Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 213 posts

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#151

Post by gtirloni »

yes_really wrote: post #107
mempko wrote: post #7

This is important for everyone here to watch. A divided house does not stand, and if you haven't noticed, it's getting more divided every day. Don't be a sucker, don't let them divide us. For perspective, we now have masked agents roaming the streets kidnapping people in broad daylight. In the United States. Think about how fast this came. EDIT: Why not have a conversation instead of downvoting. What did I say is wro…

This type of comment is what is increasing division and extremism in the US. The people defined immigration laws through democracy. Following democracy means following the immigration laws that were defined through democracy, not following what you'd like the law to be. The opposition of "Rule of Law" is "Rule of Men". If we don't follow the immigration laws defined democratically, it means, by definition, that we wo…

Due process is being followed?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#152

Post by thunderfork »

mlrtime wrote: post #138
beloch wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that people are still falling for exactly the same sort of comic-book evil even though it's every bit as obvious. e.g. Haitian's eating dogs, illegal immigrants scamming medical services, stealing high-paying jobs, etc.. A high percentage of people completely lack what Carl Sagan would call a "Baloney detection kit", and the current purveyors of baloney like it that way. That's why they're anti-science…

> same sort of comic-book evil even though it's every bit as obvious. The same as the video? Where is this happening and how is it so obvious?

Do the examples given at the end of that paragraph not qualify, in your view?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#153

Post by zahlman »

gen220 wrote: post #112
zahlman wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you show that they have arrested US citizens without reasonable suspicion? Can you otherwise show that law is not being followed? From what I can tell, they are legally allowed to wear masks for this. ICE's webpage also is adamant that they legally do not always require a warrant ( https://www.ice.gov/immigration-enforcement-frequently-asked... ), and Snopes agrees ( https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/06/21/ice-arr…

Have you considered that it doesn’t matter that what they’re doing is legal? You don’t need to know if it’s legal or illegal to know that it is wrong. It is against the spirit of this nation (or, perversely, you could say it’s the intrinsic spirit of this nation coming out…). There are plenty of things legal which are wrong. That anyone is defending these actions by claiming to do them “legally” is a means of saving…

> Have you considered that it doesn’t matter that what they’re doing is legal?

No, because it does matter.

> You don’t need to know if it’s legal or illegal to know that it is wrong.

Please explain why you think it is wrong. Or exactly, where does the wrongness come in?

Is it wrong because they attempt to enforce immigration law? Do you consider it invalid for countries to restrict legal immigration? Why?

Is it wrong because they wear masks? Why?

Is it wrong because they operate "in broad daylight"? Why?

It is definitely not wrong "because they kidnap people", because that is at best circular reasoning. Arrest is a standard tool of law enforcement.

> a means of saving face with the people in our society who are distant enough from those directly and indirectly affected, and who struggle to differentiate morality from law.

This is incorrect in my case, and frankly insulting. For example, marijuana has been legal here for several years (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_in_Canada) and I was in favour of that since long before it changed. I grew up and socialized in a world where it was outlawed and clearly not harmful, and I saw the injustice in that.

But national borders are perfectly moral, in my view.

> This kind of thinking is a slippery slope that leads to the institutionalization of violence.

In the broad sense that your argument requires, violence is supposed to be institutionalized. That's what the criminal justice system is. Never mind capital punishment, or corporal punishment (I oppose both of course): apprehending criminals requires force.

That said, I respect that you acknowledge the slippery slope fallacy here. Putting aside that "concentration camp" is not a well defined term (and people have argued since at least the Obama years about the conditions in ICE detainment facilities), that's clearly not where things are headed. Nobody wants to detain the people who are legally not entitled to be in the country. The entire point is to have them not in the country.

Besides, is it any more moral to let employers (who violate laws themselves in this way) hold the threat of deportation over illegal immigrants, to deprive them of workers' rights and fair payment? Of course these employers should also be punished, but that isn't going to stop people from coming.

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#154

Post by zahlman »

pchristensen wrote: post #98
zahlman wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is your evidence for this claim? What do you consider to be their basis for such targeting, and what is your evidence for that claim?

Off the top of my head, Kilmar Abrego Garcia had a judicial stay against exportation and the administration said his deportation was an error, but he spent weeks in an El Salvadoran prison. And there was the Korean battery factory workers in Georgia. There were also more cases in the district court record that led to the Kavanaugh Stops decision: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/10/scotus-analysis-... There h…

How does that demonstrate targeting people whose presence is legal?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#155

Post by mempko »

mlrtime wrote: post #145
pchristensen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's this one: https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64

Didn't read the whole think but a search for "white" didn't find anything.

I believe "native brit" is what you are looking for

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#156

Post by mempko »

yes_really wrote: post #107
mempko wrote: post #7

This is important for everyone here to watch. A divided house does not stand, and if you haven't noticed, it's getting more divided every day. Don't be a sucker, don't let them divide us. For perspective, we now have masked agents roaming the streets kidnapping people in broad daylight. In the United States. Think about how fast this came. EDIT: Why not have a conversation instead of downvoting. What did I say is wro…

This type of comment is what is increasing division and extremism in the US. The people defined immigration laws through democracy. Following democracy means following the immigration laws that were defined through democracy, not following what you'd like the law to be. The opposition of "Rule of Law" is "Rule of Men". If we don't follow the immigration laws defined democratically, it means, by definition, that we wo…

You do realize crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor right? Do you see how masked agents violently taking people without due process does not align with the severity of the offense?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#157

Post by mempko »

zahlman wrote: post #153
gen220 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered that it doesn’t matter that what they’re doing is legal? You don’t need to know if it’s legal or illegal to know that it is wrong. It is against the spirit of this nation (or, perversely, you could say it’s the intrinsic spirit of this nation coming out…). There are plenty of things legal which are wrong. That anyone is defending these actions by claiming to do them “legally” is a means of saving…

> Have you considered that it doesn’t matter that what they’re doing is legal? No, because it does matter. > You don’t need to know if it’s legal or illegal to know that it is wrong. Please explain why you think it is wrong. Or exactly, where does the wrongness come in? Is it wrong because they attempt to enforce immigration law? Do you consider it invalid for countries to restrict legal immigration? Why? Is it wrong…

Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor. While what Trump did is a felony. Do you see masked agents kidnapping Trump without due process in the middle of the night?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#158

Post by mempko »

jackpirate wrote: post #27
mempko wrote: post #7

This is important for everyone here to watch. A divided house does not stand, and if you haven't noticed, it's getting more divided every day. Don't be a sucker, don't let them divide us. For perspective, we now have masked agents roaming the streets kidnapping people in broad daylight. In the United States. Think about how fast this came. EDIT: Why not have a conversation instead of downvoting. What did I say is wro…

Why not have a conversation instead of downvoting. What did I say is wrong? Your second paragraph is implying that the half of Americans who voted for Trump are "bad Americans". That seems to be sowing the division that your first paragraph warns against (even if it is a reason to dislike Trump). I don't think either democrats or republicans can claim the moral high ground about sowing division.

First of all, half of Americans didn't vote for Trump, at best a fourth. Look up voter turnout and of those that voted. And yes, not voting is legitimate when you believe both parties don't represent you. This idea that half of Americans voted for Trump makes no sense.

Not only that but most people don't approve of his immigration policy.

https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker

He is going against the will of the people with unpopular policies

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#159

Post by wredcoll »

mlrtime wrote: post #138
beloch wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that people are still falling for exactly the same sort of comic-book evil even though it's every bit as obvious. e.g. Haitian's eating dogs, illegal immigrants scamming medical services, stealing high-paying jobs, etc.. A high percentage of people completely lack what Carl Sagan would call a "Baloney detection kit", and the current purveyors of baloney like it that way. That's why they're anti-science…

> same sort of comic-book evil even though it's every bit as obvious. The same as the video? Where is this happening and how is it so obvious?

The parent post literally had examples, did you just skip that paragraph?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#160

Post by wredcoll »

mlrtime wrote: post #140
gen220 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered that it doesn’t matter that what they’re doing is legal? You don’t need to know if it’s legal or illegal to know that it is wrong. It is against the spirit of this nation (or, perversely, you could say it’s the intrinsic spirit of this nation coming out…). There are plenty of things legal which are wrong. That anyone is defending these actions by claiming to do them “legally” is a means of saving…

This is not a humanity issue, this is a legal one. The president ran on removing people from this country who entered the country illegally. He is executing what he ran on and what the people voted for. I don't personally approve of all the tactics that are being used, however it is clear that some cities are not in favor of these Federal laws at all no mater which tactic is used. I also realize how quickly these con…

> country who entered the country illegally

Why does the legality only matter when it applies to a minority we're demonizing?

Trump's current wife very famously entered the US illegally, not to mention the dozens of other crimes trump has publically committed recently.

People in these conversations very frequently bring up laws and legality but fail to recognize that laws only work when they apply to everyone equally.

Post reply on HN