My understanding.. it is more grammatically correct to say that:
A person can be undocumented.
However, a person cannot be illegal - they can only commit illegal acts. I.e illegal immigration.
Language is flexible though and I understand what people mean with the term. I believe those on the left take issue with calling people illegal, out of fear of promoting xenophobia.
no one is calling anyone "illegal". they are calling them an illegal alien, it's a legal term in our immigration laws referring to a non resident who is staying here illegally, not by legal means.
getting into the semantics is ridiculous in this situation. 1/3 girls let over that border are raped according to doctors without borders. every person walking over is part of the cartels human trafficking ring, but yeah let's worry about what we called it in our legal books.
xenophobia is not the moral issue here, it's fucking human trafficking.
In other words, the perilous journey and initial exploitation by the cartels are the issue, not some semantics debate about the legal term "illegal aliens" and whether people invoke it because some alleged "xenophobia".
Unless you were selectively quoting parts of my sentences for another reason. You didn't exactly make a rebuttal.
I’m sorry I triggered you. People actually do care about the meaning behind words. That’s why we are talking about it. Words shape understanding, understanding shapes actions, and actions have consequences. Perhaps if we used more compassionate language to refer to these people it would support our efforts to prevent this violence you talk about.
Also, as of this year the Biden administration has asked ICE, CBP to stop using the term “illegal alien”.
Dude… do you know where we are? We are in a comment thread discussing the usage of words in media bias… is this not the time and place? This isn’t a thread about the cartels. Talk about false debate.
Dude... follow the chain. This was about whether or not illegal immigration has a neutral term, it does, illegal alien, the legal term. I did dive into the issue itself, but it doesn't make it a false debate, unlike the semantics debate.
I was pointing out how bias in the media in this topic always turns to a word debate not a debate on the issue.
Keep in mind YOU brought up xenophobia and not the cartels. You continued the semantics debate, but not the root issue.
Well I disagree. I don’t think there is any such thing as a neutral term in politics. No one has an objective understanding of some combination of words. Just because the term does not illicit emotions in you, does not mean it doesn’t in other people. Like I said, Biden has already recommended the term “illegal alien” be changed - thus highlighting its politicization.
And on your second point I take issue with the premise. Like I said earlier, I think our understanding of words have consequences, debating their meaning is debating the issue. However, is it the most fruitful and meaningful debate? Perhaps not.. but again, we are in a comment section about word usage in media bias - so that’s why I’m focusing on it.
Your edits have clarified your intent. I thought you were reaching for ad hominem or something by making unsubstantiated claims about my beliefs. “You like Biden”, vs, “You, like Biden”.
Regardless though, you’re still making unsubstantiated claims about my beliefs… I didn’t advocate for changing legal terms.. I was only explaining why “those on the left” feel uncomfortable with the term. My first comment was geared more towards an educational tone rather than a prescriptive tone. I recommend reading it again. I didn’t edit any of my posts.
See, this is why I think language is important. Gonna have to call it here though. Good chat.
> if we used more compassionate language to refer to these people
Which implies a greater interest in the politics of the language vs. semantic precision/grammatical precision.
The "illegal" in the phrase "illegal immigrant" refers to their illegal immigration, not to the legality of their person-hood, as your comment would imply. "Undocumented" is an intentional dodge of the legality of the immigration action undertaken by the person (aka their immigration status). The more factual phrase has been made controversial by partisans.
And btw, cards on the table, I support an expanded, rational immigration policy that recognizes the critically important role immigrants play in the U.S. economy and, more generally, society. And one that encourages legality and punishes illegality.
A person can be undocumented.
However, a person cannot be illegal - they can only commit illegal acts. I.e illegal immigration.
Language is flexible though and I understand what people mean with the term. I believe those on the left take issue with calling people illegal, out of fear of promoting xenophobia.