Thursday, July 30, 2020

BIDEN'S WAR ON AMERICA - IT'S ONLY JUST BEGUN

WORRIED ABOUT AMERICA? BIDEN'S AMNESTY FOR 40 MILLION MEX FLAG WAVERS WOULD ENABLE THEM TO LEGALLY BRING UP THE REST OF MEXICO. NOW DO THE MATH ON JOBS NUMBERS, HOUSING AND HOMELESS CRISIS!


Biden's Civil War


A victorious President Biden will move from his Delaware basement to the cellar of the White House, where he will remain only to be seen by the public in prerecorded, televised “Messages to the People.”
The riots will stop. After which, the suspiciously trained, organized, and supplied “grassroots Antifa rioters” will be “unofficially” incorporated into the Biden administration as “Local Policy Councils” financed by leftist dark money and tasked to root out disobedience and dissent. Thereby, Jerry Nadler’s Antifa “myth” will be in a position to enforce the much needed “hope and change” Biden has said he wishes to bring back.
Despite a distinct lack of promise in his future, Joseph Biden is a man who makes many promises. There was, however, one promise he made in the Democratic debates that is suspiciously absent from his recent professions of intent.
Biden (or whoever is pulling his strings) will have full control of the legislative branch of government -- either by the Democrats keeping the House, and winning the Senate in 2020, or through persuasion by Local Policy Councils of certain Republican senators, congressmen, and their families -- which of course, corporate media will ignore.  The filibuster will be eliminated to grease the path of progressive legislation.
He will spend the first two years consolidating control of Congress. The census redistricting, as modified by the Local Policy Councils and intimidated state legislatures, will ensure Democrat control of both houses of Congress by a landslide in the 2022 midterms. Perhaps, even securing the two-thirds of both Houses necessary for the elimination of the electoral college.
Still, the only way to assure implementation of the left’s promise to “fundamentally transform The United States of America,” is to disarm Americans.
Starting slowly, Biden will precipitously increase taxes on guns and ammunition while restricting the amount of ammunition that can be legally purchased in a month. There will be mandatory gun registration under penalty of law. Failure to register will subject gun owners to felony prosecution, fines starting in the tens of thousands of dollars, and civil forfeiture of property such as real estate and cars.  
Then, after the midterm elections, with the left in full control of the legislative and executive branches of government, laws will be passed outlawing all guns in private hands (an exception will be made for Local Policy Council members).
Gun confiscation will begin.
Any records the federal, state, and local governments possess pertaining to gun ownership will be made public with the release of the names and addresses of all gun owners nationwide. Employers will be encouraged to terminate any employees who are gun owners. Mortgage companies, banks, and credit card companies will be encouraged to decline financing to gun owners, “Local Policy Councils,” nee Antifa, will be encouraged to “peacefully protest” at the places of employment and homes of gun owners.
The Local Policy Councils, employers, banks, and financial firms will be indemnified against lawsuits pertaining to these actions. In addition, the Local Policy Council members as a quasi-militia will be protected by qualified immunity.
The same tactics used to such devastating effect in the rioting we have witnessed these last few months will now be used against doxed gun owners. Nightly visits by screaming, armed, and violent “mostly peaceful” council members will become prevalent. Arson, damage to private property, violent assaults, homicide, and even rape will become a “tool of the people” deployed to ensure recalcitrant gun owners “voluntarily” surrender their weapons. Again, corporate media will ignore these incidents.
Having deployed the National Guard and active-service troops from the Army throughout the 50 states, joint teams of disarmed and unfunded police, troops, Guard units, and Local Policy Council members will search homes for any unregistered guns.
Soros prosecutors and the success of the “decarceration movement” will allow socially distant incarceration of those who refuse the sensible new gun reform.
Well… that's the plan, anyway.
Apocryphally, Otto von Bismarck is said to have remarked, “God looks out for fools, drunkards, and the United States.”
The fools on the left are not going to know what hit them.
The left’s power is concentrated on the coasts and in large cities. The vast majority of this country, what is derisively called “flyover country” by those on the left, is relatively conservative and armed to the teeth. In most of America, people believe they can never be too thin, too rich, or too well-armed. It is estimated there are anywhere from 350 million to 700 million guns in private hands, and anecdotally, the higher number is probably still too low.
Remember COVID, the Chinese flu the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) deliberately infected the world with? Like all Chinese products it did not work as advertised but we locked down the economy anyway.
Well, one of the big reasons people did not starve is because truckers kept trucking. Most drivers keep a gun in their cab. When authorities confiscate that gun, deliveries to the cities will cease. It would be a matter of weeks before New York and LA started to run out of food.
How many homeowners do you think would need to be assaulted before a visit from the Local Policy Council would be met with gunfire? Council members are not trained for what they will provoke and can expect to be decimated in confrontations.
How long before people start to organize and directly attack authorities and lines of communication, in and around the cities? Keep in mind every hunter is something of a sniper. How long before some of them decide to lie in wait to pick off public officials responsible for these policies? America is also chock full of trained veterans. It does not take a brain surgeon to realize what side they will be on. Pipelines, power plants, interstate highways, railroads, and bridges will all be targets of attack.
Governors, mayors, and LEOs will start to defect, as will National Guard and any other troops who will resent being asked to kill their neighbors and relatives.
There are not enough soldiers, National Guard, and potential Local Policy Council members to protect everything or seize all weapons.
The fact is, Americans will never allow the government to take their guns, period!
The author can be found on Twitter @williamlgensert


