I think people usually view the world through the lens of 'concepts'. Be it concept of science or concept of religion, etc. — stoicHoneyBadger

Is it possible that people act in the world without any concepts, but when they analyze their experiences, concepts enter as gears in the machinery of explanation?

And then maybe these explanations, arising from reflection, affect the form of future actions.

Well, capitalist right wingers might be worried about profits, but most conservative or right wing people object to in-migration on cultural grounds. — Bitter Crank

This makes me wonder how things will be affected as the US becomes a more Latino nation.

A lot of Latinos are very conservative and condemn illegal immigration as much as any neo-Nazi Klan member would. So things might not change.

In the 1980s the unions were destroyed and soon it became a setting for undocumented workers. — Bitter Crank

So it ends up being a way that employers can circumvent all the protections American labor has achieved.

Putin was mainly provoked by the fact that Ukraine was successfully independent.

Long interview with Zelenskyy published in the Atlantic Monthly — Wayfarer

:up:

About 4 years ago, there was almost a border deal: Trump would have gotten $20 billion for border security, and Democrats would have gotten DACA protections. Trump's base got wind of it, and there were howls of protest, so the deal fizzled. — RogueAI

So part of it is racism or xenophobia?

The FRA (a European human rights watchdog) says labor suppliers need to be registered and employers punished for using unregistered migrant suppliers.

IOW, Europe needs to start regulating the whole sector. Is that possible? Or would rightists squash that as a threat to profits?

At the worst end of the exploited labor spectrum are those who are forced to work, often dangerous work without normal safety measures, live in squalid conditions, receive little or no compensation, and face beatings and rape.

"The International Labor Organization (ILO) estimates that at least 12.3 million people are victims of forced labor at any given time, 2.4 million of whom toil in forced labor as a result of trafficking. The U.S. Department of State estimates that 14,500 to 17,500 people are trafficked into the United States each year.". - - ACLU.

Per one DOJ effort to quantify it in North Carolina, about 17% of interviewed workers gave details that suggested trafficking and exploitation. Most were undocumented. But since enslaved migrants are threatened to keep quiet, this estimate may be low.

Shouldn't governments work to end this particular kind of exploitation?

:up:

But my explanation for why the US doesn't take the problem more seriously doesn't explain why exactly the same problem exists in the EU.

Migrants are enslaved in the same way: recruiters trick them into accepting transport to labor positions, and then their freedom is taken away and they're threatened to keep them quiet.

The Fra has these suggestions for measures the EU could take to reduce these crimes:

"EU Member States should require employment
and recruitment agencies and their subcontractors to avoid fraudulent or deceptive recruitment. This should apply to agencies based and operating in the EU, to their branch offices located in third countries and to those agencies based abroad and providing workers to EU Member States. To achieve this, EU
Member States should put in place:

• registration, licensing and, in particular, certification systems for agencies operating in this sector;
• clear liability rules when employment and recruitment agencies subcontract part of their activities to other agencies;
• a list of licensed temporary and recruitment agencies to EU embassies in the countries of
origin of migrant workers;
• dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with
existing legal standards;
• an effective and well-funded monitoring
mechanism to oversee the activities of em-
ployment and recruitment agencies, in coop-
eration with trade unions and relevant human
rights institutions and civil society. This should
focus, in particular, on unlawful or deceptive
practices by employment and recruitment
agencies, such as:
- collecting of recruitment fees and other
charges from workers, which contravenes
Article 6 (3) of the Directive on Temporary
Agency Work (2008/104/EC);
- replacing the worker’s contract originally
signed prior to travelling for the purposes
of obtaining the residence permit with
a  less favourable contract once the third-
country national starts working;
- confiscating the worker’s identity or travel
documents;
- using psychological and physical threats to
prevent migrant workers from complaining
of abuse. Activities of monitoring bodies should prioritise, but not be limited to, the employment sectors where there is evidence of recruitment agencies being more often used, namely domestic and agricultural workers.

"EU Member States are encouraged to sign bilateral agreements with third countries of origin of migrant workers, to limit the need for the services of recruitment agencies.
In line with Article 5 (1) of the Directive on Temporary Agency Work (2008/104/EC) establishing the principle of equal treatment and equal pay between agency workers and the regular workforce, EU Member States should make sure that workers employed by temporary agencies enjoy equal basic employment and working conditions.

" Preventing online recruitment
Some victims found work through the internet, and they were deceived because working conditions turned out to be different from those advertised. In some areas of serious organised crime, Europol supports Member States with intelligence about suspicious websites. An enhanced use of the capabilities Europol has could help Member States to take measures against persons running deceptive recruitment sites, particularly when there is a suspicion of trafficking in human beings.

