One can object to the latter without supporting the former.
There's also the the 'Affluenza' case where a teenager killed four people and got off scott-free. Well, until he was found fleeing probation in a foreign country and was dragged back here.
So I don't know: Do you think crossing the border is worse than murder?
We've already established the fact the system is massively stacked against minorities. Then we continue to use 'but it's a crime!' as justification for vile and malicious behavior to people that have committed something without an actual victim like smoking marijuana or crossing the border.
And again, we do not permanently separate families in every single case where someone commits misdemeanor. So then why is it OK to permanently separate all immigrants who cross the border despite it being the same level of crime? Give me one reason outside of 'racism and xenophobia.'
Here's an example of why I think the comparison is meaningless. Grand theft can be charged as a misdemeanor with up to a two year jail sentence. But Brock Turner was sentenced to only six months of jail time for rape. Do you think grand theft is worse than rape? Of course not, but the problem here is the Brock Turner sentence, not the sentencing for grand theft. This question could only be posed because, by design, I selected a more serious crime (rape) for which there exists at least one case where an inappropriately lenient sentence was given out.
You did the same. By design, you selected a more serious crime (murder) for which there exists at least one case where an inappropriately lenient sentence was given out. You then used this highly dysfunctional example to draw a comparison to the less serious crime. But the simplest response to your question comparing crossing the border and murder is simply that the affluenza sentencing was wrong.
But fine then, I want to draw up a more apt comparison and I want you to address this. Public intoxication is a misdemeanor similar to crossing the border illegally. How often do you think people caught being publicly intoxicated end up losing custody of their children or being permanently separated from their family?
I’d argue trying to illegally immigrate to the US is a serious crime and public intoxication is not.
[1]: https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/immigrants-right...
Funnily a child comment to you points out that "trump puts children in cage" and I followed the issue and somebody said it was an Obama era photo and they were detained by Obama because the so called parents were actually traffickers which I of course would support Obama for
Globalism is orthogonal to leftism/rightism. Brexit support was roughly similar among both Labour and Conservative party supporters.
It's quite interesting to see the Trump faction take this mantle and the Democrats (and traditional Repubs) have no idea how to react except to be reactionary and be pro-Globalization pro-TPP, pro-intervention, etc.
Quite right. It wasn't just that Bernie disagrees with open borders, in that video he is visibly upset. He really doesn't like it.
(It was the Vox interview I assume, unless you saw another one)
Also if you are old enough you might remember large anti-globalization protests around G8, Bilderberg and other such meetings.
It is kind of baffling how just a decade ago left groups were getting teargassed fighting globalization and now they are openly advocating it.
Such is the power of propaganda. It is extremely effective and could turn pink into blue, and then yellow with some moderate effort.
I suggest everyone read Chomsky and Herman's Manufacturing Consent. It was actual when it was written and just as actual even if not more today.
Speaking of Chomsky, find his writings on NAFTA and globalization as well. It might also surprise you what he has to say.