Joe Biden: Illegal Migrants ‘Enrich’ America
Dreamers and advocates attend a rally in support of a Clean Dream Act in Los Angeles, California on March 5, 2018, the deadline for DACA recipients from the Trump administration that went into motion six months ago. / AFP PHOTO / Frederic J. BROWN (Photo credit should read FREDERIC J. …
FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images
4:33

The nation’s huge population of illegal migrants is “enriching our country,” Democratic candidate Joe Biden said in a July 28 statement.
“As President, I will protect Dreamers and their families and offer a roadmap to citizenship for Dreamers and all 11 million undocumented immigrants enriching our country,” Biden said, using the “dreamer’ term to describe roughly 800,000 young illegals who were brought into the United States by their illegal immigrant parents.
The population of illegal immigrants is likely larger than 11 million, and they do enrich investors and employers as they expand the economy by buying consumer goods, lowering wages and salaries, and driving up housing costs.
However, the new arrivals also impoverish wage-earning Americans by cutting wages, by raising home prices, and by allowing employers to hire replacements for the Americans whom they do not want to hire.
The fact that the labor supply effects wages is Economics 101.
Amid evasive denials by immigration advocates, the fact has been acknowledged by independent academics, the National Academies of Science, the Congressional Budget OfficeexecutivesThe Economist globalist weekly, more academics, the New York Times, the New York Times again, state officialsunionsmore business executiveslobbyists, employees,  the Wall Street Journalfederal economistsGoldman Sachsoil drillers, the Business Roundtable, the Bank of Ireland, Wall Street analystsfired professionalslegislators, the CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce2015 Bernie Sanders, the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, the Washington Postconstruction workers, New York Times subscribersRobert Rubin, a New York Times columnist, author Barack Obama, and President Barack Obama.
Housing prices rise whenever legal immigrants and illegal migrants compete for housing, so pushing young American families out of the house they need to raise their children.
“Notably, economist Albert Saiz (2007) found a 1% increase in population from immigration causes housing rents and house prices in U.S. cities to rise commensurately, by 1%,” an investor group reported in 2019. “Coastal California is affordable for roughly 15 percent of residents, down from 30 percent in 2000,” said Joel Kotkin, a California expert.
As more migrants enter the labor markets, employers can also pick young, healthy, and grateful migrant workers, while sidelining Americans they do not want to hire.
The unwanted Americans include Americans with criminal records, disabilities, or drug addictions, Americans who are raising children or taking care of elderly or sick relates, as well as Americans who live in rural locations, in crime-ridden neighborhoods, or in locations far from where investors prefer to create jobs.
The favorable trend was put in reverse by the combination of economic growth and immigration curbs up to early 2020. Before the coronavirus crash, employers were increasingly pressured to hire former convicts, recovering addicts, disabled women, and other sidelined Americans. “The tight labor market is pushing up wages for some workers and has provided opportunities to teenagers, students, ex-convicts, long-term unemployed, the disabled and others for whom the barriers to employment once looked daunting,” the Washington Post’s editorial board wrote February, 202o. “Those are good things.”
Many polls show that Americans want to welcome migrants — but that they also strongly oppose immigration that prevents Americans from getting well-paid jobs.
Democrats have funded marketing surveys to help portray illegal arrivals as “dreamers,” skilled workers, neighbors, and Americans, even though the vast majority are foreigners who compete against blue-collar Americans for blue-collar jobs and residential housing.
“Trump’s actions would upend the lives of hundreds of thousands of our neighbors, teachers, nurses, doctors, engineers, and lawyers, among others. It’s wrong, and it’s un-American. The America I know fights for our own and that’s exactly who DACA recipients are — our own,” Biden claimed July 28.







