La Reconquista! When I read Pat Buchanan’s book two years ago, I thought it was alarmist. He’s overstating his case to scare people, I thought. Not anymore.
Buchanan’s main points are easily verifiable by simply observing the culture. By 2050, America will be a Third World nation. With the influx of non-assimilating cultures, I see it happening as clear as day (although I probably won’t be around to see it). From Publisher’s Weekly:
“Historians may one day call ‘the pill’ the suicide tablet of the West,” writes former presidential candidate Buchanan in this cri de coeur regarding the perils that await Western civilization. And he is correct in his assessment that the advent of artificial contraception brought about huge changes in the ways American and European cultures dealt with sex, children and family. Buchanan, a staunch Roman Catholic and a conservative, feels that these changes were socially and politically disastrous.Worried about the declining birth rate of European-Americans and increased immigration from nonwhite countries, Buchanan predicts that people who are now celebrating diversity “will spend their golden years in a Third World America.” Along with shifting racial demographics, Buchanan also frets about the changes in morality “rampant promiscuity and wholesale divorce and tax-payer funding of abortion.” Buchanan is equally upfront about his position on homosexuality: “had the killers of Matthew Shepard chosen a sixteen-year-old girl rather than a twenty-one-year-old gay man, her rape-murder would have been to me an even greater evil.” Fearful that American is being “de-Christianized,” Buchanan argues that “while the prognosis is not good,” America must reevaluate itself and reclaim its white, Christian origins; despite the current “coarseness of her manners, the decadence of her culture, or the sickness in her soul,” the nation is worth saving. Buchanan’s passionately expressed ideology will be too extreme for most readers, and its proud bigotry is unlikely to play well even among most conservatives.
More resources:
BUCHANAN DECLARES: DEATH OF THE WEST, Matt Drudge
Death of the West?, Thomas Sowell
Death of the West?, Linda Chavez
Failure to Control Borders Causes ‘Death of the West’ , Wes Vernon
Book Review: Death of the West: Politics of Hate, Ian M. McGullam (who thought the book was “boring”)
If you’re still not convinced we need to clamp down on our borders, here’s some info that may hit closer to home. Check out a new study released by the Center for Immigration Studies, “The High Cost of Cheap Labor: Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget.” Some of the findings:
— Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.
— Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).
— With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.
— On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.
— Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.
— If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.
— Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status — what most illegal aliens would become — can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.
— Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.
From the Federation of American Immigration Reform: New Statistics:
New data from the federal Bureau of Prisons show that 29 percent of the federal prisoner population (or 47,570) are immigrants. This is a slight increase from 1995, when the figure was 25 percent.(The figure would be much higher if state prisoners were counted, but current data are not available on the nativity status of those additional inmates. Less than eight percent of the country’s prison population are in federal prisons.) [I've read that the illegal alien prison population nationwide is closer to 43 percent.]
Prisoners from Mexico, Colombia, Cuba, and the Dominican Republic together account for more than one-fifth of the total federal prisoner population.
Incarceration of criminal aliens cost federal prisons $891 million in 2002, according to the most recent available figure from the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Also see Illegal criminal aliens abound in U.S., Washington Times
The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave, Heather Mac Donald
Perhaps we should tighten up our borders just a little?
{ 56 comments }
” By 2050, America will be a Third World nation”
And our economic policies are making sure that we have a third world income distribution too.
Actually, in many third world countries the wealthy pay no income taxes (loopholes, graft, etc.).
So, I do understand the above quote.
Interesting statistics. There are some major holes in this reasoning, though. I am certain that I have read that most of the productivity gains of the 1990’s could be attributed to immigrant labor. Which is to say, the “new economy” (remember those halcyon days of high growth and productivity without rampant inflation?)was not really built on high-tech, but rather on immigrant labor.
I do not favor illegal immigration, and when the economy is fragile or relatively weak (as it is now), I think it’s reasonable, even necessary, to tighten our borders. But it’s important to note that the statistics above don’t tell the whole story. Sure, illegal immigrants probably do take more government services than they pay in taxes, but they also produce private profits at a fairly high rate as well (no minimum wage, no health care expense, no withholding tax), to the extent that, at least in recent history, there has been a net contribution to the economy. Sorry I don’t have a link…
>> America must reevaluate itself and reclaim its white, Christian origins”
Words fail me!
I know we’re not allowed to mention the “R” word round here, but really…
JohnT, I feel confused (too?) about immigration economics. Do illegals typically work under-the-table; do they and their employers avoid taxation? If so, then I’d accept your tax balance conclusion.
How do you define a good economy or a contribution to the economy? I would assume illegals generally help the pockets of landlords, storekeeps, and employers, especially households hiring domestic help; and generally hurt the pockets of legal residents who are near the bottom of the economic heap. Is that reasonable?
On the other hand, if the boom 90s were fed by immigration, why would you want to cut off that fuel now? I realize my challenges aren’t consistent. Just wondering.
The first report I cite contains helpful info about tax implications. Also, the author’s conclusion sums things up. See this link.
We also need to remember that illegal immigration is …illegal. Very important concept.
Illegal immigration is a net profit for the economy, because they do not receive social services, not subject to minimum wage they are source of labor with little protections and are often used to gain larger profits. Most illegal immigrants find jobs in which no one else will do. The reason illegal immigration exists is because legal immigration is almost non-existent. As for Buchanan the man is claiming that America should return to its “WHITE Christian origins”, his specific ideology points to his overall bigotry and racial descrimination of cultures which are not white and christian.
Illegal aliens do receive social services. They are overloading our health care system (I read about one hospital in CA that had to shut down because of illegal aliens overtaxing the system) and through their American-born children, they receive social services, a euphemism for welfare. Read some of the stats in both reports I linked to, and check out other reports and articles on both sites.
As for Buchanan’s book, I may not agree with the “white Christian” thing, but I certainly wouldn’t dismiss his research and projections based on that. Some people tend to. I, personally, would prefer the sort of immigrants, legal immigrants, who wanted to assimilate rather than remain ensconced in their own culture. They fled he** holes for a reason, but when they get here, they want to hold on to Third World ways of living?
When I realized how widespread the use of “press 1 for English” was ten years ago, I had a feeling we were in trouble. But I was a liberal and didn’t care about such things as preserving American culture.
Boy, have I changed!
I know my handle plays on the whole “angry white male” premise, but I find Buchanan’s use of the word “white” in that one sentence to be rather off-putting. Isn’t it enough to say that the nation was founded on Christian principles (not Christian religion, mind you, but principles)? After all, God made one race (the human race), from which all ethnicities descended.
That being said, I agree with him that illegal immigration is a major problem (probably the biggest underaddressed national security threat today), and that if we as Americans don’t clamp down on it now, America will be doomed to a decline of such scale and speed as to make Rome’s demise look like a leisurely stroll down a gently-sloping hill.
La Shawn, I should specify that I agree with you on opposing illegal activities. You’re probably right to not take that for granted with people these days. It’s illegal but it’s not enforced to your satisfaction. Since I would guess it’s the wage differentials that are the greatest draw, I would think policing employers would be the most effective route to discouraging illegal immigration. Apparently our legislators don’t wish to so strongly offend a significant part of their constituencies, and so nothing much gets done.
Thanks for the link and further write-up. I need to fess up that I hadn’t explored that far!
Daniel, same question I asked JohnT. How do you define a good economy or a contribution to the economy? I don’t think the question is trivial.
No Illegal aliens do not receive “Social Services” Emergency hospital care is not a Social service. Welfare, Social Security, Healthcare, yes the children of the immigrants can receive then since they are born citizens the Children may receive social services.
I don’t understand your catogorization of “third world way of living” can you give some examples?
American Culture will not be wiped out of existence by a another culture being present, it is quite the contrary the differences which are present between Latin-american and Latin (country of origin) cultures is widely different because of the assimilation of “american” culture within latin american society.
“I dont understand your catogorization of “third world way of living” can you give some examples?”
I wide disparity between rich and poor would be my guess.
Bittern,
When i stated Immigration is a Net Profit for the Economy it means that Immigrants have contributed to the growth more than they received in ares of social services, and other services provided by the government.
Essentially if you compare immigrants to non-immigrants in how much money they contribute and how much money government spends upon them, immigrants contribute much more without the same level of government assistance that non-immigrants would receive if they contributed just as much.
I dont know if that clears it up for you. perhaps ill do some more research and find easier way of explaining it later.
See Who Killed California? and Have Immigrants Become a Permanent Underclass?
