I know that tildes isn’t for images, so I understand if this gets deleted. However, xkcd is one of my favorite webcomics, and seeing this come across my feed was…well, it certainly didn’t make me...
I know that tildes isn’t for images, so I understand if this gets deleted. However, xkcd is one of my favorite webcomics, and seeing this come across my feed was…well, it certainly didn’t make me feel good, but it makes me like xkcd (Randall Monroe) even more. I’m sure this isn’t the first “political” comic he’s done, but I find this representation meaningful, and I’m glad he’s using the platform he has to call attention and remind.
My wife is in a PhD program, and while she isn’t an immigrant, this still hits very, very close to home. I know she and her colleagues have this worry in the back of their minds that make getting any work done difficult. And a PhD is hard enough without outside, societal stresses and worries.
This has been scary for us as well. Many people I worked with in academia could find themselves in this situation. We've made sure to connect on Signal so that we have a secured communication...
This has been scary for us as well. Many people I worked with in academia could find themselves in this situation. We've made sure to connect on Signal so that we have a secured communication mechanism. Of course we all have a background in cryptography so we primarily need a way to pass a public key.
Either way... I recommend trying to identify a secure way to communicate if you have vulnerable people in your life.
Love XKCD. Had the same reaction to it. I vaguely knew that this was going on, but totally different vibe seeing the video. Girl really did just get disappeared for protesting against Israel.
Love XKCD. Had the same reaction to it.
I vaguely knew that this was going on, but totally different vibe seeing the video. Girl really did just get disappeared for protesting against Israel.
And even that wasn't even against protesting the state, Israel, but against the current genocide they're committing... not that even that distinction should matter for what she's going through.
And even that wasn't even against protesting the state, Israel, but against the current genocide they're committing... not that even that distinction should matter for what she's going through.
It’s crazier than that! She wasn’t even leading (or as far as I know attending) protests! Her ‘crime’ was simply writing an op-ed in the student newspaper. Still in ICE detention btw.
It’s crazier than that! She wasn’t even leading (or as far as I know attending) protests! Her ‘crime’ was simply writing an op-ed in the student newspaper. Still in ICE detention btw.
Right exactly its such a baseball bat to the face of “oh we really no longer have free speech in this country” because the lack of it is no longer affecting only journalists, but regular people.
Right exactly its such a baseball bat to the face of “oh we really no longer have free speech in this country” because the lack of it is no longer affecting only journalists, but regular people.
Regarding freedom of speech, I think the dual state model applies here. That is, most Americans can say what they like and the state won’t do anything, even now. We see that all over in social...
Regarding freedom of speech, I think the dual state model applies here. That is, most Americans can say what they like and the state won’t do anything, even now. We see that all over in social media. But it’s long been the case that immigration works by different rules. The Trump administration is pushing that limit as far as they can.
The administration has now ‘deported’ multiple US citizen kids (some with cancer!) because they claim the parent they are deporting wants them to come with, as opposed to staying with a US citizen...
The administration has now ‘deported’ multiple US citizen kids (some with cancer!) because they claim the parent they are deporting wants them to come with, as opposed to staying with a US citizen parent, but there has been 0 due process to verify this is true. If you think they will not eventually crack down on speech here you are mistaken.
Not to mention the chilling effect these immigration crackdowns have on the speech of citizens. If you are married to an immigrant, wouldn’t this give you pause before posting things critical of the administration? Especially if your spouse plans on becoming a citizen, where your social media is also part of the review process?
If you don’t already feel this chilling effect then you are lucky — but don’t fool yourself into thinking the government does not care what you say as a citizen. We are past that.
I share your worries, but they also aren't incompatible with a dual state model. People in dual states are often moved arbitrarily from the normative state (to which due process applies) to the...
I share your worries, but they also aren't incompatible with a dual state model. People in dual states are often moved arbitrarily from the normative state (to which due process applies) to the prerogative state (to which it does not), which appears to neatly albeit terrifyingly describe how America children were deported without any meaningful process.
I think @skybrian's point is that immigrants are already in the prerogative state. I wrote about this in more detail here.
Yes, it’s outrageous that American citizens are being attacked in this way. Not minimizing that at all. But there are still plenty of people speaking out who don’t have these reasons to feel...
Yes, it’s outrageous that American citizens are being attacked in this way. Not minimizing that at all.
But there are still plenty of people speaking out who don’t have these reasons to feel vulnerable. It would be too much to say that free speech is gone when so many people are doing it.
