To the editor:
I am writing to urge your publication to reconsider the terms used to describe Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities.
The phrase “concentration camp” carries a specific historical meaning: the mass detention of civilians without trial, based on group identity rather than individual wrongdoing. This definition—cited by historians like Andrea Pitzer and institutions such as the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum—applies to systems of detention that are administrative, identity-based, and indefinite. By that standard, ICE’s current practices meet the criteria.
Consider the facts:
- People are held indefinitely without criminal charges.
- Facilities are run by for-profit corporations (e.g., GEO Group, CoreCivic) paid per detainee.
- Detainees are often paid less than $1 a day for labor.
- There is documented medical neglect, family separation, and deaths in custody.
Terms like “detention center” are not neutral—they are bureaucratic euphemisms that soften harsh realities. Journalists routinely reject government-preferred language when accuracy demands it. This is such a moment.
I am not equating today’s policies with the Holocaust. I am asking for the use of historically accurate language to describe what is happening now. Precision is not sensationalism—it is clarity. And clarity is the foundation of informed public discourse.
Joshua Freeman
Huntington
Click here to read The Berkshire Edge’s policy for submitting Letters to the Editor.
