Bad Faith

This is an argument I've come across recently, and I wanted to address it. In regards to the current administration's immigration policy, "I like immigrants, I just expect them to follow the law" (e.g., to seek and not circumvent legal citizenship), is a bad faith argument. It's an underhanded attempt to legitimize an illegitimate stance (like saying that preventing access to contraceptive health care options has anything to do with being "pro-life", and not anti-freedom), but it is a strategy that conservatives in this country wield frequently and - unfortunately - quite effectively.

The reason this strategy works is because the argument is sound - it's just deliberately misplaced. As I learned while studying philosophy in college, an argument founded on untrue premises can lead logically to a conclusion that is, however, very much untrue. If all ICE were doing was humanely deporting undocumented immigrants, then a focus on proper documentation would be a valid stance. One that you could agree or disagree with (personally, I think the harms are exaggerated, and I support a more empathetic solution in line with our country's historical character), but a valid one nonetheless.

They want you to think that this is all ICE is doing, because it's the only way they can at least pretend their argument has any real footing. But that's not what's really going on. In addition to their purported duties, ICE has been abducting documented immigrants, harassing and assaulting natural born citizens, spreading terror in American communities disproportionately inhabited by Democratic voters (this is not a coincidence), overstepping their authority as border guards (and not domestic law enforcement), recruiting with abysmally low standards and providing inadequate training, eschewing any commitment to transparency (while the administration boldly lies to the contrary) with regards to what goes on inside ICE facilities, how detainees are treated, and what happens to them when they are deported.

All of this is beyond the scope of merely enforcing the law as it is written, and this is what the American people are protesting. For the sake of all that is Good in the world, a white woman was just shot to death in the face by an ICE agent without due cause (the video evidence is all over the internet, so you can judge for yourself), and the administration - up to and including the office of the President of the United States himself - is spreading lies any citizen can debunk with their own eyes, maliciously slandering the innocent woman who was killed, and granting unqualified immunity to her shooter, while obstructing any and all attempts by local or state law enforcement to properly investigate the crime.

This is what enrages us! And conservatives are standing behind all of this egregious behavior, twisting themselves into pretzels to justify this state-sanctioned execution of a law-abiding citizen (in broad daylight!), utilizing bad faith arguments to create the illusion that this is a two-sided issue. And it is an illusion. A thinly-veiled one, at that. And as long as we permit this regime to continue to circumvent the law (and any standard of human decency) without repercussion, these people will continue to be emboldened to sink to new depths of depravity.

I don't know about you, but having armed agents of the federal government in our streets, disappearing people without public trial, and able to murder law-abiding citizens with immunity, doesn't sound like democracy to me. It sounds an awful lot like a fascist state. And I'm terrified, because every step we take is another step closer to becoming a country which has the social infrastructure and legal precedent for everyday bigots to commit deadly hate crimes against minorities, and get away with it! Make no mistake. The real domestic terrorists are the armed thugs occupying our cities. Resisting them by nonviolent means - up to and including trying to escape what could be a deadly encounter with them - cannot be described as anything other than a patriotic act in defense of our fundamental liberties.

---

Before I finish, I have to address the mask issue, because it's another crystalline example of conservatives engaging in bad faith (isn't that a perfect description of conservatism on the whole - "bad faith"?), as well as their failure to hold to any kind of consistent principle. People have raised concerns about the way ICE agents - unlike regular law enforcement - are frequently masked, and reluctant to provide identification. I don't know what purpose is served by these agents wearing masks, but one can easily imagine that it increases their intimidation factor, while also shielding them from accountability for their actions as agents of the state - which is a reflection of the overall lack of transparency endemic to this agency (and the regime overall). On what grounds do conservatives defend these agents wearing masks when, during the COVID pandemic, they openly mocked and insulted progressives for doing the same thing?

Now, the issue here isn't whether you are for masks or against masks all the time or in any situation. It's a question of purpose. During the pandemic, the purpose of wearing a mask was to prevent the spread of an infectious disease. Why did conservatives reject masks then, yet support them now? (Other than to brainlessly counter whatever rational argument a progressive might make). Here are the facts: then, progressives wanted to prevent the spread of a potentially fatal illness; now, they want agents of the state to be held accountable for their actions. To disagree with these positions (as conservatives do) is to support the spread of disease, to value the intimidation of conscientious, law-abiding citizens by federalized agents with guns, and to reject accountaibility when those agents break the law, and violate our civil rights.

I know I'm biased - as we all are. But I just don't see how you can look at the facts and not come to the objective conclusion that conservatives are fundamentally evil - antisocial bullies who value chaos and the suffering of innocents. I know they say similar things about progressives - that we're leftist radicals who've taken leave of our senses. But again, there are not two sides to this issue. One of us is arguing in bad faith, and the other is not. One of us is right, and the other is wrong. The distinction is blatantly obvious, and it's not even close. The only way I can explain it is that - contrary to an idealistic view of the inherent good in humanity - in any population there are bound to be a range of people from the good to the bad. And it would seem that bad people are just inherently drawn to conservative politics.

Which side are you on?