Live data from Hacker News

When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

newyorker.com

61–70 of 114 posts

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada doesn’t do better at lifting people out of poverty. They’re just more selective in who they let in and don’t have a huge second world country at their southern border.

Canada's immigration rate is 5.3 per year per 1000 residents (200K per year, population 37.59M). The US immigration rate is 3.6 per year per 1000 residents (1.18M per year, population 327.2M). And in absolute (not per capita!) terms, Canada resettles more refugees than the US [1]. The US is in fact more selective (probably owing to decades of legislative gridlock leaving us with an outdated bureaucratic nightmare of…

From the same source you just shared there's a graph of refugee resettlements.

Canada only is ahead of the US as of 2018. Historically Canada hasn't even been close.

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#62
post #60
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those restrictions are exactly what Steve King’s bill imposed. Citizenship would be limited to children born in the US with at least one parent that was a US citizen or legal permanent resident: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/140 . It was deemed too racist to pursue even under the Trump administration. There is no equivalent to the grandparent thing in the US, but that would be deemed even mo…

this is worded on a way that suggests that because the Irish one isn't particularly racist, or at least not in a particularly bad way, that an equivalent law in the US shouldn't be considered racist. That ignores the difference in immigration and emigration between the two countries. in Ireland, it enables ethnic Irish to return home if their ancestors moved away, whereas in America, it would promote migrants from on…

> this is worded on a way that suggests that because the Irish one isn't particularly racist, or at least not in a particularly bad way, that an equivalent law in the US shouldn't be considered racist.

I’m pretty sure it’s worded to imply that the Irish one is pretty racist, but they just don’t realize it because the Overton window in Europe is very skewed on this issue.

> That ignores the difference in immigration and emigration between the two countries. in Ireland, it enables ethnic Irish to return home if their ancestors moved away, whereas in America, it would promote migrants from one non-ethnically American country over another, which in the context of prioritizing white immigrants over anything else, makes it pretty racist

Why should ethnic Irish migrants get preference over anyone else? Would it be okay if the US did something similar for ethnic British?

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but none of those claim to be the "land of the freedom" and other platitudes as loudly as the Americans

This seems to be written in mean spirit, but is essentially true. America is supposed to be founded upon an ideology, and deserves scrutiny whether this ideology is upheld. (Incidentally, USSR, albeit not Russia, was also this way.) I'm not American, for example, and my sympathy for that country tends to be proportional to how much free and constitutional I find it. The article is somewhat biased, but includes enough…

> This seems to be written in mean spirit, but is essentially true. America is supposed to be founded upon an ideology, and deserves scrutiny whether this ideology is upheld.

This is why I admire China, and think they will win, even if they had to tie one hand behind their back. This Western notion that we have to uphold certain principles, without actually upholding them, is one of our many Achilles heels. We have to struggle with all this theoretical and historical baggage that people take soooóooo seriously, regardless of whether it really matters, sowing social discontent, and they just continue to do what's pragmatic, sowing social harmony over time as those slighted see that it is for the greater good.

The ego of the Western mind is a force to be reckoned with, for the West.

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#64
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, Canada is actually doing better than the US in assimilating and lifting immigrants into prosperity these days, because it has a more modern immigration system (having avoided legislative gridlock and populist backlashes, for the most part) coupled with birthright citizenship. Consequently, Canada has a larger proportion of immigrants than the US. It also slightly beats the US on most measures of human devel…

Canada is terrible at assimilating immigrants, the only reason we have less poverty is because our immigration laws are much tougher than the US' and we take in mostly richer immigrants.

How much immigration in Canada is undocumented/illegal (depending on your political persuasion)?

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#65
post #36
post #8

This kind of thing is why it's important to challenge the framing of people as "illegal"; citizenship is an administrative category, and abusive governments can find all sorts of excuses to end or revoke it.

They committed a crime (crossing a border illegally). What should you call it if not illegal immigration? What do you call robbing a bank? Undocumented withdrawal? No, it's a crime.

Quite often the border crossing was legal. Then someone overstays or fails to comply with the (often obscure) requirements. Then they are .. existing illegally?

Or in the case of asylum seekers and refugees, what is effectively being said is that it's illegal for them to flee a war zone?

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#66
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People that smoke Marijuana have also committed a crime. As well as people that jaywalk, or violate any of the obscure laws the various states have on the books. They're all criminals, wouldn't you agree? We should call them illegal citizens. Then we can start working towards deporting such criminals as the article demonstrates.

> We should call them illegal citizens. Then we can start working towards deporting such criminals as the article demonstrates. Well international law prevents you from making someone stateless so they get thrown in jail instead. But yes, non-citizens who commit crimes are generally deported. Also, the US classes crimes as either felonies or misdemeanours (possibly more categories?). In Canada we have indictable crim…

That was kind of my point, that immigration belongs in the same category as jaywalking and not "actual crimes". In both cases all someone is doing is stepping across a line.

