Farm labor is not very regulated, but until about 10 minutes ago it was flooded with cheap foreign labor which seriously distorted the pricing mechanism for labor. And, that distortion helped to paper over some serious money supply expansion, i.e. the foreign labor helped food not get as much more expensive over time as it otherwise would have. If we keep things steady for several years we will see the market stabilize and rebalance, albeit now at a higher level (due to past money supply expansion finally being realized in prices).

*Note that I don’t really support the haphazard way this has been done, and I’m not confident that things actually will be held steady given the political environment, I’m just stating what theoretically would happen if they were.

If we look at it from the other direction, we are artificially increasing quality of life by taking advantage of foreigners who have no better option than to work for little pay. Getting rid of this seems positive?

This has to be a brand new sentence (post 1950s anyway).

But similar to your angle, I’ve wondered if the climate change messaging is secretly targeted towards resource depletion. If USA switches off oil and oil runs out, who cares if others didn’t switch? But people have a hard time processing “going to run out in 50 years” as a crisis, so instead we get an apocalypse angle, I suppose because humans love the apocalypse (see: various religions).

So are you recommending that, for example, protestants of German descent begin preferentially funding or buying from people in their in-group? People of anglo descent should start preferring other anglos? Catholics should buy from catholics?

I think the issue is that it's considered okay for some groups to do it while simultaneously being considered EXTREMELY EVIL for other groups to do it.

We can't really recommend that other groups do it with a straight face, they would be instantly shunned and vilified.

EDIT: When I say BUY I mean B2B deals, not consumer level, hence "funding or buying". Sorry for the confusion.

I’m curious how you propose that business ownership should work?

I don't picture new data centers being banned outright. I picture a lot more regulatory friction driven by public reaction which is in large part driven by media (which then also amplifies the perception of the public reaction).

Regulatory friction is generally considered beneficial to established companies, because it makes it harder for new companies to enter the market and for smaller companies to expand.

For example if in the 1960s computers became regulated because they will replace a lot of jobs or enable the building of advanced weapons or whatever, IBM would probably be in a very different position today.

It would be awfully convenient for the current big players if friction was added to bringing additional large scale compute resources online. Existing data centers would be grandfathered of course…

Maybe I’m confused, but I thought whataboutism was more like “you are saying I am doing X bad thing? What about Y bad thing you’re doing, let’s discuss that instead”.

It’s a deflection technique, not a check on logical consistency.

Have you looked at the projected future demographics in America if the current trends continue? What does it matter if it's peaceful in the moment or not if the end result is the same? If you are forcibly invaded and become 10% of the population, vs if you let it happen, what is the difference?

The only difference I can see is that if you are letting it happen, you can be convinced to not let it happen and then act accordingly. Whereas if you aren't letting it happen and it's still happening you may just not be able to stop it. So the current situation is really odd.

Also, if you numerically lose control of a territory, you do open yourself up to actual genocide in the future. Can you not imagine a scenario where the other groups gang up on Europeans if the Europeans no longer have the power to stop it? And again, if that somehow happens naturally in the far future I'm not going to lose sleep over it. But if Europeans are convinced that this is a fair and even good thing and shouldn't be resisted, well there is clearly something wrong with them mentally.

I could definitely imagine a smaller cheap plasticky version of this being pitched as a more intuitive way for kids to learn piano, maybe that's where they're aiming?

That doesn't mean you shouldn't feed poor black people, you just can't pat yourself on the back for honoring your ancestor at the same time.

I don't really understand the disagreement. If you are performing an act which, if your ancestor were somehow magically in the room with you, they would respond to with horror and disgust, then you aren't honoring them. Performing your own present morality does not necessarily honor your ancestors, if they had a different morality.

People in the Middle East and the far east and Africa are maaaassively more racist than the euro diaspora is today. How are you surprised that an Iranian is racist against Indians or whatever, that’s absolutely typical for that part of the world.

What percent of cases does this happen in?

If we have an imperfect system we don’t have rule of law? When has anyone ever had a perfect system?

Why do you need to be so hyperbolic? It makes it hard to take you seriously.

Can you restate your case in a non-hyperbolic fashion, ideally while taking some breaths? I am listening, but I just can’t stomach this kind of hysterical rhetoric, and so far you haven’t made a case without it, nor has anybody else I’ve read.

> Every case where a judge has said ICE violated a court order.

I don’t trust the courts already, so I need to understand at a conceptual level what sort of due process is being ignored. And I don’t really understand why people on your side aren’t stating it like that generally, uuuunless they don’t really have a strong case (not saying they don’t definitively but based on what I’ve seen written about this topic generally that is my starting place mentally, if there are strong conceptual arguments, where are they hiding!).

Where are people being tortured? ICE is pulling off fingernails and shoving glass up urethras? ICE is chopping off hands and pouring scalding water on people? What are you calling torture?

How many deaths are you talking about?

What horrible medical conditions are you talking about? How long are these people waiting for a flight? Are they trying to avoid being flown home while this is happening, or is there a gigantic backlog?

What makes them paramilitary? Are they firebombing immigrant houses? Are they assassinating immigrant leaders?

Like if you guys wanted to get these people out but you just want it to be more civil or whatever, then yeah I’m listening, but you don’t! You want them to stay! That makes your hysteria seem motivated, because you aren’t ranting about how they should stay, you are ranting about implementation details, which as far as I can tell isn’t your core concern!