During WWII, U.S. Saw Italian-Americans as a Threat to Homeland Security

Sorry for the late reply here. I fully agree that not all those who acquiesce with the travel ban are racist, and their position is further complicated by the fact that the vast majority of people in the USA know very little of immigration. I've sat in legal education classes where criminal lawyers expressed shock and amazement at their prior ignorance of the immigration system and how differently it functions from the criminal justice system. Immigration law is crazy complex and that makes it a terrible subject for trying to resolve in the format of a TV debate or something where you can otherwise assume a basic level of audience familiarity with the issue - the same reason astrophysicists argue out their disagreements via peer review rather than on Bill Nye's weekly science podcast.

It's fair to think the due diligence done in admitting foreign nationals has been lacking.

It really isn't. It takes a huge amount of vetting for a refugee to given permission to enter the USA. It's fairly easy to enter the country if you're a citizen of the EU or Japan or Canada or Australia (all of which have a good deal of socioeconomic common ground with the USA) but overall it's difficult. Visas are simply not handed out like cookies.

Some immigrants have subsequently committed crimes or even acts of terrorism within the US. but the incidence is significantly lower than that of natural-born American citizens. None of the available evidence supports the claim that there is some sort of security crisis requiring the imposition of drastic measures.

the right response is to, empathetically, discuss facts (statistics, counterfactuals) with them. The goal is to appeal to their better nature, not to make them lose so we win

I wholly agree and practice this diligently, but at some point the responsibility falls upon the listener to evaluate the information that has been provided to them and make a decision. If they just can't make up their mind for whatever reason, then chances are they'll never be politically active and investing more effort in persuading them is not an effective use of my time. If they endlessly pose counterarguments and excuses, then after a while I start to they're either arguing in bad faith or they have an position that they can't defend but don't want to give up, and it's likewise a waste of my time.

Lest this seem dismissive I'd like to point that I've been discussing politics civilly as an adult for maybe 25 years now, so if I give up on trying to persuade someone it's not from an inability to articulate an argument or an unwillingness to entertain opposing points of view.

Me too. I think the misconceptions about Trump-voting America is the another instance of the same phenomenon. And it's no less harmful, in my mind.

Get back to me when people being shot for supporting Trump without really believing in much of anything is a regular (or even an occasional) occurrence. By contrast I can point to a significant and growing death toll for acts of terrorism carried out by members of the far-right.

But why was it flagged? I do not understand. There is zero explanation.

Book is awesome. Extremely readable. The movies are a faithful yet not slavish adaptation.

I don't know exactly why users flagged it, but many did. One possibility is that you've made a bold and controversial claim without accompanying evidence. That sort of thing predictably impedes our ability to have the kind of civil and thoughtful discussion that we're here for.

> Radicalizing the American population and fostering identity division for the sake of votes and views is not a gentle pressure.

I'm not sure that anyone is "radicalizing" the population anymore than it already is. America has had a small but vocal radical left for a long time.

> Does this fact make slandering any better? what's the minimum economic divide that gives me a free pass over hate speech?

I really wish I knew what you were talking about.

> The Japanese are over-represented in every growth sector of the economy in Japan. [etc]

These are unfair comparisons and you know it. I used the term "over-represented" carefully. We'd expect a regression of the workforce to something roughly approaching the actual national population averages. Instead, we do not see that at all.

> Being against Trump is not mutually exclusive to holding media accountable.

I really wish I understood even remotely what you were actually aiming at. "Holding media accountable?"

> I'm afraid people think physical violence is something to be celebrated and used against political opponents.

Okay, stop right here. Let's break this down, because I _do_ think I know what you're talking about. You're mad because #punchanazi is a thing, and because Richard Spencer has been hit twice.

Let's point two things out here:

1. In general, the protest in the US has been overwhelmingly and surprisingly peaceful with the exception of a very small number of extreme groups in the margins, _with 2 exceptions_. Both involve members of a vocal minority of people who incite violence against vulnerable people while claiming that is their ideology.

2. Richard Spencer is someone who plainly and loudly advocates for the removal of anyone who is not "white" from America, by force if necessary. He advocates the end of a free and open society to create a "white homeland." He is not a 'political opponent.' He's an advocate for the collapse of a free, democratic society into a religiously motivated fascist state.

He's a special case. And he represents a historically special case. And before you say I'm misrepresenting his case, you should listen to him talk to people who accuse him of being a fascist actor.

> But your condescending tone is not worthy of further discussion.

It's not my fault you refuse to actually mount an argument there, Red_Tarsius. Other people who are not me and lack my somewhat wry writing style have pointed out you're not bringing much to the table other than hemming and hawing about how put upon you feel and how we should all play nice with the actual nazis among us.

You call yourself "an enemy." I wonder what you think that's really like. There's a really sharp divide in my life around the things that made me feel bad and the people who genuinely hurt me for what I was. I only consider one group my enemy.