Hacker News Reader

> Here's one of these camps, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_East_Montana

Thats a textbook concentration camp. You are correct in your descriptions and distinction from extermination camps, concentration camps are not that rare even these days around the world in troubled places.

They are as name suggests just to herd bunch of people behind the fence, not much more. Of course, the reasons are usually far from nice and thus due to at most OKish treatment even there some sad things happen due to amount of people crammed together for a long time.

In Europe during WWII we had tons of concentration camps all over conquered Europe but only few were actual extermination ones, usually converted/expanded from concentration ones. When allies were coming nazis often turned concentration -> extermination due to orders given from above.

Thank you for the clarification!

I do agree that there are three slight between "concentration", "death", and "extermination" camps when speaking about Nazi Germany. In France virtually only "concentration" is used in history classes as an umbrella term for all three. It's only very recently (less than 5 years) that I've seen people start to use the more nuanced term. (as an example, any French will tell you that Auschwitz is a concentration camp while it was, in fact, a death camp).

Yet I stand behind what I said about the word "concentration camp" be a strong and heavy word, since those were integral part in the final solution.

I'm not denying that the US has detainment camps akin to the "gentlest" camps from Nazi Germany, far from it. However, I fail to see the difference between e.g. the East Montana one and a large-scale 5k inmate prison, other than it's less regulated than a federal/regular prison thus with more abuse, and filled with regular people instead of criminals. According to the linked Wikipedia articles, the camp has been dubbed after the Alcatraz prison (known for all sorts of violations).

I may be wrong, and they may be indeed set up by ICE and the government to torture and kill the immigrants. I have a hard time to believe it though, as making a detainment camp to frighten and push immigrants to "go back" would me much more effective and less controversial. My guess would be the intent is the latter form of facility, but ends up being the former due to being staffed with ICE and not professional prison crew.

At any rate, even having detainment camps for non-convicted civilians is already too much. We're quick to point fingers at China and their labor camps for Uyghurs, but this is on the way. (as with the Nazi discussion, this is still far from what china does: ad-vitam detainment, children born in captivity, forced sterilization of people, forced religion, etc).

>even having detainment camps for non-convicted civilians is already too much.

How do you suggest enforcing immigration law when millions have entered your country illegally? (If you believe in enforcing it all.)

Legally. With due regard to the rights of those involved, and when detention is necessary, with humane treatment. In particular honoring due process, where people have the right to to at least be seen by a judge. The right to communicate with their families, and when deportation is necessary, send them to their country of origin instead of another continent entirely or paying some prison somewhere to detain them indefinitely. That when people are detained at all it on the orders of the a judge, expressed in a warrant. That while under detention they should have access to legal services, and have an avenue to complain about their treatment if necessary.

This was all very well understood and hashed out through law and precedent over many decades.

I basically agree, but even Obama built detention centers, no? I don't think anything you advocate is incompatible with detention centers or detainment camps.

That’s not the way things are being run now. People are being detained and sent to camps without warrants. There are complaints about conditions and no observers are allowed. People from South America are being dumped in Africa, detained in foreign prisons without trial, deported without a hearing. Killed with no investigation.

and for the record I dont care what Obama did. some fairly dubious things. does that justify any of this?

I don't support the "way things are being run now" or even what Obama did, necessarily. Just objecting to the narrow point that "detainment camps for non-convicted civilians is already too much".

Well, you could build centers that are not prisons. Not resorts or holiday camps, but start with not crushing the balls of the people in there.

How we handle it in Europe is not perfect either, as immigrants tend to be put in hotels and costly amenities, but at least it's a humane way to do it. Plus, be better at sending them back if they are a problem (I won't use the term "deportation" because it's a word heavy with meaning since WW2).

>centers that are not prisons

So an illegal immigrant can just walk out of the center if they want? That sounds like you don't believe in enforcing immigration law.

> Nazis were systemic against a religion and disabilities.

Just a note that Nazism was systemic primarily about a race: atheists with ethnically Jewish backgrounds were targeted, converts were few but they would have been considered 'Aryans'. It's an important distinction because many groups (specifically the Muslim Brotherhood) try and draw false equivalence between their beliefs and actual innate characteristics.