I am married to an immigrant and I have certainly toned down by speech online. If she was applying for citizenship, I would probably delete most of my online history including here. I don’t have...
I am married to an immigrant and I have certainly toned down by speech online. If she was applying for citizenship, I would probably delete most of my online history including here. I don’t have the confidence that we would not be punished for exercising my constitutionally guaranteed rights.
When it comes down to it, either these rights exist for everyone to whom they are guaranteed, or they do not really exist at all.
Seeing it as all or nothing is the part I disagree with. US citizens’ rights are being eroded and everyone should care about that. But people’s personal situations differ. For example, many people...
Seeing it as all or nothing is the part I disagree with. US citizens’ rights are being eroded and everyone should care about that. But people’s personal situations differ.
For example, many people here post anonymously and that’s totally okay, but some people don’t have to. Not yet, anyway.
It is all or nothing! Constitutional rights are not contingent! If government actions infringe on those rights for one class of people, then that right has been infringed writ large. It doesn’t...
It is all or nothing! Constitutional rights are not contingent! If government actions infringe on those rights for one class of people, then that right has been infringed writ large. It doesn’t make sense to think about these rights as a spectrum where sometimes we are granted more or less, or where some people who are constitutionally guaranteed these rights can have them be infringed more than others. Either the right is being infringed in this country or it is not.
I think you’ve gone too far in claiming that rights are collective versus individual. When someone’s rights are infringed, that’s a specific event that happened to a particular person. It wouldn’t...
I think you’ve gone too far in claiming that rights are collective versus individual.
When someone’s rights are infringed, that’s a specific event that happened to a particular person. It wouldn’t make sense for me to claim that my rights were infringed by something that happened to someone else. No court would accept that.
It doesn’t mean that I don’t care when other people’s rights are infringed. The things the Trump administration is doing are outrageous! But it’s just a fact that I’m not the victim.
The end point of this logic is the claim that, for example, free speech is alive and well in a hypothetical highly authoritarian regime where the majority of people self-censor themselves after...
The end point of this logic is the claim that, for example, free speech is alive and well in a hypothetical highly authoritarian regime where the majority of people self-censor themselves after seeing others who speak out get punished. The government has not done anything specific to those individuals, but its conduct has certainly robbed them of their right to speak freely of their convictions.
We aren’t talking about whether you personally, or you as a representative of an average person, have yet had your rights directly infringed by the government. Or whether such a claim would be accepted in court. Tyrants make their tyranny the law, after all. God willing we will never get there. But so long as the government takes actions that make the people in that country self-censor their political beliefs from the public square, I really reject the notion that free speech as a general right is not in the cross hairs.
I admire your commitment to avoiding hyperbole that you have expressed here and elsewhere. But I personally feel we are well past the point of quibbling over exactly when free speech in general is being attacked. Sometimes one’s prior beliefs can tip the scale too strongly in the direction of “it’s not that bad yet” when in fact it is. Not every extreme statement is hyperbole, especially not when we are at the point, only 100 days out of ~1400 into this, where legal residents, some with green cards, some appearing at their final citizenship hearings, are being abducted by plainclothes officers of the state. Why wait until it gets to the point of citizens being subjected to the same to acknowledge that everybody’s rights are currently under attack?
It’s true that I try to avoid hyperbole and thank you for acknowledging that. It’s somewhat for aesthetic reasons, but I think there’s a serious justification for it, too: Our conversation would...
It’s true that I try to avoid hyperbole and thank you for acknowledging that. It’s somewhat for aesthetic reasons, but I think there’s a serious justification for it, too:
Our conversation would be difficult to even have under the hypothetical regime you’re talking about. We shouldn’t be talking here or on another public Internet forum that anyone could read. Maybe Tildes should shut down for everyone’s safety? It would be the responsible thing to do. Private Signal groups would be safer - that’s what people do when they really need to worry.
If you think that’s extreme, well, maybe you don’t really think we need to worry so much quite yet? There are downsides to being too cautious, to engaging in more self-censorship than is really necessary. Running scared like that effectively gives the Trump administration more power.
So I think we should try to be realistic about the risks we face.
Things could get worse, though. Maybe posting under a pseudonym would be smarter.
Of course this conversation would not be possible under the regime I described. We are not there yet. It does not mean that where we are now does not involve a serious attack on freedom of speech...
