I can't read it cause paywall (or login wall or whatever it is), but considering it's NYT and considering the title, I'm gonna assume it has about the same tone as "is it ok to earn rent from a nazi death camp?"
You'd think so but no. They basically say "it's okay but if you feel guilty maybe use some of it to donate to Dem campaigns"
🤢
I mangled my original wording I think. Or my brain is just fried right now, idk. What I was trying to get at is that they're probably handwaving it away as not that big of a deal, cause NYT tends to be shitty on matters like nazis and such things.
Is It OK to Earn Rental Income From an ICE Holding Facility? Kwame Anthony Appiah
My husband’s family has a trust that owns rental properties. One of them is a commercial property with several tenants. One of the tenants is Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and they use it as a “short-term holding facility” (their description).
We receive income from the trust, which earns money from several other things as well; it’s all bundled together. Figuring out what portion of my rental income comes from the ICE client is not possible, as the family member who manages it declines to go to the trouble, which I understand is considerable.
I feel pretty horrible about getting money from an immigration prison, but I’m the only beneficiary of the trust who cares. I could resign from the trust, but my husband of 50 years would get my share — and anyway, our funds are completely mingled.
I’m not sure you can make me feel any better about this, but I’m curious about the ethics of receiving money from an entity you consider kind of evil. I went to a lot of Catholic schools, including a Jesuit university. I don’t know all the finer points, but it feels unethical. My husband and his family think this is ridiculous. What is your opinion? Is there a correct action? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
It’s understandable that you’re troubled. Court rulings, investigative reporting and firsthand accounts have shown that ICE has acted in ways that not only harm noncitizens but also erode the rights of citizens.
Even so, the existence of an immigration-enforcement agency isn’t inherently the problem. Most people accept that states have a right to control their borders and that there’s a legitimate role for authorities charged with enforcing immigration policy, especially when it comes to those who have committed serious crimes. ICE also investigates trafficking, smuggling and other transnational offenses that clearly require federal oversight.
The core issue is less the agency’s mandate than its methods. Well-documented abuses — denials of due process, inhumane conditions and politically motivated enforcement — have undermined public trust and raised serious ethical concerns. The worry is not whether immigration law should be enforced but how, and at what human cost.
The holding facilities ICE uses are part of this system: They house people awaiting deportation, court appearances or further investigation. What’s in dispute isn’t the need for such spaces; it’s the treatment of detainees within those spaces. Many facilities have drawn criticism for degrading or dangerous conditions. Still, as a beneficiary of a trust that rents a property to ICE, your leverage is minuscule. You can’t unilaterally break the lease. Even if you could, ICE would simply relocate its facility. And while moral complicity is a serious concern, receiving income from a legal tenant, however problematic, isn’t generally considered an ethical transgression on its own.
We’re all entangled in systems we don’t control. As citizens, we’re already implicated in the actions of government agencies that act in our name and that we help fund. If those actions are shameful, they cast a shadow on all of us. But that shared entanglement also opens the door to shared responsibility — and response.
You mentioned your Jesuit university. You’ll probably remember, then, the emphasis placed on “discernment” — not just abstract moral reasoning but the habit of examining one’s own position in the world, with clarity and courage, and then acting on that understanding. So here’s one constructive path: If this money feels tainted, redirect it. Use it to support organizations that advocate for the rights you believe ICE has violated — groups like the A.C.L.U., the American Immigration Council or local legal-aid nonprofits that provide support for detainees. Back candidates pushing for humane immigration reform. It’s a way to turn your sense of passive complicity into a measure of active redress. You may not be able to change the trust’s lease, but you can choose what your share of the proceeds stands for.
Catholic indulgences with extra steps
Thanks for copy/pasting it! I see it's about what I would have expected from NYT. To their argument, I say: "No ethical consumption under capitalism" kind of narrative doing apologetics for being tied up in complex systems you can't control does not apply to landlords. At that point, you are part of the exploiting class, however indirect it may be if it's a trust.
Figuring out what portion of my rental income comes from the ICE client is not possible, as the family member who manages it declines to go to the trouble, which I understand is considerable.
The obvious response of "talk to your family member and figure out what the actual facts are" somehow never comes up.
Someone else highlighted that various types of funds (including pension funds) are often invested in similarly dicey business. This is a great place to educate and agitate, because a lot of people would be similarly troubled by this investment, but you actually have to talk to someone and probably do some digging.
You can’t unilaterally break the lease.Even if you could, ICE would simply relocate its facility.
You can usually break a lease if the tenant is doing something illegal on the property. Force them to fight an eviction. Force them to go to the trouble of moving.
