigration enforcement policy in 2018, it was already separating children from their parents as part of a “pilot program” conducted in the El Paso, Texas, area and along other parts of the border.

www.splcenter.org

Your response is to post some pictures of crowded rooms. Are you unable to understand how absurd that is?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Are you going to answer the question or just keep on making irrelevant comments?

Well it's hard to tell who's being honest or not about it. When you say immigrants I want to say illegal.

So if a politician is hostile toward immigrants then you're not going to get any immigrants on the police force if that politician has anything to do with it, it's just that simple and it's been mentioned in past threads and such that Italians and Irish were vetted properly and were allowed into this country as full fledged citizens, which I fully support.

Happy to answer.

 

[Tomef]

Well it's hard to tell who's being honest or not about it. When you say immigrants I want to say illegal.

So if a politician is hostile toward immigrants then you're not going to get any immigrants on the police force if that politician has anything to do with it, it's just that simple and it's been mentioned in past threads and such that Italians and Irish were vetted properly and were allowed into this country as full fledged citizens, which I fully support.

Happy to answer.

Stuff that goes on in your imagination doesn’t answer the question.

 

[anotherneil]

You can find transcripts of Trump's speeches here: Donald Trump Southern Border Arizona Cochise | Rev

Your claim doesn't really stack up. There have been occasions, as in the videos you linked to, when Trump is speaking about specific incidences of brutal crimes committed by illegal immigrants (3 in total, apparently). Looking at his speeches, however, he frequently makes sweeping generalisations and enormously exaggerated conflations to refer to huge numbers of people, as here:
"...much more than 20 million people into our country, many from prisons and jails, many from mental institutions, insane asylums, and many terrorists"

What is the basis for these claims, as just one example?

Put together with the reality that the majority of sex crimes, especially involving children, are committed by white, male US citizens ( https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/...ublications/quick-facts/Sexual_Abuse_FY21.pdf ), this whole immigration mania schtick lacks any credibility. Trump's promise to build a wall ended in abject failure, there is no reason to believe his claim that he will deport millions will come to anything either. Even to any extent that there is any movement towards that, it has close to zero chance of having any kind of impact on the level of violent sexual crime in the US, given that close to 0% of that crime in the US is committed by illegal immigrants.

It's beyond obvious that Trump's rhetoric has the sole purpose of winning the votes of the gullible. What other purpose does it serve? What purpose did his 'build a wall' promise serve? His lacklustre attempts at throwing up a few desultory fences had zero impact on illegal immigration, most of which in any case occurs when people fly to the US and overstay their visas.

Americans breaking the law is no justification for illegal aliens to break the law, and I'm not a spokesperson for the Trump campaign; you'll have to ask them your questions about Trump.

 

[anotherneil]

The video is of Trump speaking.

I didn't click on the link & if it's just a video, then why didn't you just directly post the video itself?

Is it a video clip edited to portray a false narrative about Trump just like the edited video clip of him talking about the Charlottesville incident painted a false narrative about Trump?

If you are that brainwashed, you really should read news you don't like, for your own sake.

Just because they claim to be news doesn't mean they're not deceptive, misleading, and producing content designed to have a political agenda.

I don't have a problem with reading the news no matter how much I don't like what's being reported.

It's not about being very brainwashed or being brainwashed at all & if anything, it's about avoiding being brainwashed.

Don't trust everything mainstream media tells you; learn to be a skeptic.

 

[Tomef]

Americans breaking the law is no justification for illegal aliens to break the law, and I'm not a spokesperson for the Trump campaign; you'll have to ask them your questions about Trump.

The point is that your stated opinions do not square with reality.

 

[anotherneil]

No, there's a lot more to it than that, as you could easily find out. As one example, what would you have thought if, when you were at school, some old guy regularly turned up in the girl's changing rooms to ogle the teenage girls as they got undressed. You'd consider that perfectly normal behaviour? Would you be outraged if anyone suggested he was a sex offender?

This is way off topic.

 

[Tomef]

I didn't click on the link & if it's just a video, then why didn't you just directly post the video itself?

Is it a video clip edited to portray a false narrative about Trump just like the edited video clip of him talking about the Charlottesville incident painted a false narrative about Trump?


Just because they claim to be news doesn't mean they're not deceptive, misleading, and producing content designed to have a political agenda.

I don't have a problem with reading the news no matter how much I don't like what's being reported.

It's not about being very brainwashed or being brainwashed at all & if anything, it's about avoiding being brainwashed.

Don't trust everything mainstream media tells you; learn to be a skeptic.

There’s a lot of space between ‘don’t trust everything’ and ‘I won’t read that because it’s CNN’. The first is taken as read, the second is the mindset of a cult member.

Ok, so give me a link to an article you think it misleading or deceptive, about Trump or some related topic. We can see how the ‘skeptical’ mind of someone who considers Breitbart a reliable source works.