No Illegal aliens do not receive “Social Services” Emergency hospital care is not a Social service. Welfare, Social Security, Healthcare, yes the children of the immigrants can receive then since they are born citizens the Children may receive social services.
No they don’t, but yes they do? Whether through legally born children or not, illegal aliens receive social services. Where is the dispute?
American Culture will not be wiped out of existence by another culture being present, it is quite the contrary the differences which are present between Latin-american and Latin (country of origin) cultures is widely different because of the assimilation of “american” culture within latin american society.
The culture may not be wiped out, but it will eroded enough to cause serious cultural clashes, as we see now with Hispanic activists demanding government services and forms in Spanish, for crying out loud, and the need for TAXPAYER-SUPPORTED interpreters, for instance.
“No they don’t, but yes they do? Whether through legally born children or not, illegal aliens receive social services. Where is the dispute?”
Illegal immigrants receieve far less than non-immigrants do, contribution to the state is far greater than non-immigrants.
See Who Killed California? California would commit suicide if it had no illegal aliens. As for Buchanans argument about Free Trade affecting and exporting manufacturing jobs to other countries, President Bush is pushing for the expansion of current Free Trade agreements, again he will help the richest companies expand into cheap unregulated labor of foreign countries. Illegal immigration should be halted, those within the country should be reviewed and legalized if they are contributing to America and program must be secured to provide a proper influx of newly legalized workers that are needed because of expansion of domestic economy.
Illegal immigration is a net profit for the economy, because they do not receive social services
Come down here to Texas, where they overcrowd our hospital waiting rooms and receive medical care for which they do not pay. Last year my wife and I sat in a local ER and could not help but overhear the conversation from the next cubicle, where an illegal was laying wrecking his car while drunk. No license. No insurance. No arrest — he and his girlfriend marched out of the place with no reprecussions — and undoubtedly paid nothing for their services. My wife and I, on the other hand, were stuck with an 800 dollar bill from the ER AFTER our insurance paid — a bill which was inflated to pay for the guy in the next cubicle and others like him.
And would you like to know the number of students in Texas public schools who are “undocumented”? And the amount spent on special programs to help them “catch up” with American students?
TPC – Thanks for that anecdote. It is personal impact stories like yours, and not all this high-falutin’ rhetoric, that tells the story. Forget the numbers, the he said-he said nonsense, and look at the impact it has on real lives. George Bush ought to be ashamed. He’s from Texas! But he’s rich and, therefore, somewhat insulated from the reality of the influx.
The Precinct Chair
“And would you like to know the number of students in Texas public schools who are “undocumented”? And the amount spent on special programs to help them “catch up” with American students?”
Yes i Would like to know. As i stated before the amount of money government provides and state provides in the form of aid, does not come within range of how much economic activity and tax revenue is generated by those undocumented immigrants to the government in the form of federal, state, and county taxes. You have to take the numbers into account because that gives us overall assesment of how much REAL impact is occurring within our lives.
Well, I wish I could be “white” so I can make sure I am a “good” American…
Remember the simple concept of supply and demand?
If there wasn’t a demand for the illegal aliens, the supply would most definitely diminish. So as many have mentioned above, simply stating the cost of illegal immigration while not concurrently stating the benefits is creating a straw man argument.
I am an advocate of stronger policing of corporations utilizing the illegal immigrants, and a one time current amnesty program. After that strict enforcement of illegal alien policies with a closing of the borders.
“As i stated before the amount of money government provides and state provides in the form of aid, does not come within range of how much economic activity and tax revenue is generated by those undocumented immigrants to the government in the form of federal, state, and county taxes. You have to take the numbers into account because that gives us overall assesment of how much REAL impact is occurring within our lives.”
Daniel, your question has already been answered I think. Economic activity and revenue are indeed related, but the impact of illegal immigrants is in the negative, not the positive.
For instance, said immigrants contribute to an employer’s business operations, however on the average, their income level is low and stagnant. Many pay little or no taxes, and in some cases qualify for the Earned Income Credit, a net payment to them. Thus, the population increases, but tax revenues remain static or even decline. This negative impact becomes more acute once children enter the picture.