Ok NYT, Now do "Is it OK to go to a rave beside a concentration camp?"
oh it's ok if it prevents you from having to get a job and keeps you in brunches
My husband’s family has a trust that owns rental properties. One of them is a commercial property with several tenants. One of the tenants is Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and they use it as a “short-term holding facility” (their description).
I’m sure my index funds hold shares in even worse horrors, as does almost every employer pension.
Yes, but there are a number of intermediaries between you and the bad things being done when you just own an index fund.
This is much much more direct linkage to the bad shit. They are getting much more money directly from the renting. That's way worse
Archive link?
I gotchu comrade!
Sorry, I'm running BPC and it's just showing me the full thing
There is no ethical concern here either for the landlord or the writer - if one has to ask the question it is because one already knows they are evil and would like to rationalise continuing the cashflow; the questioner and the author have already deified capital above human life - the only reason I guess to advertise your parasitism is to normalise who you would like to consider subhuman.
A One-Stop-Shop for Evidence of our Social, Moral and Ideological Rot.
(It is also the official version of r/LateStageCapitalism/ on the Fediverse)
News, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge the narratives which act as legitimations for the status quo of modern class society. Posts need not be about capitalism specifically, whether late-stage or otherwise; we simply aim to cater to a socialist audience.
We do allow links to threads and comments on Lemmy/Reddit, as long as they are relevant to the content guidelines and follow the rules. Use NP links, or your post will be deleted.
This community has its roots in broad-based anti-capitalist thought, with an emphasis on Marxist concepts and analysis and a commitment to antiracism and inclusive feminism.
When it comes to proposed alternatives to Capitalism, it is the general consensus of this community that class-divisions and alienated labour must be abolished; production must be collectively organized by the laborers themselves for the direct benefit of all. We call this socialism.
Find out more here: The Principles of Communism
1. Lemmygrad-wide rules apply. Behavior such as brigading and harassment won't be permitted. Neither will posts that can be interpreted as explicit threats of/calls for violence.
2. Any post that makes a claim should have a RELIABLE source or explanation in the comments by OP. All claims, news articles, tweets and so forth that are an example of LSC should be substantiated with a reliable, factual and verifiable source. Any posts that egregiously break this rule will have their poster temporarily banned. If the Automoderator deletes the comment with sources that's fine, the moderators can still see and restore it.
3. No trolling. "I was just trolling" won't be accepted as a defense for breaking rules, and we will ban for intentionally disruptive behavior or attacks on our community, users, or philosophy.
4. No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism. This community is intended for a socialist audience, and while good faith questions are allowed, pushing your own counter-narrative here is not. We do not allow support here for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it. We are not a liberal or (U.S.-/Social-) Democrat community; we are a socialist community.
5. No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or zionism. This includes not just ideologies to the right of liberalism but also right-wing fixations such as national/ethnic/cultural chauvinism and military/police worship regardless of the underlying ideology. We take no side in the Russia/Ukraine conflict.
6. No "lesser evil" rhetoric. Lesser-evil rhetoric in relation to elections or current policies is prohibited. Dismissing voting third party because they are “useless” or because you are “throwing your vote away” also violates this rule. It also encompasses saying Trump is “worse” for Gaza, as that place is already completely destroyed. Trump is merely carrying out what the American ruling class started under Biden. Resorts being built and mass relocation were already happening under Biden and Kamala would’ve continued it.
7. No bigotry. No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or classism. The respect for readers who are subject to these forms of bigotry takes priority in this community over your right to speak freely.
8. Be nice to each other. Be respectful towards other socialists you disagree with, but also non-socialists who follow the rules and participate in good faith. Feel free to dunk on trolls, bigots and bootlickers to your heart’s content.
9. Bans are at moderator discretion. We reserve the right to eject users (as well as remove, lock, or otherwise moderate any content on the community) for reasons not listed if we consider it necessary to do so.
10. Don’t bother sending us personal promotion requests. We are not an advertising platform for your blog or YouTube channel.
11. Do not post content from Dan Price, any other CEO/business owner or ANY liberal politician/official.
This is regarding positive posts or posts agreeing with their statement. Negative posts are permitted but better suited to communities like /c/ShitReactionariesSay
Please note that Robert Reich or Bernie Sanders as liberals also fall under this rule.
12. Do not post NSFL content and flair NSFW posts accordingly. NSFL posts will be removed. Flair NSFW posts with the appropriate content warning flair, otherwise you will be banned temporarily.
13. This is not a debate community. Constructive questions and discussion are welcome, but our basic philosophy is non-negotiable and we aren’t interested in repeatedly having to explain or justify it. We also won’t debate about so-called “socialist” countries. There are plenty of political debate communities, so take your 'gotchas' there.
14. No AI generated content. The community does not allow for AI generated content, even if it’s pro-socialist/communist.