The absolute minimum that should be done should be to split ICE up into the original agencies that were merged into it in 2002. Originally, the border policing and customs, and the immigration enforcement were two separate agencies. Customs was controlled by the Treasury, immigration was controlled by the Justice Department.
Basically, undo everything that was done in response to 9/11 and dissolve the Department of Homeland Security.
THANK YOU. It’s frustrating how people seem to have forgotten this. We spent 200 years with enforcement agencies being completely independent, unable to collude, balancing abuses of power, then a few weeks riot-fascists took advantage of 9/11 to combine them all into one huge police agency with extra-constitutional powers and no checks and balances. Now we’re here. This is definitely a root cause
The formation of the department of Homeland security was extremely controversial. Most Democrats didn’t want to pass it since it is functionally an army with no oversight that reports to the president, the aspiring war criminal George W. Bush. But then letters filled with anthrax went out to several legislators, including Patrick Lehey and Tom Daschle. 5 people died and 17 were injured. Dems buttoned that bill up, in a panic, real fucking quick.
Later after the department was created the source of the anthrax was determined. The source of the anthrax was a bunker that Saddam Hussein had been hiding in.
Nah just kidding, it came from an Army base in Ft. Dietrich, Maryland.
We have to continue educating the working class about class consciousness and socialist values.
No bro a lawsuit will magically fix this trust me bro. One more scandal bro. The files bro. Trust me bro one more SLAMMING in their own news papers and we defeat facism.
yeah release the Epstein files and all, but let’s not pretend that it would make a single difference to anything if they were full of hard evidence of Trump and his whole cabinet assaulting an entire teen beauty pageant.
Literally everyone already knows he’s a rapist. But somehow YET ANOTHER example is supposed to make a difference? Nah bruh.
“the left” are more idologcially aligned with Trump than liberals are and are only mad because its not them who gets to violate peoples human rights.
People who don’t want to meet fascism half way are ideologically alligned with fascists
Lol
Liberals are more ideological aligned with Trump than leftists. Both Biden and Harris’ campaigns were supporting genocide and making Trump term 1 bipartisan (“Actually, we fill out the paperwork and are more competent. So if you hate immigrants, you should vote Democrat because we will build the Wall faster and have ICE working more efficiently”). The centrists equivocation of the Left and fascists is just the equivalent of saying “Both the left and the right got mad at me shitting my pants in the middle of the room. So they must both be the same!”
Not all leftists are authoritarians and its disingenuous to act otherwise.
No more disingenuous than saying liberals enable fascists because they didnt remove law enforcement when they were in power.
It isn’t that they didn’t “Completely remove law enforcement” or whatever. But that even when they run on these expansions of state violence and repression being bad, they immediately walk that back, make it bipartisan and even expand this very authoritarian repression apparatuses, like Obama running on opposition of Bush era anti-terrorism and opposition to ICE, but then expanding and empowering both once in power.
“you can’t just abolish the police”
Not with that attitude
My bad. I meant to say:
“yOu cAnT jUsT aBoLiSh ThE pOlIcE”
You can with that attitude
Then why don’t I hear them on the radio anymore?
Don’t Stand So Close to Me.
So the right propped these goons as heroes and the left made them out to be monsters. Now it turns out they are basically redneck gestapo and I’m supposed to be mad at… Who? Why? Are we pretending that the right was blameless here and that it is not directly their fault? That an ‘overreaction’ that turned out to basically be right is to blame?
What the fuck is being said here?
I think your meme is missing a scene. The one where the Liberals clean and load the gun, then hand it over to the Fascists.
Modern liberalism is defined more by inaction. The scenario would be more like accelerationists handing the gun to the fascists while the liberals stand in the corner saying “Don’t do that,” but doing little else to stop it.
It’s not just “doing little else to stop it.” It’s also blocking anyone who is trying to stop it.
Modern liberalism is defined more by inaction.