If you want a picture of the impact that illegal immigration has on social services, go look at the emergency room at County USC or UCLA medical centers. The LA County healthcare system is stretched to the breaking point. Waits of 10 – 24 hours are not uncommon just to be seen. Surgery? Better be prepared to wait 3-6 months unless it’s life threatening. How do I know this? My mother went through it, and she paid for her services out of pocket.
What’s up, HiRez? Glad you stopped by.
Thanks for the comment, Robert. I’d like to add, for the naysayers, that Californians are sick of it. After liberal Cali passed Prop 187 to deny welfare to illegal aliens, some judge overturned the will of the people and scrapped voter-approved Prop 187 as “unconstitutional.” Illegals have constitutional rights, do they? As I do for every occasion, I posted about this in June or July. Fed-up Californians are fleeing, leaving the state and taking their tax base with them.
If you want to see what the US will soon look like, study Cali. And you naysayers may not like Pat Buchanan, think he’s a racist, blah, blah, check out his stuff. As long as the research is right, who cares whether he’s a bigot? Read this: Who Killed California?
By the way, commenters’ e-mail address don’t show up in WordPress (sorry) so anytime you guys want to take a discussion off-line, you have to request e-mail address.
I am sorry, I just have to disagree until I see the numbers…
This is similar to the argument on outsourcing where the negative effects are concentrated but the benefits are dispersed across the economy…
If I can pay a worker a $1 an hour, verses $10 I decreased wage cost 90% indicated that I have that much more ability to reduce the cost of my product acquire more market share, enrich stock holders, and do more advertising, purchase more land, hire more legitimate upper end workers or contracts, and enrich the organization.
It is similar to the concept of tax cuts in an effort to reinvigorate the economy.
You VISIBLY see the overt effects on social services, but what is less visible is the dispersed positive effects across economic lines.
Take this $1 employee and substitute him with a $10 per hour employee and run through the effects of that…
LaShawn, I am in my International Marketing class, snoooooooozer…my schedule is so tight now, are you familar with our Nebraska Republican Congressman Lee Terry? I am working with him through our organization to implement an economic urban development model called “Critical Mass” modeled after Detroit.
BTW, some of the guys at political palace think your hot.
” some judge (may have been legislature; I’ll double-check the source) overturned the will of the people a”
Thats what they’re supposed to do. The judiciary is the counter-majoritarian branch.
HiRez, check the numbers in the first study I cite. It might give you what you’re looking for.
Never heard of your guy. I’ll check him out.
Are any of these guys you speak of single, politically conservative and Christian?
Well…regarding the idea that they are inputing into the system by paying taxes…I have a friend here in Phoenix who used to manage a Wendy’s and yes they hired illegal immigrants. The immigrants had fake paperwork, but she knew what was going on and they needed the positions filled. She said many of the illegal immigrants would claim 14+ exemptions on the W-2 form so nothing was ever withheld. They absolutely take advantage of health care social services in the hospitals. Got a cold? Go to the ER. Years ago I recall seeing a 20/20 expose on Mexicans coming across the border to pick up social security checks here that they filed using fake ID. Not sure if that is still going on or not, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
Having said all that I think we should find a way to LEGALLY allow more immigrants into the country if they are willing to settle here. Mexico’s second largest source of income is money shipped back home to family from the US. I read that somewhere this week.
Reagrding Pat Buchanan, he lost me when he said the life of a girl was worth more than the life of a gay boy…let alone his subtle message of white supremacy. Since when is Christianity intended as an exclusive club? Thought the Message was inclusive not exclusive.
It’s too bad really because I think some of what he says is worthy of debate. For instance should the US have an official language? I would say yes. It will help assimilate new immigrants into the melting pot as it were.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not pro-illegal immigration, I just don’t like straw men arguments in any form. It is done because somewhere somehow there is an incentive for it to be done and it works.
To fix it you first
Step up border patrols to minimize influx
Second, you immediately deport all criminals and criminals non-citizen families
Third you offer amnesty to the remaining illegals
Fourth you crack down on the corporations in businesses that are known to use illegals
Robert,
it is a fact that immigrants contribution is net positive. I would like to know where you got the information that immigration contribution is net negative. The only example you offered is in form of specifically “income taxes” Employer receieves the money that is not paid to them and pays income tax upon that money as well. other forms of taxation which you have failed to take into consideration.
Daniel – Didn’t you at least glance at the first report I cited? Are you citing from another report in reference to “net positive?” If so, will you link it?