Of course this conversation would not be possible under the regime I described. We are not there yet. It does not mean that where we are now does not involve a serious attack on freedom of speech in the US.
There are degrees of worry. As I said above, I am already self-censoring. The fact that I am speaking somewhat freely (note: I have certainl limited the topics I am willing to write about online) on a small site under a pseudonymous account with minimal linkage to my real identity does not really negate that. I also don't really appreciate the implication, perhaps incidental, that I am "running scared" by trying to be smart considering my spouse's immigration status. My whole point is that the fact that I, and many others, feel the need to do so should be setting off alarm bells for everyone that our constitutional rights are under attack.
So I think we should try to be realistic about the risks we face.
I am being realistic. I am a PhD student, and at my school some of my colleagues have had their visas revoked for speech. We're commenting on a story about a PhD student being abducted off the street for speech. I am a citizen and cognizant of my spouse's immigration status, and that certainly impacts the views I am willing to put into writing. The government is now ordering ICE to conduct warrantless home invasions to try and round up immigrants, another infringement of constitutional rights. All it takes is getting on the wrong ICE agent's radar to be on the receiving end of that. Are you saying this is something that is unrealistic for me to worry about? On what grounds can you make that claim?
If some people are being disappeared for their speech, we have all lost our free speech. The fact that some people have not yet been punished for what they say doesn't mean they have free speech,...
If some people are being disappeared for their speech, we have all lost our free speech. The fact that some people have not yet been punished for what they say doesn't mean they have free speech, it just means they haven't fallen into the crosshairs of the administration or are saying things that they approve of.
"Until we are all free, we are none of us free [...] we ignore and repudiate our unhappy brethren as having no part or share in their misfortunes- until the cup of anguish is held also to our own...
"Until we are all free, we are none of us free [...] we ignore and repudiate our unhappy brethren as having no part or share in their misfortunes- until the cup of anguish is held also to our own lips."
It's true because if, for example, non-citizen immigrants don't have a right to due process, then there is absolutely nothing that stops the government from claiming that you are a non-citizen...
It's true because if, for example, non-citizen immigrants don't have a right to due process, then there is absolutely nothing that stops the government from claiming that you are a non-citizen immigrant. Because you'd have no protected right to protest that.
Just because they haven't cracked down on everyone doesn't mean they couldn't crack down on anyone under those standards. Everyone's rights are threatened when one person's are taken.
That’s true except for the last line, which doesn’t follow, but it ignores an important distinction between the risk of something bad happening and it actually having happened. It’s like saying...
That’s true except for the last line, which doesn’t follow, but it ignores an important distinction between the risk of something bad happening and it actually having happened.
It’s like saying that a slight risk of going to prison is the same as actually being in prison. If you are free (not in prison) then there’s obviously a lot more you can do.
Have some courage! Our rights aren’t as secure as they might be and maybe things will get worse. But for now we can still act. Some of us, anyway.
You're responding in such a way as to suggest that DefinitelyNotAFae, and others, aren't taking actions in response to what is going on. They are. You claim that "none of us are free if any of us...
You're responding in such a way as to suggest that DefinitelyNotAFae, and others, aren't taking actions in response to what is going on. They are.
You claim that "none of us are free if any of us aren't" doesn't follow, but it necessarily does. American citizens are being forcibly removed from the country, along with legal immigrants and many, many others. The obvious reason as to why is racism - the people being removed are not white.
When legal immigrants and US citizens are being disappeared and it isn't being stopped, then peoples' actual rights are being attacked. Sure, there's many people that can speak up about it without facing (immediate) repercussions - but you know what they say about slopes, they are incredibly slippery.
I hate to invoke it, but now is as relevant as any - "First They Came" applies here so, so obviously. Women's rights have been under assault ever since Roe v. Wade (and other related cases) was decided, but they are under much more immediate threat now than ever. Trans and LGBTQ+ peoples' rights are under immediate threat, with many states attempting to take direct action to revoke said rights. Now, it's "immigrants" and, by simple observation, non-white peoples' rights.
How many people have to have their rights under immediate threat and assault before you recognize that "none of us are free if any of us aren't" is true?
I look around me and see that I’m not in jail. I don’t think you are either? Is it so hard to understand that flowery rhetoric is literally false, as a matter of facts and logic? I don’t disagree...
I look around me and see that I’m not in jail. I don’t think you are either? Is it so hard to understand that flowery rhetoric is literally false, as a matter of facts and logic?
