What Do You Actually Want?

Reform and training are coherent ideas. Why are protesters asking for things that aren't?

It might be a little late in the game for me to admit this, but I don’t actually know what these ICE protests in Minnesota are for. I know what the signs say. I know that the protesters hate ICE, and don’t want to see them on the streets anymore. But that’s a superficial complaint.

Since ICE leaving Minnesota doesn’t change ICE, and changing ICE doesn’t change immigration law, what exactly is the point of this? It feels like being against chicken pox, and wanting it gone, so drawing up a plan to just put on a bunch of makeup.

If people are literally martyring themselves for a cause, shouldn’t that cause be obvious? Isn’t it kind of a waste if it isn’t?

The ground strategy of the activists, as I understand it, is to keep up pressure in the street, continue to force ugly confrontations that will turn public sentiment against the agency (and by extension, Trump), and hope it forces some kind of policy change.

As strategies go, that’s not a bad one, at least not in principle. It’s not dissimilar to how the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s gathered support. Highlighting the brutality of agents of the state is a reliable way to influence public opinion, and ICE is offering up plenty of violence to shock the masses.

But again, what is this in service of?

The demand seems clear enough: ICE out of Minnesota. But that is a very extreme request - states asserting that the federal government cannot legitimately enforce federal law within their borders is a road we have been down before…

And there’s a problem here, which is that there’s nothing underpinning the showdown. The left doesn’t want ICE operating in Minnesota. Fine. Why though? What is the specific objection to their being there, and what does it actually change if they leave?

The main gripe is that they’re brutal, thuggish, and causing all kinds of chaos on the ground. No arguments there, but that’s kind of circular: they’re getting in brutal fights with people who are fighting them because they’re brutal.

Anyway those are complaints about the agency itself. If they reformed their behavior, could they stay? Would that pacify the folks in the streets? Doesn’t feel like it.

Police reform is a necessary idea in the United States, and ICE is long overdue for a not-just-cosmetic makeover. They need more and better training, and they need much more accountability. Cursing at civilians, roughing up demonstrators, constantly landing themselves in situations where they’re pulling iron or beating ass to get clear; these are hallmarks of unprofessionalism.

ICE’s behavior is below the standard we demand of American law enforcement, and the perception that they are acting as a private army of Donald Trump is not without grounding. If this is this is the crux of the protests, I’m in. But I don’t see any signs reading, “Please clean up your act.”

To their credit, national Democrats have noticed the problem, and are trying to turn attention from bulldozers to reform. But they’re not getting much of an assist from their Minnesota colleagues, for whom one wonders if this isn’t perhaps a welcome distraction from the snowballing fraud saga.

The conversation is becoming reminiscent of the Defund the Police hysteria that emanated from the same city five years ago. Instead of “let’s fix this,” we’re getting “let’s get this out of our faces.” That’s not overwhelmingly noble. And as with Defund the Police, making ICE the issue doesn’t address the thornier matter of what ICE is there to do.

ICE is an instrument of the state. They don’t write the laws they enforce, Congress does.

Do the protesters want changes to those laws? What are they? And who do they want to change them? The guys with the guns and masks and badges can’t actually accommodate that request.

Do they think that immigration law is inherently illegitimate? Some do, obviously, but that is a very fringe view on the wider left.

Most immigration polls don’t even ask the question directly. They ask things like, “Do you want more or less immigration?” Or they ask about preferred enforcement methods. Few frame the choice as, “Do you want a total crackdown or open borders with limitless flow?”

From what I can tell, both extremes enjoy only single digit support among Americans. About 9% want zero immigration (that figure is from 2021), and 6% want unfettered access for anyone who wishes to come.

Link.

Link.

ICE is not a popular agency, and their public support is indeed falling as their conduct receives more attention. Getting them out of Minnesota isn’t an impossibility (though it’s very unlikely, as I’ll explain shortly).

Parsing available polling trends, it looks like a lot of Americans who thought they wanted tougher enforcement from the Trump administration are discovering that they lack the stomach for what tougher enforcement actually looks like. Fair enough. It’s a free country, and they’re allowed to change their minds.

But is this about states’ rights? Is it about immigration law? Is it about police brutality? The organizational structure of the Department of Homeland Security? Do we know? Do the protesters know?

Forcing confrontations with cops is easy. I don’t recommend it, but you can go do it right now. Head down to your local police station, start putting hands on the people in uniform, and your wish will be quickly granted. But this only has salience as a protest action if it’s in service of something grander. In Minnesota, that signal is getting lost in the noise.

Another problematic dimension: most of the worst clips circulating - the shooting of Renee Nicole Good is the most viral example of this - are of ICE getting rough with protesters. There have been some videos of undocumented immigrants crying as they’re loaded into vans, and those videos are sad, but ICE, the agency, appears to be eclipsing their mission as the primary cause for activist consternation.

That’s not a good look for the demonstrators. Or rather, it’s not a sustainable look.

The protesters - and the Minnesota politicos egging them on - are counting on the public viewing this confrontation as one between an intrusive federal government and a heroic resistance. That collapses though if the federal government doesn’t look intrusive in places it isn’t being resisted.

The left will scream “victim blaming!” at that suggestion, of course, but there’s something to it. It’s hard to paint ICE as an obvious aggressor if the only trouble spots are places where people are getting in their business. If they’re not really the aggressor, then someone else must be. And there’s only one other party to blame this on.