Among other things:
“Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household. ” — Center for Immigration Studies
“Immigration: The Demographic and Economic Facts
9. Public Opinion about Immigration
Published by the Cato Institute and the National Immigration Forum
When interviewed by public opinion polls, Americans have always
been against more immigration. This is the finding of R. Simon’s
review of the national U.S. surveys that included questions about
immigration, from the earliest polls in the 1930s through
1993–mainly Gallup, NORC, and Harris surveys. Though the
strength of the sentiment has varied, at all times the responses
seem to indicate that Americans have not favored increased
immigration as a general matter (see Figure 9.1). Fairly typical
was a 1977 Gallup poll which asked, “Should immigration be kept
at its present level, increased or decreased?” Seven percent said
“Increased,” 37 percent said “Present level,” and 42 percent said
“Decreased,” with 14 percent “No opinion” (R. Simon 1985, 41).
Content analysis of writings about immigrants in magazines
over the past century well before the first polls–in the 19th
century and even earlier–and continuing into the 20th century
shows that the same viewpoint has been popularly expressed in all
periods. R. Simon characterizes American public opinion
throughout the century as, “The people who came here in earlier
times were good folks, but the people who are coming now are
purely scum” (see also Douglas 1919).
A different impression emerges from a different sort of
question, however. Americans have positive feelings toward the
immigrants in their own areas and toward the immigrants they know
personally. The comparison between the results of the two
inquiries can be seen clearly in a 1978 poll about Vietnamese
immigrants. When asked, “Thinking now about the Indochinese
refugees, the so-called `boat people’; would you favor or oppose
the United States relaxing its immigration policies so that many
of these people could come to live in the United States?”, 32
percent were in favor, 57 percent were opposed, with 11 percent
no opinion. But when asked, “Would you, yourself, like to see
some of these people come to live in this community or not?”, 48
percent said “yes,” 40 percent said “no,” with 13 percent no
opinion. There is an interesting split in thought here, with the
greater voiced opposition apparently being based upon abstract
belief formed by the mass media, and the greater voiced support
coming from personal experience with immigrants (R. Simon 1985,
42).
Another indication of lack of consistency in public thinking
about immigration is the fact that people look back toward prior
waves of immigration with more positive feelings than they have
toward the present wave, whenever “present” is, as noted above,
according to R. Simon’s content analysis.
There is widespread opinion among Americans that “most
immigrants wind up on welfare” (47 percent, according to a 1986
poll; New York Times, July 14, 1986, 1).
Forty-nine percent of respondents said that “[m]ost recent
immigrants are here illegally” (New York Times/CBS News poll,
June 1986).
Eminent Economists’ Opinions
In a poll of eminent economists conducted by Stephen Moore
and me in the mid-1980s (see Simon 1989, Appendix C), with update
by Moore in 1990, we found agreement that immigration had (and
has now) a positive effect upon the economic condition of the
United States; Moore found comparable results in a 1989 poll,
too. Included in the surveys were 38 persons who had been
president of the American Economic Association, as well as those
who had been members of the President’s Council of Economic
Advisers. In answer to the question, “On balance, what effect has
twentieth-century immigration had on the nation’s economic
growth?”, 81 percent answered “Very favorable” and 19 percent
answered “Slightly favorable.” (See below.) None of these top
economists said that immigration was “slightly” or “very
unfavorable” or felt that he or she did not know enough to
answer. This extraordinary consensus belies the public picture of
the economic profession as being on both sides of all important
matters.
The top economists also are willing to extend their backward
assessment into a forward-looking policy judgment. When asked,
“What level of immigration would have the most favorable impact
on the U. S. standard of living?”, 56 percent said “more,” 33
percent said “same number,” and none said “fewer.” Only 11
percent said “don’t know.”" – http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-imopi.html
HiRez – Good stats, I wonder what more current polling would reveal on opinions about immigration…Also wonder if those opinions would have changed pre 9/11 to post 9/11.
I suspect that people not directly impacted by immigrants are more favorably disposed, but here in Arizona I think the opinion is split pretty much down the middle.
I suspect that people not directly impacted by immigrants are more favorably disposed.
