this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
52 points (91.9% liked)

World News

38797 readers
2010 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (2 children)

People aren't illegal

They can illegally be places they shouldn't, but they're two completely different things and even tho this is likely due to translation it's always good to point out

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Agreed. That's why I always preferred the official Canadian government term - out of status.

These are foreigners who just happen to be out of status in that particular place.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Do you prefer the term "criminal foreigners"?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

What's wrong with "people who immigrated illegally"?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Technically, nothing. In the same way that "person who committed thievery" is a correct term for "thief." People may not be illegal, but we call them criminals all the time.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

But you realize that's not what's in the headline, right?

Like, if you're trying to actually learn I'm down to clarify, but it feels like you just want to argue the line as close to dehumanizing these people as you can...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (3 children)

No, I just don't find much point in the "no human is illegal" thing. Nobody is saying that being a human is illegal, or that they are innately illegal. But people can be criminals. Do you prefer the term "criminal foreigner" rather than "illegal foreigner"?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

The whole "people can't be illegal" thing is an attempt to bypass negative attitudes people have towards people who - ya know - break the law and violate the sovereignty of the country they're in. It's what dovetails with rebranding to saying "migrants", it's a bald-faced attempt to manipulate the public and get them to accept people jumping borders and overstaying visas.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

or that they are innately illegal.

The modern American right wing would like to object.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Nobody is saying that being a human is illegal, or that they are innately illegal.

The headline:

Illegal foreigners

But in case you're honestly trying to learn:

Use an adjective to describe a person. Don't use a noun to label to them.

Christian's are the exception because they "took it back" like over a thousand years ago when they became the majority, it's perfectly fine for them to prefer that. But it doesn't effect any other group.

And it's not just religions, literally every group in every conversation;

Use adjectives.

Not nouns.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You don't think it's okay to refer to people as Muslim or Buddhist but Christian is fine?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Someone who is....

Christians are different for the reason I already mentioned....

Christian’s are the exception because they “took it back” like over a thousand years ago when they became the majority, it’s perfectly fine for them to prefer that. But it doesn’t effect any other group.

I know you said you're legitimately trying to understand.

But I'm not spending anymore time helping.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

Thinking it's not okay to describe someone as Muslim or Buddhist is pretty funny. I wonder if nationalities are okay, can I be a Finn or should I be "a person of Finnish citizenship" lmao. Come on. Wikipedia uses the term "Muslim", pretty sure Muslims call themselves Muslims, everyone calls them Muslims.

But I’m not spending anymore time helping.

There's a bazillion nouns used about people, thinking that as a general rule you shouldn't use a noun, I just have hard time you are being serious about this.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Illegal immigrants seems shorter

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

And "The Jews" is shorter than saying "people who are Jewish"...

But we don't just say that do we?

Are you legitimately having trouble understanding?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

People absolutely use the term Jews, it's even in regular ass news headlines. I'm not sure if you're kidding or if you think people aren't saying "the Jews in Israel" but "people who are Jewish in Israel".

Are you legitimately having trouble understanding?

I am, illegal immigrant is a normal and widely used term..?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

People absolutely use the term Jews, it’s even in regular ass news headlines

Show me one headline with "the Jews" that isn't extremely far right or full on nazis

illegal immigrant is a normal and widely used term…?

It was. But lots of things people used to say is not acceptable today. That's literally the definition of progress: shit gets better...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

??

It was. But lots of things people used to say is not acceptable today. That’s literally the definition of progress: shit gets better…

It still very much seems to be. The word is all over the place. Some seem to have started calling them "undocumented migrants" and other terms, but it's still a commonly used term. If you want a short term that's more "pc", that seems like a good one in that case, because "people who immigrated illegally" is fucking mouthful for a headline.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

"Illegal people" is not a concept. Gotta fix the headline so it isn't nonsense.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

I think they meant to write illegal immigrants

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Who the hell illegally migrates to Myanmar?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago

In the last decade? People who have lived there for generations but that the Tatmadaw, in an attempt to rally support from the majority population has declared to have immigrated illegally so that they can murder the 'illegals'.