Hacker News Reader

Comment by k__ | Hacker News Reader

Isn't that what the US wants? I mean, at least this ICE stuff happened doesn't seem very inviting.

The current admin definitely wants to look tough on immigration.

Opinions among actual Americans vary. Some blue states even issue driver licenses to unauthorized immigrants on the basis that it's better for them to pass the driving test than to drive without taking the test.

The administration wants to look tough on the "wrong" skin color

It's based on the state of the countries they came from, not skin color.

No thanks rayiner

Is that why white South Africans are being welcomed as refugees?

Yes. It’s also why the right loves Japan and, increasingly, China.

It's almost as if racists view certain kinds of Asians as a sort of "model minority".

Why would they view certain asians as a "model minority?" Are they deciding based on cranial measurements? Or is it because Japan, China, etc., are orderly and developed--in which case it's not about "race" at all, is it?

Because it's allowed them to dismiss the issues of institutional racism that exist in our country by claiming that because some races are more successful than others, there's no reason for American society to change. That those other races are less successful due to their inherent inferior nature.

The truth is that there is nothing inherently superior or more "orderly and developed" about the people of Japan and China than the black Americans, Hispanics, and other Asians in this country. Culture and class vary significantly within populations and nations, even small island nations like Japan. US Immigration policies have selected for unrepresentative samples from certain populations though. The costs and accessibility of getting to the US from somewhere like Mexico are nothing at all like they are for people in countries on the far side of the Earth. Other distortions arise due to circumstance and need, for example refugees and manual laborers more frequently come from some regions, and very rarely from others.

There's no point in trying to dig too deeply for gems of logic and consistency when it comes to racist ideology though. You can only be left disappointed.

You’re coming up with all this theory and labeling to avoid the simpler conclusion that the right’s views are just based on looking at the country immigrants are coming from. That’s the proof of the pudding. (Selective immigration obviously has nothing to do with that.) The right likes Japan and, increasingly, China because they are orderly and developed countries and doesn't like Bangladesh because it isn't. It’s not because they’ve concocted some rubric of cranial measurements under which one group is “model minorities” and the others aren’t.

It's what a huge proportion of the US population wants, yes. And many of the people who are in the US and who are counted in the number of people in the US are themselves immigrants or closely socially connected to recent immigrants - one of the justifications for blanket immigration restrictionism is precisely that once an immigrant is physically in the country, they start affecting the democratic political process that decides what policies will be, including further immigration policy.

> huge proportion of the US population wants

Thinks they want (where "think" is doing some massive heavy lifting because it's simply factual that wide swaths of voters have demonstrably exercised very little "thinking".)

I mean, there is a big grey area between immigrants here who are:

undocumented and here temporarily (most people oppose this),

undocumented and here permanently (the left is split on this, the right is mostly against it),

documented and here temporarily (most people are fine with this, especially tourists),

documented and here temporarily with an option to become permanently (many oppose this because it's impacting employment, especially with H-1B abuse),

documented and here permanently with no intention of becoming citizens (many people on the right don't like this for assimilation reasons),

documented and here permanently an a path to citizenship (most people support this except the extreme right),

former immigrants who are now citizens (nearly everyone supports these people).

The problem is that all of this is put under a single umbrella called "immigration," but it includes so many sub-issue like rule of law and assimilation preferences that you can't have a serious debate on it.

The other thing making it difficult to have a serious debate about is that one portion of the population keeps getting asked to moderate their positions on immigration (in all its facets) while there is little to no similar pressure on the opposing group. To put it another way: why should I move towards the center (from my "left" position) when I see the right continue to push immigration policy to the extremes?

It's absolutely what some powerful and well-funded people are actively pursuing.

https://www.project2025.observer/

They want a Autocratic Theocracy AKA God's Chosen One-ocracy (and take a wild guess at which demographic gets to decide who the chosen one is...)

The ICE stuff is extremely unpopular. Most of the people who voted for it did not understand they were doing so. If "the US" is the people, then no, they mostly do not want this. If "the US" is Trump, then yes, it is.