That’s true, Matt. If folks are competing with illegal aliens for jobs, I think the sentiment would be different. While doing research for columns on the case that dismantled legal segregation, Brown v. Board of Education, I found a study that said while some whites believed in the concept of integration and that blacks and whites should live in “diverse” neighborhoods, the same people’s behavior didn’t match up to their words. Most lived in majority-white areas. It also showed that when whites become a minority or their numbers are otherwise significantly decreased in a given neighborhood, they moved.
When these things directly effect us, all kind of considerations come up: the safety of your family, quality of life, the ability to provide for your family, etc. I never fail to fall out laughing when I find out where “diversity”-spouting white liberals live: as far away from blacks as they can get!
As for illegal aliens costing taxpayer’s money, this is my experience.
I’ve lived in California my whole life. 15 years ago, I worked at a lumber company. A handful of illegal aliens stood around trying to pick up work. About 6 months after they started ‘hanging out’ the INS stepped in & collected everyone up. This only happened once to my knowledge. Fast forward to present day. There is now easily 35+ out there everyday. The city had to place a portable toliet at the corner because I can only imagine the mess that was being created from so many people on a daily basis standing around all day long. Who do you think pays for that? And that’s just one case.
Spouting “diversity” is better than spouting “segregation”
All I have been reading is the financial costs/benefits of massive immigration. What is needed is insight on the cultural and societal impact, which is the main premise of Mr. Buchanan’s work.
We are now admitting very large numbers of people, with only a passing interest in assimilation, if at all. We are also putting one of the bedrocks of our culture, namely the English language, in a position wherein it is losing its primacy in many quarters, and this is spreading.
And no, Daniel, it isn’t. If the lefties were spouting “segregation, they would at least be honest as they go back to their whitey, yuppie gated communities in the evening.
Understand this, the conservative model is based on the foundation of business as cornerstone, that being said, can you understand why they are hestitant to enact sweeping enforcement of immigration policies?
The fact that immigrants do reduce line item cost on income statements which increase the bottom line, is the crux of this.
Do you think if there wasn’t the potential of a serious economic repercussion that the U.S. wouldn’t have executed an aggressive strategy by now?
The fact is that numerous companies benefit from this “immigration” and that there are not to many politicians who are willing to risk there neck telling these businesses they are going to increase wage cost by over 50%.
On another note to the gentleman above…
Why is the assumption that “assimilation” and melting pot are synonymous? The concept of the melting pot implies that individuals merge and the nature of the pot changes as those who “melt” into it create a different constitution of sauce
. Assimilation implies that one or the group merges into the “majority”. See the difference?
Just the fact that Buchannan would imply that the “white Christian” model is what should be the standard of American behavior shows he believes in “assimilation” as opposed to “melting pot” furthermore, white christian is not homogenous in and of itself. Many white Christians are categorically opposed to what Buchannan stands for.
http://www.dellgines.blogspot.com
hahah Mark so you support the Right which will “honestly” hate other cultures???
Daniel – People self-segregate all the time. Take an informal survey among people you know. Ask what kind of people they socialize with, what sort of neighborhoods they live in.
I’ll cut and paste part of a previous post I wrote:
While doing research for columns on the case that dismantled legal segregation, Brown v. Board of Education, I found a study that said while some whites believed in the concept of integration and that blacks and whites should live in “diverse” neighborhoods, the same people’s behavior didn’t match up to their words. Most lived in majority-white areas. It also showed that when whites become a minority or their numbers are otherwise significantly decreased in a given neighborhood, they moved.
When these things directly effect us, all kind of considerations come up: the safety of your family, quality of life, the ability to provide for your family, etc. I never fail to fall out laughing when I find out where “diversity”-spouting white liberals live: as far away from blacks as they can get!
At least be honest. There are certain people I’d prefer not to be around. It’s human nature. Now when the government segregates citizens based on race, that’s a different story…
Self Segregation is based upon antiquated notions of race and the inability of this nation to cease polarizing based upon melanin and is in reality attached to a whole system that perpetuates certain negative ethnic mythologies.
That is why you have “white flight” as opposed to true urban infastructure redevelopment.
There is “black flight”, too.
