[cshipley]

Well here, talk to me. I protest the travel ban. I think it is racist. Not middle America, but the president and his strategist.

I think a lot of other people who are for the ban aren't racist, just misinformed. A lot seem to think Muslim immigrant|refugee == terrorist.

One person told me "I'm for the ban because I don't want them to come and kill me and my family in our sleep."

I blame this perception on the people who seek to profit by the general hysteria, not those manipulated by it. I am sad for the victims of it.

[humanrebar]

Disclaimer: Maybe you (and any particular reader of this post) are an exception to the rule -- I don't know you personally. I only know the people I've personally interacted with in this whole national discussion.

> A lot seem to think Muslim immigrant|refugee == terrorist.

Some do. But some people think the U.S. never landed on the moon. That is, just like not every Muslim is a terrorist, not every person who wants change in our visa laws wants to introduce internment camps, etc.

It's fair to think the due diligence done in admitting foreign nationals has been lacking. I think this particular approach is heavy-handed and inhumane, but we're not arguing for a more humane alternative... actually, I'm not sure what we're arguing about other than people are mad and think things are really racist right now.

> I'm for the ban because I don't want them to come and kill me and my family in our sleep.

So maybe you heard "Muslims are clearly dangerous" when they meant "my government's job is to protect my family and waiting until people are dead is too late". And even if they think Muslims are more dangerous, the right response is to, empathetically, discuss facts (statistics, counterfactuals) with them. The goal is to appeal to their better nature, not to make them lose so we win. All the left-wing apoplexy and panic these days is actively harmful from that perspective.

> I blame this perception on the people who seek to profit by the general hysteria, not those manipulated by it. I am sad for the victims of it.

Me too. I think the misconceptions about Trump-voting America is the another instance of the same phenomenon. And it's no less harmful, in my mind.

[anigbrowl]

Sorry for the late reply here. I fully agree that not all those who acquiesce with the travel ban are racist, and their position is further complicated by the fact that the vast majority of people in the USA know very little of immigration. I've sat in legal education classes where criminal lawyers expressed shock and amazement at their prior ignorance of the immigration system and how differently it functions from the criminal justice system. Immigration law is crazy complex and that makes it a terrible subject for trying to resolve in the format of a TV debate or something where you can otherwise assume a basic level of audience familiarity with the issue - the same reason astrophysicists argue out their disagreements via peer review rather than on Bill Nye's weekly science podcast.

It's fair to think the due diligence done in admitting foreign nationals has been lacking.

It really isn't. It takes a huge amount of vetting for a refugee to given permission to enter the USA. It's fairly easy to enter the country if you're a citizen of the EU or Japan or Canada or Australia (all of which have a good deal of socioeconomic common ground with the USA) but overall it's difficult. Visas are simply not handed out like cookies.

Some immigrants have subsequently committed crimes or even acts of terrorism within the US. but the incidence is significantly lower than that of natural-born American citizens. None of the available evidence supports the claim that there is some sort of security crisis requiring the imposition of drastic measures.

the right response is to, empathetically, discuss facts (statistics, counterfactuals) with them. The goal is to appeal to their better nature, not to make them lose so we win

I wholly agree and practice this diligently, but at some point the responsibility falls upon the listener to evaluate the information that has been provided to them and make a decision. If they just can't make up their mind for whatever reason, then chances are they'll never be politically active and investing more effort in persuading them is not an effective use of my time. If they endlessly pose counterarguments and excuses, then after a while I start to they're either arguing in bad faith or they have an position that they can't defend but don't want to give up, and it's likewise a waste of my time.

Lest this seem dismissive I'd like to point that I've been discussing politics civilly as an adult for maybe 25 years now, so if I give up on trying to persuade someone it's not from an inability to articulate an argument or an unwillingness to entertain opposing points of view.

Me too. I think the misconceptions about Trump-voting America is the another instance of the same phenomenon. And it's no less harmful, in my mind.

Get back to me when people being shot for supporting Trump without really believing in much of anything is a regular (or even an occasional) occurrence. By contrast I can point to a significant and growing death toll for acts of terrorism carried out by members of the far-right.