Do you think there's a difference between the Dems having migrants detained for on average a month (farrrrr less than the limit for pretrial detention for even citizens), just to process paperwork and decide whether they can come in or not, and the Republicans who intentionally used it to punish and seperate families, and plans to use the military to round up millions of immigrants?
Absolutely incredible the lengths you're willing to go to to throw minorities under the bus and downplay what's happening the very moment it becomes inconvenient to you. What you described is absolutely not what's happening. The system doesn't fundamentally change overnight the moment a democrat gets in office, immigrants are still being detained en masse, indefinitely, in terrible conditions, with no due process or right to council. If it's just about "processing paperwork" then why did Biden shut down asylum and try to pass a bill giving the president the power to unilaterally shut down the border?
Again, this isn't about the Republicans. You're doing whataboutism again. You chose to make that irrelevant when you made the claim, not that democrats were merely "less xenophobic than Republicans" but "not xenophobic at all." I don't want to hear another word from you trying to change the subject to something irrelevant like that to weasel your way out of this.
I think arguing that the Dems are fighting against the literal fascist party is a sign of them fighting not taking part in xenophobia. But sure, if you'd only like to talk about the Dems policy and ignore the fascists I can do that too.
The policy of the Biden administration has been entirely built around taking in more people through legal avenues, while trying to decrease the amount of illegal migration, while also trying to aid the countries battered by poverty and decades of U.S. military intervention that are the sources of the migration in the first place.
You can say "Biden tried to close the border" or "People held indefinitely" but both of them are untrue, border crossing would only become closed to those who tried to come across illegally, the legal avenues wouldn't close, and the Biden administration has brought the amount of time the average asylum seeker is detained massively from several months under Trump, to an average of 10 - 30 days under Biden.
That's the Democratic policy, and I strain to see how any of it comes from xenophobic intentions, but if you would like to say that they're the same, or even that the democrats are "an evil" on the issue and don't want to fix it, then go ahead.
I think arguing that the Dems are fighting against the literal fascist party is a sign of them fighting not taking part in xenophobia.
It's absolutely not. The Democrats were always going to fight the Republicans regardless of policy, because they want to be the ones in charge.
If I'm like a warlord conquering shit for my own gain, and one of the places I conquer happens to be full of assholes, that does not prove that I have some kind of ideological commitment against being an asshole. In the same way, the Democrats' road to power happens to involve winning elections against Republicans, but they don't get credit for pursuing their own self-interest.
As for the points you mentioned, it's true that they have relaxed immigration policy in some areas, but my criticism still stands - Biden wants to give the president power to unilaterally shut down the border, people are held indefinitely in camps, and he also put limits on the number of asylum seekers. Your assertions to the contrary are simply false. Since your claim was that they don't engage in, or even fail to fight xenophobia "in any way" it's not enough to just show a couple points in that direction, it has to be a consistent policy.
"Okay but it's still indefinite and he wants to close the border"
As I addressed, both of those are false, but if you would like to ignore the truth and retreat to your comfortable talking points where you can pretend the Dems only want to do good things to fight the Reps then go ahead.
"Only applies to" so you admit that it is, in fact, happening. So when you say, "Points out what you were saying isn't true," and "both of those are false," you're just brazenly lying and contradicting yourself.
You're not going to convince me that trusting border cops to indefinitely detain whoever they feel like, so long as they accuse them of being a terrorist first, is in any way a good idea or not xenophobic. I don't give a shit about the distinction between "legal" and "illegal" ports of entry either.
You can't say you don't care about specifics when the specifics specifically refute what you're saying.
You can ignore the difference between legal ports of entry and the rest of the border, but the entirety of border law is built upon this difference, so ignoring this difference immediately makes you irrelevant among all professional discussion of the border. There's also a massive difference between closing the border and closing the border in areas where it can't be regulated, which is what the Biden administration did, the border is not closed.
"Border Cops" aren't the ones doing the investigations into Cartel and terrorist group members, that would be DHS. There's a massive difference between DHS getting the name and identity of a terrorist, putting them on a list, their name coming up to Border Control at the border, and then Border Control holding them until DHS can investigate, and "every immigrant is detained indefinitely with no lawyer in terrible conditions" which was your original claim.