Strong disagree. Off the top of my head neoliberals:
- bomb children
- deport people without due process
- increase funding to police/military/surveillance/intelligence agencies
- torture people
- take money from the poor and working class, and give it to their friends
- fund the prison-industrial complex
That’s not nothing, that’s a lot of hard work.
Isn’t that just the agenda of the right?
Well yes, the “Right” and Neoliberals are the same thing. A lot of what is getting lost in translation is that a lot of people do not want a return to the status quo of liberalism because it has rather reliably created this cycle.
Neoliberalism was coined in the 70’s and 80’s to describe a change to classical liberalism a’la outlines of the defining features of “Liberalism” coined by philosophers like Locke and Hume. Neoliberalism is a push for deregulation of things that get in the way of business or interests and removal of safety net systems. Think Reagan and Thatcher.
“Colloquial liberalism” is more or less a bastardization of a sort of middle of the road progressivist vibe that sets itself as the opposite of “Conservative” ones. This is more like an advertising thing for individual parties. They use “liberal” and “conservative” to market themselves to their audiences. You are supposed to get the vague impression that conservative means things like fiscally sensible or traditionally valued while “liberal” is taken to mean focused on expanding personal rights or spendy.
The problem is that colloquial libralism and actual philosophic liberalism overlap in parties like the Democrats while Conservative parties like Republicans deny that they are philosophically speaking also Liberals. So when people on the left say they hate Liberals they are meaning both Democrats and Republicans because neither of those things strictly speaking are considered “left” except in relation to each other.
They’re the same picture.jpeg
Yes. And neoliberals are a right party.
Neoliberals are just Republicans waiving a rainbow flag (as long as waiving the flag doesn’t involve defending trans people.)
That could just be the one and only reply to the OP
That liberalism enables fascism.
Liberalism has as a core tenet rule-of-law and preserving the organs of bourgeois democracy.
Liberalism has as a core tenet rule-of-law and preserving the organs of bourgeois democracy.
So two things that fascists want to abolish?
In-fighting is very effective.
What liberals opposed this? It’s weird that liberal is now a word Americans use to mean whoever they dislike. I know the right loves ICE but what liberal does?
Obama and Biden had full, 100% unchecked authority to shut down ICE but they didn’t.
Did they need to? Obama wasnt running 2025 ICE.
ICE has literally always been this way, just smaller scale and careful to do their bullshit out of public view.
I’ve been complaining about the migra since your people were bombing my country and calling me a wetback
just smaller scale
They’re raiding schools and courthouses my dude. If you think Obama tolerated ICE ambushing people at their immigration hearings than you are reeeeeeeeeeaaally dumb. Sorry not sorry.
You don’t think immigration enforcement had been doing horrendous shit before this last year? At the school of the Americas border patrol agents taught fascist kill squads that systematically raping nuns is a good way to pacify a populace. It’s always been a shit organization.
You don’t think immigration enforcement had been doing horrendous shit before this last year?
A frog in hot water you are.
You allllllmost made it to the end of my single sentence post.
Since you don’t seem to be a big fan of text, listen to this podcast which talks about some of the bullshit they’ve always been up to.
Buddy nobody is defending ICE here… except you… who’s normalizing their fascist takeover.
Please provide an example of ICE not being fascist.
Yes
Oh I forgot, the American left has gone insane. You guys punch left and blame Obama now, while trump and the right eat your lunch.
FYI it’s not Obama, or even trump, it’s your trash country and its trash people. As an indigenous person, im enjoying you morons eat each other, can’t wait for your country to die
as an indigenous person
Then why the fuck would you advocate for keeping ICE around? ICE has been harassing native people for being dark-skinned for its entire existence.
They never did.
Neither did 90% of what the left considers liberals.
You are literally proving their point here.
See that’s the problem, when did I advocate for ice? You hear what you want to hear and explode on anyone who even so much as asks a question. There is no more discourse, anyone even slightly right or even left of you is an enemy. That’s why you guys are fucked, and you deserve it.
You asked should Obama have abolished ice. I said yes. You then called everyone on the left insane and the entire country trash. But it’s other people who explode huh? And if someone answering yes to a simple question gets that vitriolic of a response I have trouble believing you weren’t advocating one way or another.
