Recently, several Democrats in Congress took the initiative to support Kilmar Abrego Garcia – the immigrant who the Trump administration deported back to a notorious prison in his home country, El Salvador. This occurred even though a court order in 2019 explicitly banned his deportation. Responding to this development, Christopher Rufo, a staunch conservative commentator, made his stance clear. Strangely, he drew a parallel between Garcia, who has never been implicated in any criminal act, and Luigi Mangione, a man currently awaiting trial for intentionally killing United Health Care CEO, Brian Thompson.
The comparison seems peculiar, to say the least. Can one really equate the act of showing kindness towards an innocent individual, potentially on the brink of life-long incarceration at a mere 29 years old, to endorsing a criminal? Moreover, the concern surrounding Abrego Garcia extends beyond simple ’empathy’. The case underscores a larger issue – that of an individual legally entitled to reside in the United States (a husband and a father of U.S. citizens), being forcibly expelled without due process, even in the face of explicit court ordination.
This tweet from Rufo, however, is symptomatic of a broader wave of antipathy towards empathy seen in the political right, especially when it pertains to immigration. Post the Supreme Court verdict involving him, Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, sided partially with three liberal justices in a dissent arguing for a halt in deportations until a judicial review was concluded. This stance drew severe criticism from the right, labeling her as a traitor and a phony.
Senator Mike Lee from Utah also expressed his disapproval of Barrett’s judgment, prompting Elon Musk, the tech entrepreneur, to provide his commentary. Some, like psychologist J.D. Haltigan, connected empathetic leanings to sex and referred to it as ‘mass feminization’. Expressing support for empathetic governance, Barrett sided with John Roberts and liberal justices to maintain a lower court order that mandated the administration pay $2 billion to contractors for services rendered to the United States Agency for International Development.
In her Twitter bio, a female user declaring ‘Christ is King’ emotionally implored not to assign another ‘spineless woman’, whose ‘suicidal empathy’ could lead her astray from rational decision-making due to the influence of other women’s adverse views. This incident points to a noticeable theme within right-wing circles, where their denouncement of empathy often carries a misogynistic undertone.
Typically viewed as a female characteristic, empathy tends to be reported at slightly higher levels by women as compared to men. Men identified as manifesting empathy are frequently characterized as unmasculine or accused of having depleted testosterone. However, questioning an excessively empathetic outlook does not necessarily make one an apologist for horrific acts or a misogynist.
Indeed, empathy can often be manipulated to serve political and ideological purposes. Critics of those sympathizing with migrants argue – using an equally empathy-driven line of reasoning – that individuals deported are not entitled to due process because Americans who fell victims to illegal immigrants were denied the same.
That said, a mode of politics or communication that solely relies on empathy has its downsides. Emotionally charged appeals can potentially stifle reasoned discourses and substitute for logical arguments. While empathizing with human suffering is important, it does not prescribe solutions to alleviate the condition, and some of these empathetically proposed solutions could even prove counterproductive.
However, it is ridiculous to suggest that the well-being of humans should not factor into our political or legal decision-making process. Indeed, the critique of empathy can also be employed for selfish gains: any perspective not aligning with one’s own can conveniently be dismissed as ‘excessive empathy’, especially if it contends for human rights or decency.
The concept of ‘suicidal empathy’ implicates the worst possible ‘targets’, such as immigrants or transgender athletes. Consider the case of Volodymyr Zelensky: Following his office encounter with JD Vance and Donald Trump, Zelensky was criticized for his lack of compliance. Americans, disturbed by Zelensky’s treatment, were ridiculed for their belief in empathy and kindness, as Zelensky was not perceived to have been treated courteously.
Anti-empathy rhetoric can serve as a rationale for brutal acts or even lead to heinous crimes. A political movement that condones flagrant disregard for compassion should raise eyebrows. Current American politics sees no shortage of insensitivity on either side of the aisle. Even though some of the ‘cancel campaigns’ displayed excessive harshness, others have taken the disdain for empathy to a whole new extent.
A disregard for empathy from a Presidential candidate, when a newspaper was assessing their leadership and legacy, could be seen as heartlessly cruel. And yet, for a migrant torn away from his family and abruptly deported to a vicious foreign prison, empathy is labeled as ‘suicidal’.
The post Democrats Stand up for Unlawfully Deported Immigrant Amid Controversy appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
