6 ms·

Correcting jeffbee's misrepresentation of history is important for the same reason they felt the need to misrepresent it in the first place.

wat10000 6d ago
That’s not an answer. Their comment didn’t mention whiteness at all. You believe that the whiteness of these immigrants is so important that leaving it out constitutes misrepresentation. Why is it so important? Come on, you obviously think it’s a key part of the story, so spit it out.
- like_any_other 6d ago
  > Their comment didn’t mention whiteness at all. Yes, that was the misrepresentation.
  - wat10000 6d ago
    Why are you dodging the question of why that even matters? Are you too cowardly to explain your beliefs?
    - like_any_other 5d ago
      I'll summarize the conversation up to this point to you: The story is about a Chinese national working as a supervisor in CBP. geetee asked why is CBP hiring foreign nationals. jeffbee answered that it's because the US is a "nation of immigrants that for centuries recognized the value of recruiting foreign people". I corrected him that those "centuries long" attitudes only applied to whites, and excluded the Chinese national subject of the article. This directly debunks his assertion that American values until recently meant his acceptance. My beliefs are only relevant in so far as it is against my beliefs to lie. Why is that so strange to you? You seem to believe debunking lies requires one to have some fringe beliefs. What does that say about what you think are mainstream beliefs? What does it say about yours? I've only referred to widely-known facts of US history, that I don't believe you're ignorant of. Why did you not only not correct the lie, but attacked the person that did? The only conclusion I can make is that you are so at odds with truth, that you see correcting obvious lies as an assault on your worldview.
      - wat10000 5d ago
        I corrected the actual misconception in another comment: CBP is not hiring noncitizens. Given that, I don’t know what to do with the rest of this. Knowing about the racial makeup of past immigrants is apparently super important for a bad answer to a question based on faulty assumptions. And I guess you dropped in that little parenthetical about politicians promising that law wouldn’t change white-only immigration just as a fun little reminder about how people in the 1960s were super racist.
        like_any_other 5d ago
        > I corrected the actual misconception in another comment: CBP is not hiring noncitizens. If you want to imply that what I corrected wasn't a misconception, why don't you say so directly? Is it because doing so would make it too obvious you're trying to deflect from the truth?
        wat10000 5d ago
        Your statement is far too broad to be correct in any case. Thousands of Chinese and other non-white people immigrated long before 1965. Ironically, some of the earliest Chinese people employed by the federal government were employed by Customs, decades before 1965.

wat10000 6d ago

That’s not an answer. Their comment didn’t mention whiteness at all. You believe that the whiteness of these immigrants is so important that leaving it out constitutes misrepresentation. Why is it so important? Come on, you obviously think it’s a key part of the story, so spit it out.

like_any_other 6d ago
> Their comment didn’t mention whiteness at all. Yes, that was the misrepresentation.
- wat10000 6d ago
  Why are you dodging the question of why that even matters? Are you too cowardly to explain your beliefs?
  - like_any_other 5d ago
    I'll summarize the conversation up to this point to you: The story is about a Chinese national working as a supervisor in CBP. geetee asked why is CBP hiring foreign nationals. jeffbee answered that it's because the US is a "nation of immigrants that for centuries recognized the value of recruiting foreign people". I corrected him that those "centuries long" attitudes only applied to whites, and excluded the Chinese national subject of the article. This directly debunks his assertion that American values until recently meant his acceptance. My beliefs are only relevant in so far as it is against my beliefs to lie. Why is that so strange to you? You seem to believe debunking lies requires one to have some fringe beliefs. What does that say about what you think are mainstream beliefs? What does it say about yours? I've only referred to widely-known facts of US history, that I don't believe you're ignorant of. Why did you not only not correct the lie, but attacked the person that did? The only conclusion I can make is that you are so at odds with truth, that you see correcting obvious lies as an assault on your worldview.
    - wat10000 5d ago
      I corrected the actual misconception in another comment: CBP is not hiring noncitizens. Given that, I don’t know what to do with the rest of this. Knowing about the racial makeup of past immigrants is apparently super important for a bad answer to a question based on faulty assumptions. And I guess you dropped in that little parenthetical about politicians promising that law wouldn’t change white-only immigration just as a fun little reminder about how people in the 1960s were super racist.
      - like_any_other 5d ago
        > I corrected the actual misconception in another comment: CBP is not hiring noncitizens. If you want to imply that what I corrected wasn't a misconception, why don't you say so directly? Is it because doing so would make it too obvious you're trying to deflect from the truth?
        wat10000 5d ago
        Your statement is far too broad to be correct in any case. Thousands of Chinese and other non-white people immigrated long before 1965. Ironically, some of the earliest Chinese people employed by the federal government were employed by Customs, decades before 1965.