I don’t disagree with the metaphorical meaning. I completely agree that the Trump administration is attacking the rights of US citizens and that is an outrage, even if it doesn’t directly affect us yet.
You've piqued my curiosity. Who comprises "us", in your statement above? The general Tildes population? Members of your citizenship/ethnicity/gender identification? People who lack...
even if it doesn’t directly affect us yet
You've piqued my curiosity. Who comprises "us", in your statement above? The general Tildes population? Members of your citizenship/ethnicity/gender identification? People who lack family/friend/colleague connections to affected groups?
A significant number of users on this thread (and in the Tildes microcosm) have reported both direct and indirect impacts from the policy. This story just posted suggests that we all need to fear lawless impunity in pursuing the deportation agenda.
Even if you find the phrase "none of us are free if any of us aren't" to be needlessly hyperbolic, I'd expect better of you than to minimize this concern.
Because I doubt I’m special. Although I don’t know about the specific situations of strangers, I think we can assume there are many millions who haven’t been directly affected by the Trump...
Because I doubt I’m special. Although I don’t know about the specific situations of strangers, I think we can assume there are many millions who haven’t been directly affected by the Trump administration’s civil rights violations yet, because if there had been, the news would be rather different.
I think you're trying to have it both ways. And I think you know exactly what is meant by the phrases being used. I also think that "us" is a shield to protect you from saying "me." Because I...
Exemplary
I think you're trying to have it both ways. And I think you know exactly what is meant by the phrases being used. I also think that "us" is a shield to protect you from saying "me." Because I think it's a lot more dismissive and selfish to say "I" don't feel threatened when the people talking to you tell you how they are.
And honestly I hope you're on the streets at every protest and in politicians' ears every day if you feel zero chilling effect, zero personal erosion of your rights. Because you're doing a lot of preaching and I hope you're following that up with action.
I don't want you to tell me that action. It doesn't matter. I just have to have some hope because this feels in such bad faith right now. We've disagreed a lot but this is just disappointing.
If "everyone is in jail" is the line at which you think people are no longer free, I think you have a fundamental disagreement regarding what "freedom" actually entails? You think that Trump...
If "everyone is in jail" is the line at which you think people are no longer free, I think you have a fundamental disagreement regarding what "freedom" actually entails? You think that Trump jailing American citizens without cause has nothing to do with your freedoms, (and perhaps that's somewhat true, given your personal situation) and other people have a different perspective. It's not that their rhetoric is flowery and false, it's that you have a narrow definition (or are so privileged so that you don't see how your freedom is threatened) and other people have a broader perspective on how the violation of some people's freedom are a violation of all people's freedom.
No, that’s not what I believe. I think this a case where binary thinking is bad. Our rights are being eroded. We should resist. That doesn’t mean we’ve lost them entirely. That’s defeatist...
No, that’s not what I believe.
I think this a case where binary thinking is bad. Our rights are being eroded. We should resist. That doesn’t mean we’ve lost them entirely. That’s defeatist thinking. It would be like the Ukrainians giving up because one man was captured.
In practice, because these are legal rights, it means that the lawsuits about rights violations should continue. There are lots of cases still pending. Fighting for legal rights is an ongoing process.
There is nothing "defeatist" about recognizing reality. I feel like you may be being pedantic in a situation where doing so acts to diminish the lived experiences of people. No, we haven't "lost...
Exemplary
There is nothing "defeatist" about recognizing reality. I feel like you may be being pedantic in a situation where doing so acts to diminish the lived experiences of people.
No, we haven't "lost our rights entirely", and nobody has even suggested that is the case. But we are losing rights, as a collective - women are losing bodily autonomy. LGBTQ+ people are losing the right to exist as their true selves and all of the things that means (e.g., participation in sports, access to public resources). Immigrants and "people that don't look white" are losing the right to exist on US soil - even including Indigenous people who have been here since time immemorial.
All of those things do not reflect that "everyone has lost their rights entirely". All of those things do represent a continued eroding of what rights everyone has. Which is why we say "none of us are free if any of us aren't". It's shorthand for this whole conversation - if a person has their right to bodily autonomy taken away, or their right to access to public resources, or their right to exist in the country at all taken away - then what other rights can/will they lose?
You seem to think that acknowledging the continued loss of rights is somehow being defeatist. I believe it's observing reality, that has nothing to do with actions that people can take. Observation is not the same as action.
Again, stating an observation is not the same as taking action. You can consider anything you'd like to be defeatist; that doesn't make it so. Here's the line, I think, you're referring to: Do you...
Again, stating an observation is not the same as taking action. You can consider anything you'd like to be defeatist; that doesn't make it so.
Here's the line, I think, you're referring to:
If some people are being disappeared for their speech, we have all lost our free speech. The fact that some people have not yet been punished for what they say doesn't mean they have free speech, it just means they haven't fallen into the crosshairs of the administration or are saying things that they approve of.
I think you and I have fundamentally ... shall we say, different ... views on what a "right" is, and how it applies to a society. The fact that you can sit at home (or work, wherever) and type...
I think you and I have fundamentally ... shall we say, different ... views on what a "right" is, and how it applies to a society. The fact that you can sit at home (or work, wherever) and type that out, in the same thread in which people are posting examples of people that have been disappeared for doing exactly that ... I do not understand where you are coming from.
The people with the freedom to speak out about the abuse without (as much) fear of retribution... Are white people, and/or rich people. That should tell you about the imbalances at play.
The people with the freedom to speak out about the abuse without (as much) fear of retribution... Are white people, and/or rich people.
That should tell you about the imbalances at play.
Immigration officials are already arresting US citizens without due process, so it's not clear to me how you come to the conclusion that US citizens are safe or that this is a continuation of...
Immigration officials are already arresting US citizens without due process, so it's not clear to me how you come to the conclusion that US citizens are safe or that this is a continuation of long-established norms rather than the intense escalation it very much is.
That’s why I said most. I still think that’s true, today. Most of us don’t fear Immigration, day to day. But it obviously could get worse. This administration is clearly dangerous.
That’s why I said most. I still think that’s true, today. Most of us don’t fear Immigration, day to day.
But it obviously could get worse. This administration is clearly dangerous.
Immigrants and journalists, I know journalists were detained even under Obama, so far back as I can remember. So this girl was a double whammy, an immigrant doing journalism. How dare she /s
Immigrants and journalists, I know journalists were detained even under Obama, so far back as I can remember.
So this girl was a double whammy, an immigrant doing journalism. How dare she /s
I know that tildes isn’t for images, so I understand if this gets deleted. However, xkcd is one of my favorite webcomics, and seeing this come across my feed was…well, it certainly didn’t make me feel good, but it makes me like xkcd (Randall Monroe) even more. I’m sure this isn’t the first “political” comic he’s done, but I find this representation meaningful, and I’m glad he’s using the platform he has to call attention and remind.
My wife is in a PhD program, and while she isn’t an immigrant, this still hits very, very close to home. I know she and her colleagues have this worry in the back of their minds that make getting any work done difficult. And a PhD is hard enough without outside, societal stresses and worries.
Thanks for posting it. I saw it on Bsky and Lemmy; it deserves discussion here too.
Make sure you click on the comic image too.
Ah, I had seen the alt text but I didn’t realize he linked the video, thanks for pointing that out.
I think he linked the wikipedia page and the video is on there
The link goes straight to YouTube for me, where do you see the Wikipedia page
Hm maybe I did just Google it
This has been scary for us as well. Many people I worked with in academia could find themselves in this situation. We've made sure to connect on Signal so that we have a secured communication mechanism. Of course we all have a background in cryptography so we primarily need a way to pass a public key.
Either way... I recommend trying to identify a secure way to communicate if you have vulnerable people in your life.
Love XKCD. Had the same reaction to it.
I vaguely knew that this was going on, but totally different vibe seeing the video. Girl really did just get disappeared for protesting against Israel.
And even that wasn't even against protesting the state, Israel, but against the current genocide they're committing... not that even that distinction should matter for what she's going through.
It's even crazier than that. She was protesting her university's response to the genocide
It’s crazier than that! She wasn’t even leading (or as far as I know attending) protests! Her ‘crime’ was simply writing an op-ed in the student newspaper. Still in ICE detention btw.
Right exactly its such a baseball bat to the face of “oh we really no longer have free speech in this country” because the lack of it is no longer affecting only journalists, but regular people.
Regarding freedom of speech, I think the dual state model applies here. That is, most Americans can say what they like and the state won’t do anything, even now. We see that all over in social media. But it’s long been the case that immigration works by different rules. The Trump administration is pushing that limit as far as they can.
The administration has now ‘deported’ multiple US citizen kids (some with cancer!) because they claim the parent they are deporting wants them to come with, as opposed to staying with a US citizen parent, but there has been 0 due process to verify this is true. If you think they will not eventually crack down on speech here you are mistaken.
