The prominent and polarizing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has come out to say that Trump’s latest tweeting chaos has “endangered the lives of millions of Americans.” While there is no question that a xenophobic and divisive undertone exists in the President’s tweets, the assertion that “millions” of Americans are in danger is a fearmongering tactic without much backing. It is searingly ironic that she has made these comments about “danger” when her hyperbolized definitions of ICE detention centers lead directly to a terrorist attack.

On July 14th, a domestic terrorist launched a violent attack against ICE agents at the Northwest Detention Center. The 69-year-old man, Willem Van Spronsen, is a self-professed member of Antifa. The report indicates that he launched the attack on the facility armed with “incendiary devices”, an AR-15 rifle, and a 500-gallon propane tank. Luckily, he failed to harm anyone in his attack that could have put agents and detainees alike in serious danger. The four ICE agents that caught him have since been put on administrative leave. However, much like many domestic terrorists, he left a manifesto. The manifesto states his allegiance to Antifa and far-left anarchist causes, as well as support for other anarcho-socialist militias, who are currently hailing him as a martyr.

One could consider that this attack was not contingent on an official’s specific rhetoric. Though, the detail that connects this attack, and more broadly the leftist movement, is the usage of the phrase “concentration camp” in his manifesto. Furthermore, he called upon fellow Antifa “comrades” to join him on his mission, which he was hoping would spark a larger conflict. It is also worth noting that Antifa is the same group, fighting perceived “nazis” and “alt-right fascists”, that savagely robbed and assaulted a controversial reporter named Andy Ngo. Although Mr. Ngo is a person of color and openly a member of the LGBT+ community, he was not spared being called a nazi.

However, by no means is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez directly responsible for the attacks. She has a right to speak her mind, and drawing attention to the border crisis is not inherently bad. Though, if the past has taught us anything, it is that words can be powerful. Referring to the detention centers as concentration camps, coupled with the Holocaust specific phrase “Never Again,” has directed a sense to far-left groups that the centers are the works of a fascist, murderous government.

To compare the legal and temporary detention of people flocking to the United States to the kidnapping, separation, and systemic extermination of six million Jews downplays the severity of the latter. Erica Fox, a journalist from Forbes, touts the increasingly popular slippery slope fallacy due to the incessant comparisons to the Holocaust. The idea is that detention today could mean violence tomorrow. The argument is inaccurate for a multitude of reasons. For example, the goal of a detention center is to process and evaluate detainees who do not enter and/or apply for asylum at a US port of entry. The detainees are typically given a court date to appear before an immigration judge, offered asylum, or deported, depending on the conditions. One should consider that the word “refugee” is a legally defined term, in that “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Therefore, if one does not satisfy these requirements, then one cannot usually apply for asylum. This has been the standard operating procedure since the Clinton era.

Furthermore, there was no sudden “slippery slope” in Nazi Germany. Hitler came to power in 1934 and immediately enacted de jure persecution against Jewish people. The wholesale, calculated slaughter of millions was envisioned and executed by 1939. There was no temporary detainment, and the prisoners were forced into slave labor, only to be subsequently killed. ICE agents are not the Schutzstaffel, kidnapping and arresting migrants from their homes and forcing them into camps for imminent murder.

It’s also important to take into consideration that “concentration camp” can be a broad phrase. Even by conventional definitions, the detention centers are not comparable to other concentration camps. For example, in China, their concentration camps are specifically targeted at the Uighur minority, with the intent to “re-educate” them. Millions of this specific Chinese minority are in hidden camps being brutalized, but it has fallen on deaf ears. The parallels are simply not in line with the US crisis.

Yes, some of the stories coming from the camps are rightly alarming, but there are more democratic ways of solving the problems, instead of martyrdom. The crisis has been exacerbated by growing pains due to Trump’s failure to mitigate border crossings, which have hit a 12 year high. The battles over funding have split the Democrats stuck between giving more money to better the facilities or to actively try to have the facilities shut down. To protect migrants from the potential governmental failures at detention centers, both parties ought to keep illegal border crossings illegal. Migrants fleeing crisis at home can safely apply for asylum at a legal port of entry, instead of allowing extremely unsafe and strenuous methods. It allows for horrifying incidents such as the death of a 7-year-old Guatemalan girl who came into custody severely dehydrated and exhausted, only to perish after she was rushed to a hospital.

Yes, it is imperative to learn the harsh lessons of the past and to take them seriously. It is an inherently good thing that the detention centers are under scrutiny and being put under pressure by the public. Having fear of the horrors of the past means making valid comparisons that allow for productive public discourse. This also prevents it from ever happening again. There is no verbiage stronger than comparing something to one of the most profound acts of evil ever committed. Simply referring to everyone we disagree with as a Nazi or fascist begins a cycle of prejudice followed inevitably by violence. That being said, if there is a hope to improve the conditions at the border, it will have to start by promptly condemning terrorist attacks, and no longer capitalizing on the greatest tragedy in human history.



Advertisements

Matthew Richards Matthew Richards is a sophomore political science student at Saint Louis University. He is passionate about national-level US politics and seeks to shed light on the most pressing issues of our lives from a conservative perspective, with special attention to capital punishment and gun rights. Outside of The New Voice, he is a competitive powerlifter and member of the Phi Delta Theta Fraternity.

Share this: Facebook

Twitter



Leave this field empty if you're human: