I doubt they’re getting their needs met. In Trump 1, they tried to argue that they shouldn’t have to provide soap or lights that turn off at night in the detainment centers.
Also, take some time to critically examine your thoughts about national borders. Most people just want to live and work and mind their own business. We allow unfettered migration between the states and there’s no problem there; people move between states, find work, and mind their own business. That’s also true of the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants, only we set up a bullshit system designed to provide an underclass of labor for exploitation, and now some folks are arguing in bad faith that they’re cleverly defending immigrants from exploitation by (checks notes) detaining and deporting them instead of attacking the bullshit exploitation system we created.
Panama doesn’t have the same animosity against migrants that I’m aware of, so I’m not sure why they’d do that. Plus, the article doesn’t mention any sort of treatment like that, so I don’t see a reason to assume it of Panama without some sort of evidence.
My thoughts about national borders are fully examined. All countries have the right to say who is and who is not allowed to be within their borders, and they also have the right to temporarily detain individuals who they don’t want within their borders until they can be repatriated, regardless of those individuals’ intentions or behaviors.
The way that illegal immigrants are exploited is also bullshit, of course, but it’s a false dichotomy to claim that sovereign nations therefore cannot decide who is or is not allowed to cross their borders.
I’m deeply skeptical of this whole “oh, they’re just innocent lil camps outside of our own borders and laws where the media can’t easily check, why are you suspicious lmao?” narrative.
I’m also of the belief that people should live and work where they please, and that national borders are the tools of oppressors.
I’m deeply skeptical of this whole “oh, they’re just innocent lil camps outside of our own borders and laws where the media can’t easily check, why are you suspicious lmao?” narrative.
This is a very fair and respectable position to take.
I’m also of the belief that people should live and work where they please, and that national borders are the tools of oppressors.
Here we will have to disagree (not that national borders can’t be tools of oppressors, but that they are inherently so). I’ve enjoyed our conversation - you’ve given me the benefit of the doubt here, unlike many other commenters, and I very much appreciate your good faith comments.
I doubt they’re getting their needs met. In Trump 1, they tried to argue that they shouldn’t have to provide soap or lights that turn off at night in the detainment centers.
Also, take some time to critically examine your thoughts about national borders. Most people just want to live and work and mind their own business. We allow unfettered migration between the states and there’s no problem there; people move between states, find work, and mind their own business. That’s also true of the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants, only we set up a bullshit system designed to provide an underclass of labor for exploitation, and now some folks are arguing in bad faith that they’re cleverly defending immigrants from exploitation by (checks notes) detaining and deporting them instead of attacking the bullshit exploitation system we created.
Panama doesn’t have the same animosity against migrants that I’m aware of, so I’m not sure why they’d do that. Plus, the article doesn’t mention any sort of treatment like that, so I don’t see a reason to assume it of Panama without some sort of evidence.
My thoughts about national borders are fully examined. All countries have the right to say who is and who is not allowed to be within their borders, and they also have the right to temporarily detain individuals who they don’t want within their borders until they can be repatriated, regardless of those individuals’ intentions or behaviors.
The way that illegal immigrants are exploited is also bullshit, of course, but it’s a false dichotomy to claim that sovereign nations therefore cannot decide who is or is not allowed to cross their borders.
Suffice it to say:
I’m deeply skeptical of this whole “oh, they’re just innocent lil camps outside of our own borders and laws where the media can’t easily check, why are you suspicious lmao?” narrative.
I’m also of the belief that people should live and work where they please, and that national borders are the tools of oppressors.
This is a very fair and respectable position to take.
Here we will have to disagree (not that national borders can’t be tools of oppressors, but that they are inherently so). I’ve enjoyed our conversation - you’ve given me the benefit of the doubt here, unlike many other commenters, and I very much appreciate your good faith comments.