Not to mention the chilling effect these immigration crackdowns have on the speech of citizens. If you are married to an immigrant, wouldn’t this give you pause before posting things critical of the administration? Especially if your spouse plans on becoming a citizen, where your social media is also part of the review process?
If you don’t already feel this chilling effect then you are lucky — but don’t fool yourself into thinking the government does not care what you say as a citizen. We are past that.
I feel the chilling effect and I have zero immigration concerns. I have big "if I'm arrested even on bullshit my partner has no caretaker" concerns.
I share your worries, but they also aren't incompatible with a dual state model. People in dual states are often moved arbitrarily from the normative state (to which due process applies) to the prerogative state (to which it does not), which appears to neatly albeit terrifyingly describe how America children were deported without any meaningful process.
I think @skybrian's point is that immigrants are already in the prerogative state. I wrote about this in more detail here.
Yes, it’s outrageous that American citizens are being attacked in this way. Not minimizing that at all.
But there are still plenty of people speaking out who don’t have these reasons to feel vulnerable. It would be too much to say that free speech is gone when so many people are doing it.
I am married to an immigrant and I have certainly toned down by speech online. If she was applying for citizenship, I would probably delete most of my online history including here. I don’t have the confidence that we would not be punished for exercising my constitutionally guaranteed rights.
When it comes down to it, either these rights exist for everyone to whom they are guaranteed, or they do not really exist at all.
Seeing it as all or nothing is the part I disagree with. US citizens’ rights are being eroded and everyone should care about that. But people’s personal situations differ.
For example, many people here post anonymously and that’s totally okay, but some people don’t have to. Not yet, anyway.
It is all or nothing! Constitutional rights are not contingent! If government actions infringe on those rights for one class of people, then that right has been infringed writ large. It doesn’t make sense to think about these rights as a spectrum where sometimes we are granted more or less, or where some people who are constitutionally guaranteed these rights can have them be infringed more than others. Either the right is being infringed in this country or it is not.
I think you’ve gone too far in claiming that rights are collective versus individual.
When someone’s rights are infringed, that’s a specific event that happened to a particular person. It wouldn’t make sense for me to claim that my rights were infringed by something that happened to someone else. No court would accept that.
It doesn’t mean that I don’t care when other people’s rights are infringed. The things the Trump administration is doing are outrageous! But it’s just a fact that I’m not the victim.
The end point of this logic is the claim that, for example, free speech is alive and well in a hypothetical highly authoritarian regime where the majority of people self-censor themselves after seeing others who speak out get punished. The government has not done anything specific to those individuals, but its conduct has certainly robbed them of their right to speak freely of their convictions.
We aren’t talking about whether you personally, or you as a representative of an average person, have yet had your rights directly infringed by the government. Or whether such a claim would be accepted in court. Tyrants make their tyranny the law, after all. God willing we will never get there. But so long as the government takes actions that make the people in that country self-censor their political beliefs from the public square, I really reject the notion that free speech as a general right is not in the cross hairs.
I admire your commitment to avoiding hyperbole that you have expressed here and elsewhere. But I personally feel we are well past the point of quibbling over exactly when free speech in general is being attacked. Sometimes one’s prior beliefs can tip the scale too strongly in the direction of “it’s not that bad yet” when in fact it is. Not every extreme statement is hyperbole, especially not when we are at the point, only 100 days out of ~1400 into this, where legal residents, some with green cards, some appearing at their final citizenship hearings, are being abducted by plainclothes officers of the state. Why wait until it gets to the point of citizens being subjected to the same to acknowledge that everybody’s rights are currently under attack?
It’s true that I try to avoid hyperbole and thank you for acknowledging that. It’s somewhat for aesthetic reasons, but I think there’s a serious justification for it, too:
Our conversation would be difficult to even have under the hypothetical regime you’re talking about. We shouldn’t be talking here or on another public Internet forum that anyone could read. Maybe Tildes should shut down for everyone’s safety? It would be the responsible thing to do. Private Signal groups would be safer - that’s what people do when they really need to worry.
If you think that’s extreme, well, maybe you don’t really think we need to worry so much quite yet? There are downsides to being too cautious, to engaging in more self-censorship than is really necessary. Running scared like that effectively gives the Trump administration more power.
So I think we should try to be realistic about the risks we face.