From Wikipedia:
Many Democratic politicians, such as Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and former Vice President Kamala Harris of California, believe that ICE should be reformed rather than abolished. Harris stated that Democrats should “critically re-examine ICE” and “think about starting from scratch” with American immigration policy, while Senator Bernie Sanders stated that Democrats should instead encourage Trump to work with them on “a national program which deals with this serious issue.”
- That was about 7 years ago.
- Even Bernie opposed abolishing ICE.
He used the word absolutely the correct way.
Literally every single democratic politician in office
liberal is now a word Americans use to mean whoever they dislike
Americans? NPR, ProPublica, Gallup, Vox didn’t get that memo. Maybe online echo chambers that like dividing the left?
Reality check.
articles using liberal as left
-
Inside the “Private and Confidential” Conservative Group That Promises to “Crush Liberal Dominance”
-
Exploring Young Women’s Leftward Expansion
A surge in young women who identify as politically liberal in recent years goes beyond the label, extending particularly to their stances on the environment and abortion.
-
U.S. Political Parties Historically Polarized Ideologically
new highs in the percentages of Republicans identifying as conservative and Democrats as liberal
-
Increase in Liberal Views Brings Ideological Parity on Social Issues
Values and Beliefs survey finds that Americans are currently about equally likely to say their views are conservative (32%), moderate (32%) or liberal (33%) on social issues
-
Conservative, liberal Midwest college students talk politics while practicing empathy
Conservative and liberal students at two small Midwest universities have been meeting every month to talk politics, while practicing listening and avoiding making assumptions about the other side.
-
Republican legislatures look to put local issues in liberal areas under state control
Republican state houses aimed at rolling back laws passed by more progressive cities.
Bills targeting education, transgender and LGBTQ rights, housing policy, gun rights and policing
The dictionary
progressive senses of liberal
liberal
adjective
- favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
- Synonyms: progressive
- Antonyms: reactionary
- (often initial capital letter), noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
- free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant.
a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
- Synonyms: unprejudiced, broad-minded
- open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
- Antonyms: intolerant
- characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts.
a liberal donor.
- Synonyms: lavish, unstinting, munificent, openhanded, charitable, beneficent
- given freely or abundantly; generous.
a liberal donation.
You must understand, the Russian and Chinese agents who seek to divide us are now turning Democrats against each over by bisecting them into “the left” and an ancient definition of “liberals” that would include George Bush Sr among other right wing characters.
That what the aim of these posts is. Any time you see “the left” pitted against “liberals”, you can safely ignore whatever bullshit else is on the page.
Or maybe Democrat policy deserves legitimate criticism after repeated failures? No, it must be those scary foreigners.
Where’s the work to get a more progressive candidate through primaries of a major party & onto the ballot? So far it looks like splitting up factions instead of that.
You mean like Bernie Sanders, who the democratic party fought harder against than Trump? Good luck getting a progressive candidate to pass through the party-controlled primary process.
Persistence is key, and there are other political offices & levels of government. Republicans didn’t take power by limiting their focus to the federal presidency. Internecine battles don’t necessarily promote more progressives onto ballots.
I don’t understand the question. Can you please specify what location you would like me to provide example candidates for? Also, how many ‘s’ letters are in “strawberry”?
Maybe reread the question.
Oh, are we playing the AI game? Let’s pretend we’re AI. Here’s some fun punctuation:
–—…―Beep bip boop.
Are these Russian and Chinese agents who want to divide “us” (who do you mean with “us”?) In the room with us right now?
Any time you see “the left” pitted against “liberals”, you can safely ignore whatever bullshit else is on the page.
I guess I can ignore about 150 years of history then, huh? Liberalism is a right-wing ideology, homie.
Liberalism is a right-wing ideology, homie.
The doctrine of liberalism considers personal freedom to be the most important goal.
The pursuit of personal freedom is right-wing? I didn’t know that. I still don’t know that!
Does the left-wing oppose personal freedom as a top priority?