I know, I fly from yuppie whites…
HiRez: interesting comparison on the assimilation vs a continually changing melting pot. I hadn’t considered the differences, but clearly they are there. The societal question then becomes how much melting should and is occuring in the melting pot. (English vs Spanish being taught in schools) Also, is adding too much of one ingredient going to change the intended meal(What makes Americans…Americans?)….I think this analogy is making me hungry…
Any thoughts on Bush’s Guest Visa for migrant workers? I think I like it. There are negatives to it, but I think the positives outweigh them.
What about illegal immigrants being allowed to vote? I don’t like that idea personally. I think you should have to be a US citizen.
Whoa! Never should someone who is not a citizen deserve the right to vote.
I am damn near to the point of not allowing them medical attention, or access to welfare if they are illegal with the exception of their children.
I think as harsh as the penal system is on the black men in America in terms of disparate sentences on similar crimes, they should at least be as harsh on people who don’t even legally belong in this nation.
I am not opposed to certain kinds of guest visa’s to get the situation under control though.
Those who claim that “Immigrants Built America” are missing the point. This is about as relevant as “Kerry served in Vietnam” – this is old news, and not relevant to the present.
The massive immigration that is occurring now is not the productive immigration of the past – new immigrants cost us money (as economists have demonstrated) – with low eduction levels, large families, they consume government services beyond the taxes they pay. This is just a fact of life.
This is a small problem compared to lack of assimilation – and I believe this is the point Buchanan is making.
La Shawn is smart enough to appreciate some of Buchanan’s wisdom, often hidden beneath his rants against free trade and his “digs” at “neocons” and Jews.
Assuming that many of you are “conservative evangelicals”, have you thought about welcoming “them” with the Good News of Jesus Christ? Democrats want their votes and Republicans want their cheap labor so who’s fooling who here. Pres. Bush has failed to secure our borders since 9-11 because his Republican business folk don’t want him to. I think he should be impeached on that basis alone.
Wow! You guys are starting to freak me out, sounding alot like the mucky-mucks of the late 1800s/early 1900s when my Irish grandfather’s family was immigrating. The “great unwashed” they were called, as they came here with their “low eduction levels, large families, they consume government services beyond the taxes they pay” (I don’t know how to do italics, but from the post above).
I’m not saying we don’t have a problem, but the majority of the immigrants are Christians already, and as a Catholic, I know the Catholic church (along with countless Protestant churches) is doing their part already with Latin Americans and Haitians and Eastern Europeans on “welcoming “them” with the Good News of Jesus Christ.” A dear friend and priest we know who works with migrant workers told us stories about holding mass in a double-wide trailer and having to educate the migrants that they are not allowed to just get up during mass (or after, for that matter) and urinate against the walls. He told us stories of walking through the camps at night and being able to literally feel the evil amongst the people, with their impoverished and violent lives, and just how much work on assimilation they really need. The stories of poverty of both pocketbook and spirit are truly mind-boggling. The people are fearful of the government, but they flock to this priest for help; the children confuse him with Jesus. As always, IMHO, the churches do the dirty work amongst the “unwashed.” We, the people, fund much of it, but our holy people of all Christian faiths are in thick of things.
To flip the argument around, it amazes me that our system has been able to continue to support the huge numbers of illegal and legal immigrants. It seems, however, that this is not a new problem, we just happen to be the ones on the “inside” this time instead of on the boats coming to shore. I respect GW for trying to work on this problem; God knows few Presidents have touched such a live wire or opened it for debate. Probably this is because he is from Texas, which bears such a huge burden. However, being from Florida, I can tell you we have huge influxes of legal immigrants (Haitians, Cubans, South Americans, Eastern Europeans – one year my cousin, a teacher, had a big group of Polish immigrant children in her class in South Florida and was at a total loss to handle it), and this can be as much a cross to bear as the illegals.
This isn’t the sort of problem we can just wish away, and it’s also not something we can legislate away – we simply do not have the funds to close the borders and evict everyone not allowed here. We can’t halt the bureaucratic train that has so many illegals getting their matriculation cards and drivers’ licenses, which has given an open door to every Arab terrorist who changes their name to Lopez in Mexico. It’s happening, it has happened, and it will take time and money to change it.
The difference, as I see it, is that the stakes are so very much higher now after 9-11. THAT, in my opinion, is the issue, not the social programs the immigrants receive or the drain on our economy (I still think the numbers are debatable, so much is off the books). I’m all for stepping up security and pushing money into that angle. I just pray every night that GW and those entrusted with our country’s well-being know what in the heck they’re doing.