Things could get worse, though. Maybe posting under a pseudonym would be smarter.
Of course this conversation would not be possible under the regime I described. We are not there yet. It does not mean that where we are now does not involve a serious attack on freedom of speech in the US.
There are degrees of worry. As I said above, I am already self-censoring. The fact that I am speaking somewhat freely (note: I have certainl limited the topics I am willing to write about online) on a small site under a pseudonymous account with minimal linkage to my real identity does not really negate that. I also don't really appreciate the implication, perhaps incidental, that I am "running scared" by trying to be smart considering my spouse's immigration status. My whole point is that the fact that I, and many others, feel the need to do so should be setting off alarm bells for everyone that our constitutional rights are under attack.
I am being realistic. I am a PhD student, and at my school some of my colleagues have had their visas revoked for speech. We're commenting on a story about a PhD student being abducted off the street for speech. I am a citizen and cognizant of my spouse's immigration status, and that certainly impacts the views I am willing to put into writing. The government is now ordering ICE to conduct warrantless home invasions to try and round up immigrants, another infringement of constitutional rights. All it takes is getting on the wrong ICE agent's radar to be on the receiving end of that. Are you saying this is something that is unrealistic for me to worry about? On what grounds can you make that claim?
No, I make no such claim. Many people are at risk. There are people I worry about. Some more than others.
How many people need to disappear for the risk to be real?
Rights are definitionally collective. The Constitution doesn't just apply to you.
If some people are being disappeared for their speech, we have all lost our free speech. The fact that some people have not yet been punished for what they say doesn't mean they have free speech, it just means they haven't fallen into the crosshairs of the administration or are saying things that they approve of.
"Until we are all free, we are none of us free [...] we ignore and repudiate our unhappy brethren as having no part or share in their misfortunes- until the cup of anguish is held also to our own lips."
It’s nice-sounding rhetoric, but a good line isn’t reality.
It's true because if, for example, non-citizen immigrants don't have a right to due process, then there is absolutely nothing that stops the government from claiming that you are a non-citizen immigrant. Because you'd have no protected right to protest that.
Just because they haven't cracked down on everyone doesn't mean they couldn't crack down on anyone under those standards. Everyone's rights are threatened when one person's are taken.
None of us are free if any of us aren't.
That’s true except for the last line, which doesn’t follow, but it ignores an important distinction between the risk of something bad happening and it actually having happened.
It’s like saying that a slight risk of going to prison is the same as actually being in prison. If you are free (not in prison) then there’s obviously a lot more you can do.
Have some courage! Our rights aren’t as secure as they might be and maybe things will get worse. But for now we can still act. Some of us, anyway.
You're responding in such a way as to suggest that DefinitelyNotAFae, and others, aren't taking actions in response to what is going on. They are.
You claim that "none of us are free if any of us aren't" doesn't follow, but it necessarily does. American citizens are being forcibly removed from the country, along with legal immigrants and many, many others. The obvious reason as to why is racism - the people being removed are not white.
When legal immigrants and US citizens are being disappeared and it isn't being stopped, then peoples' actual rights are being attacked. Sure, there's many people that can speak up about it without facing (immediate) repercussions - but you know what they say about slopes, they are incredibly slippery.
I hate to invoke it, but now is as relevant as any - "First They Came" applies here so, so obviously. Women's rights have been under assault ever since Roe v. Wade (and other related cases) was decided, but they are under much more immediate threat now than ever. Trans and LGBTQ+ peoples' rights are under immediate threat, with many states attempting to take direct action to revoke said rights. Now, it's "immigrants" and, by simple observation, non-white peoples' rights.
How many people have to have their rights under immediate threat and assault before you recognize that "none of us are free if any of us aren't" is true?
I look around me and see that I’m not in jail. I don’t think you are either? Is it so hard to understand that flowery rhetoric is literally false, as a matter of facts and logic?
I don’t disagree with the metaphorical meaning. I completely agree that the Trump administration is attacking the rights of US citizens and that is an outrage, even if it doesn’t directly affect us yet.
You've piqued my curiosity. Who comprises "us", in your statement above? The general Tildes population? Members of your citizenship/ethnicity/gender identification? People who lack family/friend/colleague connections to affected groups?
A significant number of users on this thread (and in the Tildes microcosm) have reported both direct and indirect impacts from the policy. This story just posted suggests that we all need to fear lawless impunity in pursuing the deportation agenda.