This is also the most important political question in the US right now. Are the people still sovereign?

The ICE theatrics under Noem was unpopular. The underlying policy of mass deportations has been consistently popular: https://harvardharrispoll.com/assets/uploads/2026/07/HHP_Jul... (p. 22).

"Deporting all immigrants who are here illegally" was polling at 55% approve/45% disapprove as recently as July.

The issue is that people's idea of illegal immigrants are hardened criminals living a lift of crime, whereas in reality the majority of people that are being deported are normal people that overstayed their visa, ie. the low hanging fruit. So people can be both supportive of the policy but dismayed at the implementation, which is what we are broadly seeing here.

The Harvard-Harris survey linked above asks separately about “deporting immigrants who are here illegally and have committed crimes.” Support for that was at 78% in July.

There was opposition to Noem’s theatrics. But it seems like Mullen’s quieter approach has taken the heat off and most of the focus now is on the shit inflation and Iran war.

"The ICE stuff" means what ICE is actually doing, not some abstract, lawful policy that you could imagine instead. This is precisely the point. Many people who voted for Trump did not understand what they were going to get.

Actual support for Trump's immigration policy and ICE is much lower than you suggest.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-majority-says...

This is not true. Maybe it's unpopular in your circles, but deporting illegal aliens is broadly popular with the American public.

Deporting illegal aliens might be popular as an abstract concept but as soon as the question is about deporting actual people that they know, their opinion changes. It’s great politics to say you’re going to do it, but bad politics and a moral atrocity to _actually_ do it.

The only ethical way to do it is better security at the border and making legal immigration and visits much easier. You can’t just snatch people who are established in communities and put them into camps without leading to a thoroughly justified moral outrage.

I think that it's possible to deport people while still treating them with dignity and respect, without keeping them in horrific conditions, without sending them to random dangerous countries they've never been to, without murdering innocent citizens and non-citizens, and while affording the people you remove legal due process.

Our current president has intentionally created a system designed to be cruel, brutal, and unfair because his supporters get off on it and because every abuse of power makes his next abuse easier, but even though some people will inevitability be upset when the illegal immigrants in their lives are removed from the country, it doesn't have to be a complete moral atrocity to enforce immigration law. The way it's being done today is a choice.

Deporting someone who broke the law is not a moral atrocity. Is it unethical to arrest and jail a bank robber who has established themselves in a community?

These people knowingly and deliberately broke the law, and they continue to deliberately elude enforcement. The problem is that we've been too soft on enforcement, leading to millions upon millions of them assuming they are exempt from the law.

Deporting someone that arrived here 20 years ago, who has a family, whose spouse might be an American citizen, who might have American citizen kids, grandkids, friends, employers, they might own a company and contribute to the economy, etc absolutely is a moral atrocity. Violating border crossing laws is not a crime that is worth upending so many lives. It’s a misdemeanor and the fact that you have to elevate it to a bank robbery to make it seem reasonable tells you everything you need to know. Not all crimes are worth ruining lives over.

I am in favor of deporting people that have not been here long, but there has to be a way to fine people and get them documented after a certain amount of time.

You can say the exact same thing about a bank robber "who has a family, whose spouse might be an American citizen, who might have American citizen kids, grandkids, friends, employers, they might own a company and contribute to the economy".

Entangling yourself into society doesn't absolve you of crimes.

Illegal entry is a felony. Unlawful presence is a misdemeanor which carries the penalty of deportation. Trying to downplay it and liken it to minor infractions tells me everything I need to know.

I am in favor of deporting all illegal aliens. Apply the law equally.

> The ICE stuff is extremely unpopular.

You'd be surprised to learn that ICE is quite popular. For example 73% of Republicans approve of the job ICE is doing --- see page 14 of this NPR/PBS/Marist poll: https://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/NPR...

Why would anyone be surprised Republicans approve? They voted for it, it was like the main thing they wanted... But despite voting for it still 21% disapprove.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com