
Elon Musk seeks “specific amendments” to recommend to Trump on immigration order - BinaryIdiot
https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/29/elon-musk-seeks-specific-amendments-to-recommend-to-trump-on-immigration-order/
======
marcell
The problem with this reasonable seeming approach is that it accepts the
frame.

Trump/Bannon present the following frame: we can combat terrorism by banning
refugees from Muslim countries. This claim is factually incorrect, and
moreover it is an attempt to set up an "other" group (Muslims) as an enemy.
Keep in mind Trumps unapologetic claim on the campaign trail:

    
    
        Donal J Trump is calling for a
        total and complete shutdown
        of Muslims entering the United States
        -- Donald J Trump, Dec 2015
    

By proposing "specific ammendments", Musk says the framework as correct, but
the details are wrong. In fact, the opposite is the case: the framework is
wrong, as well as the details. The entire order should be rescinded, without
qualification.

Musk and other SV commentators should know better than this, and not lend
their credibility to un-American actions by the administration.

~~~
dexen
I'd like to correct the quote:

    
    
      Donald J. Trump is calling for a
      total and complete shutdown
      of Muslims entering the United States
      until our country's representatives
      can figure out what is going on. [1]
    

That's why the current order has set duration of 90 days, and it's announced
that subsequent immigration from the affected seven countries will be allowed,
subject to tougher vetting.

[1] [http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-calls-for-total-
and...](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-calls-for-total-and-complete-
shutdown-of-muslims-entering-u-s/) \- first hit in Google search.

~~~
simonh
What is going on is that muslims such as the Iraqi government and Iraqi army
are fighting IS tooth and claw right now. An Iraqi that had family members
murdered for helping the US has been prevented from getting on a plane to the
US. This ban is affecting thousands of people who support the US and some who
are risking their lives to help the US fight terrorism.

Trump had no idea what he was doing when he made that quote, has no idea now.
What better idea in 90 days? Cancel this order? Meanwhile his actions are
increasing the risks to the US. This is all about posturing and victimising a
minority that's easy to demonize and nothing to do with security.

~~~
JohnTHaller
The same kind of better ideas like the GOP's perfect replacement for
"Obamcare" of course. It's going to be great. Trust me.

------
astrodust
By "specific amendment" he should be saying "throw it out". This policy is
misguided and evil from the ground up. If this program had been in place
twenty years the number of terrorist attacks it would have prevented is zero.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
Saying "throw it out" isn't productive. Trump won't back down because that
means admitting a loss. You get to, in the short term, choose between a
substantial win (finding a better middle ground) and a feel-good victory
(saying "screw you" and living with this policy).

~~~
jasonvorhe
The only winning move is not to play. Interacting with Trump's government,
unless necessary for legal reasons, is stupid and makes it harder for everyone
else to publicly denounce the current government.

~~~
sremani
Musk is a CEO of multi-billion dollar companies, disengagement for 4 years is
not a thing, not with the US government.

An activist can tune-out and entrepreneur has to adapt.

~~~
yarou
It's also a skill to engage with people you disagree with on certain issues,
or even if you dislike them personally.

These are basic life skills people.

Edit: s/work/engage

------
RealityVoid
I think that Musk is trying to be diplomatic. I think he's fully against this
measure because:

1) As I know Tesla does hire foreign engineers

2) He, himself is an immigrant to the US, and he was - if not an actual
illegal alien, at least in a gray area immigration wise - at some point while
building x.com

~~~
BinaryIdiot
Yeah I agree I think he's against it but realizes the best we can hope for, at
least going through the administration which he has access to, is offering
amendments to soften the executive order.

I get the feeling Musk is trying to do what he can, the best he can, but since
he's not directly saying it needs to go away he's going to catch hell for it.
I think he's in a very difficult spot either way he goes.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _but since he 's not directly saying it needs to go away he's going to catch
> hell for it_

That's, unfortunately, the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics[0] at play.

"The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or
interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very
least, you are to blame for not doing more. Even if you don’t make the problem
worse, even if you make it slightly better, the ethical burden of the problem
falls on you as soon as you observe it. In particular, if you interact with a
problem and benefit from it, you are a complete monster. I don’t subscribe to
this school of thought, but it seems pretty popular."

[0] - [https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-
eth...](https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/)

------
JumpCrisscross
Part of the problem is "a 1952 immigration law [giving] the chief executive
the power to bar 'any class' of immigrants from the country if allowing them
is deemed 'detrimental to the interests of the United States'" [1].

[1] [http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/early-wins-against-
tru...](http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/early-wins-against-trump-anti-
terror-immigration-order-may-not-last-234348)

------
mnx
I think this can be viewing as harm reduction, analogous to giving needles to
drug users. Sure it's easy to just say "They shouldn't be banning immigrants",
but if they will anyway, we might as well make sure they do it less harmfully.

------
tbabb
If that's his angle, rather than helping an ignoble command become more
implementable (and directly playing into a door-in-the-face strategy), I'd
love to see some suggested amendments that make it more vulnerable to legal
attack.

------
jakeogh
Suggestions on the vetting process will have a potentially greater effect. The
obvious goal is the person(s) should on average be a net benefit to the United
States. What that means is what needs to be hammered out and it's unknowable
if that's the standard. More basic tests like freedom of speech are what I
want to be used.

------
chme
Because the self proclaimed "born negotiator" hasn't done his job and
negotiated before making decisions, a better one has to step in.

------
SFJulie
The muslim ban is probably as effective as the internment of the Japanese
during WWII ordered by Roosevelt.

Which under Carter have been proven totally illegitimate and useless.

Well, segregation in the USA based on religion (Feynman barred from a PhD in
Princeton for being jew) or colour of skin (until 1969), or birth (slavery-
native americans) is part of the dark side of its history. Nothing new under
the sun.

Question, is this a new cause of secession between rural and urban america
growing up? I mean, if history repeats itself ...

