A reminder about your rights. If the government can declare you to have an attribute that negates your rights, then you have no rights.
Any time someone claims that some group of people should have no/reduced due process, I respond essentially the same way: “If you believe that $GROUP shouldn’t have due process then you are a $GROUP_MEMBER. Prove you’re not without any due process.” Before this year, it was mostly people accused of sexual assault, but illegal immigrants are the new target of choice as people who allegedly don’t deserve due process rights.
Even though being in the country undocumented is a civil offense, like speeding or something. Still, using language alone, they made this the one offense that supposedly makes a person be “illegal” — textbook dehumanization btw.
So it’s legally on par with speeding, factually less dangerous than speeding, but somehow it’s seen as the worst “crime” in the country, so bad that they argue it warrants suspending due process like you’re at war or something. Manufactured delusion.
they made this the one offense that makes a person be “illegal”
It doesn’t make the person be illegal, but we nounify crimes to describe people who have committed said crime all the time.
The whole point of the “undocumented worker” language is to make it sound like someone who misplaced some paperwork, rather than someone who violated immigration law.
I mean, no one gets mad when you use the more common terms to describe an undocumented procurement specialist, an adverse euthanasia specialist or an unauthorized sexual partner. Despite those terms describing the person as being their violation of law.
For sure. I just meant that they intentionally and repeatedly use this wording to obscure the fact that undocumented status isn’t that big a problem (it doesn’t hurt anyone except maybe the undocumented person), as well as to reinforce the idea on a subconscious level that they’re somehow dangerous criminals.
Any time someone claims that some group of people should have no/reduced due process, I respond essentially the same way: “If you believe that $GROUP shouldn’t have due process then you are a $GROUP_MEMBER. Prove you’re not without any due process.” Before this year, it was mostly people accused of sexual assault, but illegal immigrants are the new target of choice as people who allegedly don’t deserve due process rights.
…PHP developer?
Even though being in the country undocumented is a civil offense, like speeding or something. Still, using language alone, they made this the one offense that supposedly makes a person be “illegal” — textbook dehumanization btw.
So it’s legally on par with speeding, factually less dangerous than speeding, but somehow it’s seen as the worst “crime” in the country, so bad that they argue it warrants suspending due process like you’re at war or something. Manufactured delusion.
It doesn’t make the person be illegal, but we nounify crimes to describe people who have committed said crime all the time.
The whole point of the “undocumented worker” language is to make it sound like someone who misplaced some paperwork, rather than someone who violated immigration law.
I mean, no one gets mad when you use the more common terms to describe an undocumented procurement specialist, an adverse euthanasia specialist or an unauthorized sexual partner. Despite those terms describing the person as being their violation of law.
For sure. I just meant that they intentionally and repeatedly use this wording to obscure the fact that undocumented status isn’t that big a problem (it doesn’t hurt anyone except maybe the undocumented person), as well as to reinforce the idea on a subconscious level that they’re somehow dangerous criminals.