"FRA opinion 2
Member States’ authorities could draw upon the
support of Europol to detect the internet sites that traffickers and exploitative employers use.
EU Member States should discuss with social
networking sites the implementation of safety
features in relation to job offers, encourage website owners to report suspicious advertisements to police, and introduce independent monitoring of internet safety in relation to online recruitment. In this respect, closer cooperation with internet service
providers and social media should be established."

So how do we explain the severe exploitation of labor in the EU?

But after a righteous Civil Rights Movement, why hasn't this problem been addressed by a nation that prides itself on its human rights stance? — frank

I'll give my two cents worth.

The Civil Rights Movement was driven in part by national security concerns in the context of the Cold War. There was international pressure on the US to clean up its act wrt segregation in the South (much of it from France). The US responded to this pressure because its fairly monstrous appearance (regarding lynching, for instance) was driving neutral areas of the world toward the USSR and China.

There is no international pressure on the US at this point, and no reason for the last superpower to take note, even if there was.

This is a case study in the benefits of balanced power in the world. A lone superpower has no conscience, no one to hold up a mirror and say, "Look!!"

Thanks for the info. I was trying to give a fair hearing to the idea that the Ukraine invasion was provoked or partially provoked by the US. The more I learn, the more absurd that seems.

Do you agree with that? Or do you still think provocation was part of the story here?

Per the ACLU:

" Migrant workers pay the price when the U.S. lags in international standards. For example, under the U.S. guestworker program, foreign guestworkers (or temporary workers) are left at the mercy of employers who can exploit, isolate and abuse them. Guestworkers often arrive to the U.S. deep in debt after paying exorbitant amounts of money to recruiters who promise them job opportunities. With inadequate governmental oversight of labor abuses in the guestworker program, it is only after they arrive in the United States that these workers discover that they have no way to escape an abusive situation because, under the terms of the guestworker program, they are unable to lawfully transfer their visas from one employer to another.

"Another group of very vulnerable migrant workers are domestic and agricultural workers, who are excluded from federal legislation that provides basic protections like the right to a minimum wage, overtime pay, freedom of association, and health and safety guarantees while at work. These exemptions can be traced back to New Deal legislation passed in the 1930s, when the growers' lobby and other moneyed interests pressured Southern senators to exempt the then largely African-American worker populations of farm workers and domestic workers from these basic workplace protections. Because of this racially biased “compromise,” workers in these professions today – who largely include migrants from Central/South America, South Asia, Africa and the Caribbean – continue to be unprotected."

So Latinos in America today are victimized by Jim Crow era loopholes in labor laws.

But after a righteous Civil Rights Movement, why hasn't this problem been addressed by a nation that prides itself on its human rights stance?

Next: why would they put up with these conditions? — frank

In some cases it's old fashioned slavery, but not state condoned, so the enslavers are subject to prosecution.

I say it isn't condoned, but since little effort is made to inspect farms and meat packing facilities to make sure the labor isn't being harmed, it's at least a low priority.

Legislation to protect slave labor from abuse existed in America before the USA was created. As London began asserting its authority in the previously anarchic English Colonies, it laid down the first labor laws in America.

So what's gone wrong that the worst kind of labor practices go unnoticed until someone gets around to prosecuting the transporters?

Likely they will ask to join.

Likely they will be admitted and likely the countries will be in NATO in the end of this year or so.

But of course, surprising things can happen. We live in interesting times. — ssu

And now I don't understand why Ukraine didn't join earlier.

The panic over women is a panic over capitalism in another form — StreetlightX

I agree, except I'd add that the setting for this is the age of high tech warfare, so we aren't shuffling millions of men off to die in a trench somewhere.

Maybe this eased the way for women's rights in the 1920s when capital's domination of labor was worse.

So I would refer to what I said a month ago here. It's also useful to listen to the comment of an Finnish ex-prime minister who tells our position quite well and the what is left of the idea of Finnish "neutrality". After all, Putin is both against the EU and NATO. — ssu

I remember that earlier discussion. For Finland and Sweden, the benefit of joining NATO is deterrence. So will they join now?

And there was that time the Dutch committed genocide against the French. Terrible.

The Russian economy could pivot to become better integrated with the Chinese economy. It would be less profitable and also place Russia in a situation of dependency to China, something they would resent, but what choice do they have now? Withdraw from Ukraine and ask for forgiveness? — Olivier5

If Putin pulled out of Ukraine now, how long would it take to normalise relations with Europe?

To facilitate a reduction of the number of countries with nuclear weapons, the US made security promises to Ukraine in exchange for them delivering the weapons to Moscow, something Moscow agreed to.

With that in mind, how does everything said about reckless escalation not apply to Russia attacking a country that the US has openly promised to protect in coordination with Russia? — Count Timothy von Icarus

So the US and Russia haven't been fighting over Ukraine for decades.

It could take a few years, yes. But I could be wrong; Mr Putin could still surprise us. — Olivier5

Supported with oil dollars and conscription? Will that just hollow out the Russian economy? More than it already was?

think the war will go on untill a new Russian president is ushered in, who is psychologically and politically capable of making peace. There might be ceasefires now and then though, or long periods of low intensity conflict. — Olivier5

Wow. That might take a while.

How long is this war going to continue in your view?

Yep.

Why don't you tell me what you think is true and argue why the above is false instead of handwaving at it? — Benkei

I just meant your belief that NATO was threatening Russia isn't based on what's most probable. It's something about Mexico.

I just don't think you're focusing on what's probably true.

Right. There are two things I'd like to get you to see about the USA-Mexico comparison to Russia-Ukraine.

1. In the USA-Mexico scenario where Mexico wants to ally itself with China, the aggression actually started with the USA, not China. MEXICO WANTS A STRONG ALLY BECAUSE IT'S BEEN ABUSED.

So the USA can't really complain that it feels threatened by China. It's rather that its regional authority is threatened.

So this translates to:

Ukraine wants to join NATO because Russia is a real threat. If NATO is interested in this alliance, this does not mean NATO is threatening Russia.

I'll go on to number 2 (if that's OK) if you agree with 1.

I find the argument that the NATO is purely a defensive alliance rather naïve. As if the US would accept a defensive pact between Mexico and China where China places ballistic missiles in Mexico. — Benkei

In this scenario, why is Mexico interested in a defensive pact with China?

But they'd been proposing to be less corrupt. The idea is dangerous to Putin. That made Ukraine the best candidate for empire building.

Unfortunately, Putin didn’t have the expertise necessary to take Kiev, so his plans went astray.

Putin knew NATO had no intention of threatening Russia militarily. He wasn't worried about that. He felt it was time to raise Russia's global profile.

All accounts I read were reporting that corruption reform wasn't going anywhere — Benkei

In Russia? That's expected.

Wouldn't that do it?
— frank

Haven't they done that already? — Olivier5

Yes. I think the anti-corruption-democratic activities that went on in Ukraine were seen as a threat to Putin directly. He needed to squash that and the ties Ukraine had that reinforced that mentality.

He's not going to let Ukraine join the EU.

Military integration resulting in all sorts of military bases surrounding Moscow is in my view the main worry of the Russians, — Benkei

Ok.

↪frank I seem to recall, but can't find it right now, that Russia explicitly stated economic integration with the EU wasn't the issue — Benkei

That doesn't really make a lot of sense though. Economic ties usually go hand in hand with political ties.

Now I'm confused. Weren't you arguing that the West is responsible for the attack because of overtures toward Ukraine?

How could they stop it, if the EU is willing? Nuke Brussels? — Olivier5

They could invade Ukraine and blow a bunch of stuff up, kill a bunch of people, try to take the Donbas region, get bogged down, kill more people, blow more stuff up.

Wouldn't that do it?

Economics has never been the issue as far as I know. The question is the level of corruption and to what extent that's a barrier to integrate with the EU economic system. — Benkei

Russia would allow Ukraine to integrate into the EU?

Remember, people are often blind to their own bigotry, clothed in self righteousness as they are.

I'm not saying you're a bigot, but I know what Tclark was talking about. The psyche gravitates toward the acceptable vent for hatred and frustration and disappointment. It takes what it can get.

And the OP stinks of it. It's disgusting.

Assuming that everyone in the world is on a spectrum from the most cruel diabolical and evil human being to the most divinely graceful and saintly human and everything in between (by the assumption that some people are better -more moral/ kind/ loving than others).... my questi — Benj96

People are never separable from the environments they inhabit. The ruthless wacko who bathes himself in blood might have been a fairly normal person in a different time and place.

We each have the potential for monstrousness or saintliness. I think the person who ends up being a Saint in the worst of circumstances has some special insight. For instance, consider what Othello would have needed to understand to avoid becoming a murderer.

Could Ukraine reestablish economic ties with Europe after the war? Or would that be a provocation?

:rofl: Well I thought you could research a topic. I might have been wrong.

You can start with learning what's meant by "superpower."

I'm not continuing this conversation.

Will do. If you could cite me a good contemporary political science source arguing that Russia is no longer a military super power, I'll get stuck in. — Isaac

I think you're capable of doing a little research.

..or we could go with the opinion of some random dude off an obscure social media forum... — Isaac

Russia isn't a superpower, Issac. Read some contemporary political science and get yourself up to speed.

It sounds a lot more like evidence which conforms to the zeitgeist is given more weight, no? — Isaac

Ok.