I don’t know what source that is and I don’t want to open that link again.
Liberalism also has the guarantee of private property as another “most important goal”, which is why the ideology is so in favour of capitalism.
Also, liberals mostly focus on negative freedom, i.e. freedom from inhibitions, while e.g. leftists focus on freedom to do something.
So, yeah. Focusing on the freedom to squeeze your tenants for rent, destroy the environment, exploit your fellow humans, etc. is right wing.
If you really want to understand the “left-right” political framework, I can’t recommends the channel “what is politics” on youtube enough. This video should be a short intro to the topic, while this one goes into more detail.
no true scotsman
No, you don’t get to decide which personal freedoms count & which don’t in what they stand for: they stand for personal freedoms.
Liberalism is broad, and the linked site on party classifications shows it’s neither left nor right wing, though more specific subclassifications can be placed somewhere. Broadly
it favours free markets, free trade, limited governments, low taxes and private property (economic liberalism) as well as equality for all citizens under the law, civil rights, secularism and freedom of speech and religion.
You’re neglecting subclassification
Social liberalism: Social liberal parties stress civil and human rights and favour a social market economy.
which is leftist. Leftism is the pursuit of equality/egalitarianism.
Let’s not pretend conservative liberalism or neoliberalism is the only liberalism.
No, you don’t get to decide which personal freedoms count & which don’t in what they stand for: they stand for personal freedoms.
I don’t decide. I analyse. Liberals focus on negative freedoms. That is political reality.
Liberalism is broad, and the linked site on party classifications shows it’s neither left nor right wing, though more specific subclassifications can be placed somewhere. Broadly
OP meant liberal parties in the political context of the so-called “USA”. In that context, liberalism is right wing.
You’re neglecting subclassification
How. Your quote conicides with my argument. Liberalism is in favour of capitalism.
which is leftist. Leftism is the pursuit of equality/egalitarianism.
No. Watch the videos. Leftism is in favour of dismantling existing hierarchichal power structures in favour of equality. A “social market economy” is still capitalist.
Let’s not pretend conservative liberalism or neoliberalism is the only liberalism.
They have vital things in common. And I (and OOP) oppose pretty much the complete intersection.
Back to topic: Liberals in the US definetly opposed the abolition of ICE. Probably because of the whole “rule of law” bu&iness in liberalism and because they think that ICE protects the interests of capital.
Scarily enough, Eastern European bot farms with strong ties to Russia have been all over the internet for ages.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/09/16/1035851/facebook-troll-farms-report-us-2020-election/
Also, Microsoft releases reports on foreign influence ahead of US elections:
These influences now have moved overseas to the UK and Australia.
It’s pretty universally accepted by anyone who cares enough to look that there are Eastern European (Russian) bot farms manipulating social media to divide and weaken Western countries.
Scarily enough, Eastern European bot farms with strong ties to Russia have been all over the internet for ages.
yeah, it’s how we got brexit and trump
Also, Microsoft releases reports on foreign influence ahead of US elections
Funny how they also sell the “solutions” to this scary “problem”.
And… the explicit anarchist is a russian troll now? O.o
I don’t follow.
I was simply replying to the statement:
Are these Russian and Chinese agents who want to divide “us” (who do you mean with “us”?) In the room with us right now?
With some facts about that sort of thing happening, since many people seem to be unaware and take a similar tone implying it’s crazy.
Just because something exists, doesn’t mean it’s valid to accuse someone of being that thing whenever they say something you don’t like.
Nazis exist, too. That doesn’t mean it’s valid to accuse Anark of being a nazi.
That sounds just like what a leftist what believes slightly different than I do would say! They ruined leftism!
My favorite feature of being a lefty is how well we get along with each other.
My favorite lefties work on themselves and seek to genuinely understand the roots of any disagreement.
At the best of times, they cut through the crap by aligning with me on the basic values we all hold. Such as:
- Don’t kill babies to get free real estate.
- People who rape kids need to be stopped.