Great post by Jeannie. Christians are doing a great job in welcoming them. But Pres. Bush has failed in his #1 priority of protecting the country. The borders have to be closed because of the terrorist threat. What good are all the checks at the airports if the Mexican border is still pretty much wide open? And I still think that the primary reason that its not is that Republican and Democratic businessmen don’t want to lose their source of cheap labor. If a future attack shows links to terrorists who came across the border, whoever is president should be impeached as well as offending members of congress.
Frank Zavisca,
“The massive immigration that is occurring now is not the productive immigration of the past – new immigrants cost us money (as economists have demonstrated) – with low eduction levels, large families, they consume government services beyond the taxes they pay. This is just a fact of life.”
Companies which require manual labor certaintly dont think that way, new immigrants have low education levels, they have large families, but they do not consume more governmental services beyond the amount of taxes plus the amount of profit those employing them obtain.
Daniel,
If they don’t pay the taxes, the certainly exceed what the taxes put into the system.
Personally, I am all for immigration. I don’t believe in the term illegal immigrant (you are either here legally to become a citizen, thus an immigrant, or you are an illegal alien).
What we need to do is abolish the exiting tax structure and rediculous minimum wage standards that set the stage for illegal alien labor being so attractive.
I am not at all dumbfounded in regards to why some of our brothers and sisters put so much emphasis on politics or politrics, when economics is the core issue for humanity, including black humanity. None of the two major parties are addressing the true cause of many of this nation’s ill, which is its economic construct…and NO, which does not by default mean that I am advocating Marxism, socialism or whatever. However I do understand the philosophy that if you are not with us, then you must be against us, fallacy of that attempts to remove accreditation.
The reality is that everything in life has a tradeoff, including economic systems and constructs. Our system is fueled by the concept of profit, which the creation of often has an offsetting effect, most of which is kept hidden or conserved to the future. There was a time when this nation did not or could not hide the effect of its profit maximization methodology. In other words, the effect was real time, such as what manifested during slavery and “seesaw” economics in which one group profited from the oppressing of other groups. Now globalization has made the oppressed hidden and the moral implication of our profit seeking is steadily eroding the morality of the nation, which will have a tremendous negative toll on the future.
Noah,
Nice polemic. Anything to back it up with? Examples, anecdotes or… facts?
And how is profit, in itself, bad?
And I think you mean consigned to the future. If you conserved to the future (though should be for) that means you preserved something, or used it sparingly.
-Zola the American
Noah,
To say that economics is the core issue for humanity, that is Marxism — in fact, it is the central premise of Marxism.
Still, your assertions are not without merit. But the crass pursuit of profit (that is, at the expense of all else, no matter who one has to hurt or exploit) is foremost a spiritual problem, along with so many of the ills of our society that we often think are impenetrable.
Noah — You have precluded any possibility that independent agents (the pot luck attendees) could, through the efforts of their labor, and motivated by profit; could create a bigger dinner, and one with more selection and higher quality.
The only alternatives to this would be a state-sponsored economy (national socialism or communism — two sides of the same coin). This is, sadly, what our society seems to be slipping to. It also has the counter effect of fomenting the same exploitation and elitism that you detest.
The other would be a return to the agrarian system, wherein each family, or extended family, grew or made all (or almost all) that they needed. In the words of Andrew Nelson Lytle, “A family farm is not a place to grow wealthy, it is a place to grow corn.”
No, all AOL users are given shifting IP addresses. You never actually get their client IP address. You did, however, manage to block the constant IP address of my T1 connection at work. I guess you deed need to give your patrons an explanation as to why you have chosen to ban me…the old vilify and discredit strategy. Sorry, I have a beautiful black Nubian sister for a wife…that’s all the Porn that I need…I make my own…the way God intended…and it is not for sale, resale or public viewing…thank you.
I think that the actions of this site serves notice and says more about the character of the sites owner and administrators than I ever could in an essay. Fine, I have no pressing need to help fuel the success of a hypocritical web log via my participation to it.
The one way to stop the death of the west is to get our country out of the UN and the UN out of america we must also get our schools back from the NEA and the unions and we must drive jessie jackson and his rainbow goons out of our schools or just go back to home education and eleminate the dept of education
Comments on this entry are closed.