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#67
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada is terrible at assimilating immigrants, the only reason we have less poverty is because our immigration laws are much tougher than the US' and we take in mostly richer immigrants.

How much immigration in Canada is undocumented/illegal (depending on your political persuasion)?

Almost none. It exists but not in any large numbers because illegal immigrants can't work, get bank accounts, drivers licenses, go to schools, etc...

If you're a business owner and hire illegal immigrants, you risk up to 2 years jail time personally and a $50k fine. So almost no one takes that risk.

The few that are here illegally generally come legally, overstay and have family to harbour them.

And keep in mind I'm in an industry that, in the US, is known for employing illegal immigrants (restaurants). In 17 years, I've never seen one nor heard of anyone hiring them. I'm sure it happens in a few ethnic enclaves but it's definitely not typical.

I read a statistic somewhere that California alone has more than 10x as many illegal immigrants as all of Canada.

Of course I should also add, we do of course allow more legal immigration per capita than the US, many irregular border crossers are granted temporary status while their cases are processed and in general our bureaucracy seems less insane than the US'.

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can be in administrative violation of a statute without being criminally liable. This distinction matters a lot in law because in the former case any litigation is a civil, not criminal matter. As an everyday example, suppose you park carelessly and get a lot of parking tickets and then don't pay them. You could run into all sorts of problems and eventually your car might be towed away and sold but generally you…

To be honest, this seems like hand wringing about the degree of consequence for a given law-breaking act. It isn’t unfair to label someone who parks illegally an “illegal parker”. I understand that law may distinguish between different violations and establish terminologies (like “misdemeanor”) to classify them into categories and enable discussion around them and affix penalties based on those categories. But all th…

Nobody was complaining about the term 'illegal immigrant'. My post was about the common misconception that everyone covered by that is a criminal, a misconception which the grandparent comment made twice.

If you had paid attention to the context perhaps you would have saved yourself the effort of making a throwaway account to add a moot point.

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn’t make sense to me. Aren’t all laws then “administrative categories”, of those who commit or don’t commit the corresponding crimes? Breaking the law means, per definition, that someone has committed an illegal action. Calling someone an “illegal immigrant” is appropriate when the crime is immigration related.

You can be in administrative violation of a statute without being criminally liable. This distinction matters a lot in law because in the former case any litigation is a civil, not criminal matter. As an everyday example, suppose you park carelessly and get a lot of parking tickets and then don't pay them. You could run into all sorts of problems and eventually your car might be towed away and sold but generally you…

Deportation is also an administrative punishment similar, since you brought this analogy, to impounding an illegally parked car. People who are anti-immigration are not demanding prison sentences for illegal aliens, are they? They demand the appropriate administrative action - deportation.

Re: When America Tried to Deport Its Radicals

#70
post #4

> In 1919, alarmed by the growing presence of “peoples of Asiatic races,” the Anti-Alien League called for a constitutional amendment “to restrict citizenship by birth within the United States to the children of parents who are of a race which is eligible for citizenship”—i.e., whites. Senator Wesley Jones, of Washington State, promised to introduce such a measure—a proposal not unlike today’s calls to end birthright…

>“to restrict citizenship by birth within the United States to the children of parents who are of a race which is eligible for citizenship”—i.e., whites

White was also not considered a race in the 20's. There were Nordics, Jews, Irish, Eastern Europeans, and Southern Europeans. American eugenicists also were very much into "building" a race. They would have family breed competitions at fairs where families would compete like dogs or livestock for who were the best breeding stock. It wasnt a white vs colored, it was a tall, intelligent, hard-working, disease-free, group of mostly northern europeans vs anyone short, stalky, diseased, epileptic, mentally deficient, criminal, promiscuous, obsessed with art, etc. For instance, Irish were considered a problem because they didnt work hard, were obsessed with art and music, were short, and susceptible to tuberculosis. Mind you, this is not scientific fact, this is just the nonsense they spouted at the time. They also believed in a thing called "Germplasm" which roughly translated to gene pool, but of course even today we're not exactly clear on what's genetically inheritable and what isnt.

I should also mention, this is the deeply disturbing origin of the progressive movement in america. Using what they thought was superior scientific understanding of the natural world, the IQ test, birth control, the gifted student program, the use of performance metrics in school and workplaces to justify glass ceilings, firings, mass deportation, and mass sterilizations of anyone deemed deficient in any way by society. The work americans did to create a legal framework for eugenics would be borrowed by the Nazis to create their own legal framework for the deportation and final solution of the jews.

Post reply on HN