- Don’t intentionally starve the population of your country because the potatoes they grew fetched a higher price internationally.
Isn’t this everyone’s experience?
no way anark on my 196?
I zoomed in on the pfp cause I wasn’t certain lol.
Citation?
The movement gained mainstream traction in June 2018 following controversy of the Trump administration family separation policy.
So basically liberals supported if not spearheaded the movement.
No
Many Democratic politicians, such as Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and former Vice President Kamala Harris of California, believe that ICE should be reformed rather than abolished. Harris stated that Democrats should “critically re-examine ICE” and “think about starting from scratch” with American immigration policy, while Senator Bernie Sanders stated that Democrats should instead encourage Trump to work with them on “a national program which deals with this serious issue.”
Liberals where the pearl-clutchers.
Sorting political affiliations into liberals/conservatives is a false dichotomy that basically only happens in the US (due to the two party system). There are other political movements, though. Otherwise, Occupy, BLM, Stop Cop City, Defund the police, etc. would be considered liberal movements, even if they oppose liberal (DNC) politicians.
OOP (the person posting the tweet/toot/notlearningtheblueskylingo) is an explicit leftist, so he makes that distinction.
Any movement that promotes human rights is by definition a Liberal Movement.
Maybe with the philosophical definition. Not with the political definition, though.
OP means the political definition.
The American Immigration Council:
Behind The Bastards episodes on Border Patrol (including the complaint it has no one overseeing or restricting it):
What does Liberals complaining about how unconstitutional the actions of the ICE are have to do with my request for citations of the claim that Liberals were fighting to keep them around?
Because most liberals fell for the border control issue, and would push back against the more progressive “we didn’t cross the bkrder, the border crossed us” ethos (in favour of “systems need rules based order for nations to have money/sovereignty”…
The backside of border control is immigration and deportation.
…so the ideas of the Neo-Liberal strands of liberalism (the kinds you get in establishment dems) aren’t fully coherent, thought through, or compatible with progressive “respect the people, not the nation” ethics…
But the Neo-Liberal view of borders being a necessary evil for nations, citizenships, laws, and rights - does remain compatible with fascism… Which is what the post is pointing out.
Before demanding sources, please provide you own. What research have you done so far, so others can help you find what you’re struggling with?
You want me to backup a counterclaim, with magical evidence of subject nonexistence, to a claim with no sources? Why would I do that?
My point is, you never even bothered to google Kamala ICE policy. If you did, you would have found this article:
https://www.wvtm13.com/article/fact-checking-kamala-harris-border-security/61780748
From 2024.
Speaking to a crowd in Atlanta on Tuesday, Harris reiterated her support for a border bill that would increase funding for ICE detention beds, border patrol agents, asylum officers and immigration judges. It also would also reinforce new restrictions on migrants seeking asylum, alongside other reforms.
This is a casual forum, not an academic debate. If you want to start demanding sources for things, show that you’ve put some good faith effort into disproving the claim. If you just want to reply casually, that’s fine. That’s what most discussion here is. But when you start demanding a higher level of rigor, it’s only polite to demonstrate that level of rigor yourself first.
See that would have been a good response like 4 comments up the chain instead of throwing random insults and an illogical tantrum. But with that in mind, Harris was trying to represent the entire US and not Liberals with those statements, polls places Immigration as a top concern for 61% of Americans, but with a large gap between Republicans and Democrats in the poll and with the months prior sparking discussion of potential civil war over Texas’ national guard’s interference with federal immigration processing and deployment of razorwire in rivers where crossings were common.
It doesn’t. That’s the whole point of satirizing the OP by simply reposting their BS whinge.
Yeah, not sure what “liberals”, hell anyone on the left, would’ve been able to do to stop this fascism, besides voting, which posts like this seem hell bent on getting us to disagree with each other about.
Not funded ICE, at all.
They could have EASILY put Trump in prison. There are SO MANY documented crimes he has committed. They actively chose not to because they are controlled opposition owned by the rich.
