Sidechat icon
Join communities on Sidechat Download
Crazy to make a poor analogy to the civil war when SC seceded in 1860 BECAUSE OF SLAVERY. Non-citizenship doesn’t mean protections (5th amendment) are nulled. The confederacy viewed the fed govt as an enemy bc of that, then attacked the union @ at Sumter.
9 upvotes, 8 comments. Sidechat image post by Anonymous in US Politics. "Crazy to make a poor analogy to the civil war when SC seceded in 1860 BECAUSE OF SLAVERY. Non-citizenship doesn’t mean protections (5th amendment) are nulled. The confederacy viewed the fed govt as an enemy bc of that, then attacked the union @ at Sumter."
A short history lesson: In 1861, fearing that their wage slaves with no citizenship would be taken away, Democratic state officials and protesters revolted against the Republican federal government and attacked federal troops. Oh wait, that was 2026
upvote 9 downvote

default user profile icon
Anonymous 1w

yeah and democrats now wanna keep their slaves (undocumented immigrants) they can pay at super low wages. how many times have you heard the argument “but who will pick the strawberries??!!?” as an argument for why we need them here? Democrats functionally view them as slaves and are now revolting to keep them

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 1w

The action of the federal government is unconstitutional. Immigrants, citizens or not, have equal protection under the law, right to due process, fair trial, etc. If you seriously want to make the argument that democrats view undocumented immigrants as slaves, you should also be an advocate for easier paths to citizenship, things like TPS, worker protections, benefits, non-discrimination laws, and against the threat of detainment/deportation for undocumented workers (US v. Kozminski).

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 1w

I understand and can agree that undocumented workers are exploited in the country. However, the current administration has only made it harder to receive citizenship, putting the system in total gridlock. If the bone you’re picking is about exploitation, you should be vouching for (increasing) citizenship that would allow increased worker protections, benefits, and opportunities.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 1w

The exploited laborers and their employers shouldn’t be in this country under the law. Crack down HARD on employers exploiting the workers and if they don’t have papers send them back to their country. It’s that simple

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 1w

You need to read through the UNs Sustainable Development Goals BAD. Just because something is against the law doesn’t make it inherently wrong. There are fundamentals of humanitarianism that uphold our world and societies much more than a legal code can.

post
upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 1w
post
upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 1w
post
upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 1w

While these guidelines don’t have to be the Bible, they are developed by some of the more powerful institutions/organizations and countries in the world. It suits us to understand what will actually benefit our country (and the world) rather than cling on to the idea that there’s forces of evil, deviance, or prevention working against us.

upvote 1 downvote