Even if you find the phrase "none of us are free if any of us aren't" to be needlessly hyperbolic, I'd expect better of you than to minimize this concern.
I wouldn’t presume to tell strangers whether they’ve been affected or not. I think people can judge for themselves?
Then why do you say "us" and not "me"?
Because I doubt I’m special. Although I don’t know about the specific situations of strangers, I think we can assume there are many millions who haven’t been directly affected by the Trump administration’s civil rights violations yet, because if there had been, the news would be rather different.
I think you're trying to have it both ways. And I think you know exactly what is meant by the phrases being used. I also think that "us" is a shield to protect you from saying "me." Because I think it's a lot more dismissive and selfish to say "I" don't feel threatened when the people talking to you tell you how they are.
And honestly I hope you're on the streets at every protest and in politicians' ears every day if you feel zero chilling effect, zero personal erosion of your rights. Because you're doing a lot of preaching and I hope you're following that up with action.
I don't want you to tell me that action. It doesn't matter. I just have to have some hope because this feels in such bad faith right now. We've disagreed a lot but this is just disappointing.
I'll ask again - how many people have to be disappeared for it to become an issue, to you?
It already is an issue. I do care what happens to other people. Terrible things are going on.
If "everyone is in jail" is the line at which you think people are no longer free, I think you have a fundamental disagreement regarding what "freedom" actually entails? You think that Trump jailing American citizens without cause has nothing to do with your freedoms, (and perhaps that's somewhat true, given your personal situation) and other people have a different perspective. It's not that their rhetoric is flowery and false, it's that you have a narrow definition (or are so privileged so that you don't see how your freedom is threatened) and other people have a broader perspective on how the violation of some people's freedom are a violation of all people's freedom.
No, that’s not what I believe.
I think this a case where binary thinking is bad. Our rights are being eroded. We should resist. That doesn’t mean we’ve lost them entirely. That’s defeatist thinking. It would be like the Ukrainians giving up because one man was captured.
In practice, because these are legal rights, it means that the lawsuits about rights violations should continue. There are lots of cases still pending. Fighting for legal rights is an ongoing process.
There is nothing "defeatist" about recognizing reality. I feel like you may be being pedantic in a situation where doing so acts to diminish the lived experiences of people.
No, we haven't "lost our rights entirely", and nobody has even suggested that is the case. But we are losing rights, as a collective - women are losing bodily autonomy. LGBTQ+ people are losing the right to exist as their true selves and all of the things that means (e.g., participation in sports, access to public resources). Immigrants and "people that don't look white" are losing the right to exist on US soil - even including Indigenous people who have been here since time immemorial.
All of those things do not reflect that "everyone has lost their rights entirely". All of those things do represent a continued eroding of what rights everyone has. Which is why we say "none of us are free if any of us aren't". It's shorthand for this whole conversation - if a person has their right to bodily autonomy taken away, or their right to access to public resources, or their right to exist in the country at all taken away - then what other rights can/will they lose?
You seem to think that acknowledging the continued loss of rights is somehow being defeatist. I believe it's observing reality, that has nothing to do with actions that people can take. Observation is not the same as action.
Yes they have, by saying things like “we really no longer have free speech in this country.”
I consider that sort of thing defeatist.
Again, stating an observation is not the same as taking action. You can consider anything you'd like to be defeatist; that doesn't make it so.
Here's the line, I think, you're referring to:
Do you disagree with that assessment? If so, how?
I do disagree. I think we are exercising our right to free speech right here! Millions do every day on the Internet.
I think you and I have fundamentally ... shall we say, different ... views on what a "right" is, and how it applies to a society. The fact that you can sit at home (or work, wherever) and type that out, in the same thread in which people are posting examples of people that have been disappeared for doing exactly that ... I do not understand where you are coming from.
Please don't tell me to "have courage" it comes off as incredibly patronizing.
The people with the freedom to speak out about the abuse without (as much) fear of retribution... Are white people, and/or rich people.
That should tell you about the imbalances at play.
Immigration officials are already arresting US citizens without due process, so it's not clear to me how you come to the conclusion that US citizens are safe or that this is a continuation of long-established norms rather than the intense escalation it very much is.
That’s why I said most. I still think that’s true, today. Most of us don’t fear Immigration, day to day.
But it obviously could get worse. This administration is clearly dangerous.
Immigrants and journalists, I know journalists were detained even under Obama, so far back as I can remember.
So this girl was a double whammy, an immigrant doing journalism. How dare she /s