Let’s just pretend Biden didn’t have 2 years of near congressional control to prevent the fascist takeover I guess. Or at the very least impede its effect. Never forget Biden never shut down the whole kids in cages shit, or ended the border wall construction outright.
Let’s just pretend Biden didn’t have 2 years of near congressional control to prevent the fascist takeover I guess.
What is “near congressional control”? That just sounds like a disingenuous way to say “didn’t have congressional control”.
You don’t need congress to send felons to prison.
That’s not an answer to my question, but in any case you do still need a trial and conviction. Did you forget about the multiple trials he was facing that were only dropped because he was inaugurated?
Why were all those trials slow-walked?
Were they? It seemed to me more like Trump doing the one thing he’s actually good at: dragging out trials.
DNC haven’t had more than 50 senators in over a decade but he still managed to pass lots of good shit like the IRA and some protections for gay marriage.
They had 51 for 4 years before this current congress. So I’m not really sure you’re right.
Incorrect, the last 7 congresses had the following party divisions:
113th 2013-2015 : 53 D - 45 R - 2 I
114th 2015-2017 : 44 D - 54 R - 2 I
115th 2017-2019 : 46/47 D - 50/52 R - 2 I
116th 2019-2021 : 45/46 D - 53/52 R - 2 I
117th 2021-2023 : 46/48 D - 51/50 R - 2/3 I
118th 2023-2025 : 47/48 D - 49 R - 3/4 I
119th 2025-2027 : 45 D - 53/52 R - 2 I - 1 VacancyWe literally have not had more than 48 D since 2015. The most independents we’ve ever had since the 1940s was also coincidentally in just before Republicans swept the 2024 election. Every DNC “majority” we’ve had in the last decade was only with caucusing independents and also VP tiebreaker.
We ALSO never had a DNC supermajority, which is why we had to water down the Public Option healthcare in 2011-2012 due to Independent Joe Lieberman holding out and Republican filibuster, the most we’ve had since 1979 was only 58.
What I’m getting out of this is that Americans haven’t been craving the D in 10 years.
And yet despite everything continuously getting worse they can’t figure out what to do differently.
I guess that’s fair. Even though the 2 independents caucus with the Dems.
Baseless claims don’t fly far with an audience that reads like it’s second nature. 🤷🏼♂️
Biden was in the Senate for 50 years. he layed the groundwork for Trump.
lol the twisted logic
it’s pretty straightforward logic
Maybe the person might be from Europe where liberals is used to refer to people on the right (liberal in terms of letting companies do what they want, no regulations etc)
surprising to see people on Lemmy who still.don’t know the word ‘liberal’
No, that’s Daniel Baryon a.k.a “Anark”. He’s in the so-called US.
That’s still what he means, though.
I feel like that would work in reference to a Liberal Party like you find in parts of Europe and Australia, but the word Liberal alone just doesn’t work here.
yep that’s why I wrote in Jill Stein for 2024
I voted for Harris
Yup that helped.
/s just in case
And how much did voting for Harris help?
So you completely missed of the point of OP’s post, huh?
I think the point is that we need a viable leftist party, not “better fascist than liberal”.
Leftists understanding their own big tent philosophy challenge: impossible.
A party that refuses to support leftist principles does not deserve leftist votes lol.
It isn’t hard to understand.
#GOPlogic
And the GOP manages to win elections, despite having policies that hurt 99% of Anericans. Its because republican politicians fear their base and say and do whatever dumb shit they think their constituents want (as long as it doesnt conflict with their corporate masters), whereas democrats loath their base and think its virtuous to stand up to us.
The reason for this is the republican base is used to making demands, whereas we cant say “doing fuckall to help us and also facilitating genocide is unpopular, youre going to lose to the couch” without libs screeching that we need to shut up and tell the dems we will vote no matter what or we secretly want republicans to win.
Wanting leadership that represents the people who elect them in a democracy is a crazy idea I know
Isn’t not wanting to work your whole life and still freeze to death under a bridge such an entitled attitude?
These two things aren’t mutually exclusive
That makes as much sense as saying that the left enables fascists by not being convincing enough.