Vice President JD Vance just posted the following:

In the cities that are not sanctuary cities, the deportation process is orderly and normal--like most law enforcement. In Minneapolis and a few other sanctuary jurisdictions, local jurisdictions and a few leftwing agitators have decided to wage war on all immigration enforcement officers.

They are hoping that a little chaos will convince us to give up on immigration enforcement. They are wrong.

This represents an important development for a few reasons. It forcefully reframes the unrest as being the fault of ICE’s opponents rather than ICE itself, it highlights the fact that arrests and deportations are advancing without major disruption in communities that are playing ball with the feds (which is true), and it makes clear that (for now) the Trump administration isn’t backing down.

If Trump isn’t ready to fold, then more convincing is needed. But what might that look like? It’s a grim thought, because there’s really only one thing it can look like: more carnage. More violence. More bloodshed. Higher stakes. If that’s what happens, and if Trump gets the blame, sure, maybe he buckles. But the videos keep featuring fights with protesters, and lefty protesters are a much less sympathetic bunch than the people they claim to be protecting.

If the public grows weary of the hubbub, they might just as easily start wishing the activists would go home, rather than ICE. Vance made it a chicken vs. egg debate; are the protests violent because ICE is violent, or is it the other way around?

And here’s why Trump is unlikely to blink first:

1. There’s too much at stake.

   1. Minneapolis is ground zero because of its “sanctuary” policies - policies that limit local law enforcement’s ability to cooperate with ICE. Trump pulling out would send a message to every blue city in America that all they need to do to resist the Orange Beast is pass some sanctuary laws and they’re untouchable. Trump can’t allow that to happen.

2. It’s personal - Trump fucking hates these people.

   1. Two popular explanations for Trump’s initial decision to run for president: a) Barack Obama making fun of him, b) Gwen Stefani out-earning him. This dude is petty. With Tim Walz, Amy Klobuchar, Ilhan Omar, Jacob Frey, and a bunch of other people Trump can’t stand lining up to stare him down, he might nuke the Twin Cities just to spite them.

3. He’s already said: this is practice.

   1. Trump suggested that US cities would make good training grounds for the military, and while that’s obviously fucked up in about 900 ways, it’s also kind of smart. Trump has a different approach to foreign policy from his recent predecessors. He favors limited military engagement, with as few boots on the ground as possible. Whether it’s Minneapolis, Caracas, or Nuuk (if you don’t know where Nuuk is, you probably will soon…) learning how to wield a small force to keep peace in a hostile urban center makes for a valuable lesson, and an opportunity he won’t want to waste.

4. No election for 11 months.

   1. Retreating is bad politics, and Trump has no reason to right now. He has three years left on his term, and the midterms aren’t until November. That’s an eternity in politics. Even if ground conditions in Minneapolis become significantly worse, and public opinion turns on him, there’s no direct incentive structure for Trump to care right now. He can ride this out as long as he wants.

5. He’s still escalating.

   1. Trump just threatened to cast Insurrection Act, which is a level 50 spell.

The bottom line here is that however unpopular ICE is, the protesters still need to decide what they’d prefer instead. Trump’s goal is clear: illegal immigrants must leave. Nobody is confused about what that means. It’s direct, and it’s actionable, whatever one thinks of its wisdom or morality.

On the other side, the messages are muddy:

Kick ICE Out of Minnesota

Nobody who wants this has the power to compel it. Anyway, it won’t solve any underlying problems. They’ll just head to Wisconsin and work their evil there.

Abolish ICE

Go for it, but another agency will take its place. Remember the INS?

No More Immigration Enforcement

Only 6% of people want open borders. This is about as unpopular an idea as it is literally possible for an idea to be.

Better Behavior From ICE

Love it! But the protesters seem to think it’s too late.

End Fascism

You know that immigration enforcement isn’t just a fascist thing, right? Right?

Weaken Trump

Even if the GOP gets smoked in Nov, he’s still president until he’s 82. He’s also an autocrat who rules unchecked, so a party drubbing won’t rein him in.

Justice For Nicole Good

Nicole Good is beyond justice. She’s dead. More people joining her will not bring her back.

To lefties pushing for this struggle to continue, I want to know something: what are you, personally, willing to do as this unfolds?

Do you know what a “chickenhawk” is? A chickenhawk is somebody who cheer-leads for war with no interest in actually fighting it. My sense from a lot of you is that this is all a bit spicy and exciting, and it’s giving you an adrenaline hit that you can huff right through your phone. The problem I have there is that you seem to want it to be other people standing on the front lines.

Don’t get me wrong, you’re never going to catch me out there mixing it up with armed agents, but I feel like I’m at least being consistent. I don’t want anybody doing that. I want peace. I want order restored. I want Minnesotans to stop thinking about this shit and start getting ready for the Twins’ season. I have no idea what you want.

I’d like to, but I don’t. I know that you’re very angry, and I know that you hate ICE. That’s fine. It’s okay to hate things. I hate when people put cilantro on my tacos. I don’t fight cops over it that much, only because I’m not sure what doing that would get me.

You seem to want this strife rally to keep rolling. I don’t, but I’ll listen if you have some demands you think can be met. Do you?

Or, am I over-complicating this? Is this all just because ICE is…mean? People don’t like their style, don’t like their lame, wannabe-commando outfits, and think that sending them over one state represents a victory against cruelty? Is it just that?

I really want it to be more substantive. But usually, when I find myself wanting that, I end up disappointed.