Foreign influence in our elections is bad, unless done by illegal aliens


It is becoming increasingly difficult to refute the idea that as civilization advances, our collective memories are shrinking. It’s as if we can’t remember things that just happened a few short years ago. Whether the cause is advancing technology, the breakneck pace of our world or growing self-absorption, we are losing our ability to connect our past to our present. This can only bring bad consequences.
A recent example is the threat of foreign influence in our elections. Remember that? Barely a year ago the headlines were buzzing with the specter of Russian intelligence agents meddling in our 2020 presidential election, same as supposedly happened in 2016. Back then, the media breathlessly proclaimed the purported hack of our election to be as sinister as the attack on Pearl Harbor. Wherever you sit on the ideological spectrum, the message was clear: foreign influence bad; electoral integrity good.
To return to the present, we apparently have forgotten about that whole foreign-influence-bad thing. When President Trump recently signed an executive order to not count illegal aliens for the purpose of determining how many representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives are apportioned to each state, the very same people who railed about Russian influence howled in protest. Either some cannot remember the recent past, or they are hopelessly captive to their hyper-partisanship.
Make no mistake, foreign influence in our elections is indeed a bad thing. The biggest threat to our electoral integrity comes not from Russians, but from allowing illegal aliens to affect congressional apportionment.
Absent President Trump’s recent order, states can increase their number of representatives in Congress if they have more illegals aliens. More representation means more political clout in Washington and more ability to direct federal dollars home to those states. And when millions of illegal aliens are concentrated in just a few states, counting them gives political power to foreign nationals who choose to come here in violation of our laws, and takes power from Americans by diluting their votes. One can easily see the noxious incentive that creates for states: flood your state with illegal aliens and reap the political and financial rewards. 
More representatives in Congress also means more votes for a state in the Electoral College. Another reward for encouraging foreign nationals to violate our immigration laws is to receive more importance in presidential elections. This is not the policy of a country that wants to be sound and prosperous for the long term.
President Trump’s apportionment order raises another question: is there any founding principle of this country we are not prepared to abandon? Americans are not united by their DNA, but by our belief in uniquely American ideas such as the Bill of Rights and that we are endowed with those rights by a Creator, not government. That is why we have taught these concepts to our children from an early age.
Those who apply for U.S. citizenship legally are similarly required to learn about America’s history and its commitment to individual liberty. Foreign nationals here illegally, by contrast, have none of that grounding. They often come from countries run by oppressive dictatorships where the United States is despised. An oppressive nanny state is often all they know and expect from government. Unscrupulous politicians see these people as gullible marks whose votes can be purchased with the promise of a utopia that can never exist. That is precisely why such politicians are staunchly opposed to any measure that restricts illegal aliens from our electoral process.
Electoral integrity is one of the vital pillars upon which our country stands. To abandon it in the name of political correctness and the quest to consolidate political power is to set our country on a downward spiral from which it may never recover. At that point we will be no better than the authoritarian, corrupt and poverty-stricken states from which many prospective immigrants flee. This is a battle worth fighting. Few other issues are as important. Let us not forget our history when we need it most.
Dale Wilcox is executive director and general counsel at the Immigration Reform Law Institute, a public interest law firm working to defend the rights and interests of the American people from the negative effects of illegal migration.
Image credit: The Guardian, shareable YouTube screen shot.



California State University, the largest public university system in the country, is requiring all students to take an ethnic studies or social justice course in order to graduate — a move that will go into effect at the beginning of the 2023-2024 academic school year.

Alien Nation: Common Sense About America's Immigration Disaster

Author Peter Brimelow
Description
The controversial, bestselling book that helps define the debate about one of the most important and hotly contested issues facing America: immigration.
From Publishers Weekly: Forbes senior editor Brimelow's alarmist, slashing anti-immigration manifesto is likely to stir debate. He maintains that the 1965 Immigration Act and its recent amplifications choked off immigration from northern and western Europe while selectively reopening U.S. borders to a huge influx of minorities from Third World countries. Many of these latter entrants are unskilled and require welfare support, and those who do work may adversely affect opportunities for poorer Americans, especially blacks, according to Brimelow. Because of multicultural programs, he charges, the new immigrants are not expected to assimilate, and thus they retain their separateness. Illegal immigration?two to three million entries a year?plus one million legal immigrants annually are causing, by his reckoning, an "ethnic revolution," because Asians, Hispanics, Middle Easterners and others shift America's balance away from the white majority, creating a strife-torn, multiracial society. Brimelow calls for an end to all illegal immigration, a drastic cutback in legal immigration, policies favoring skilled immigrants and elimination of all payments and free public education for illegals and their children. Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc. From Library Journal "Immigration has consequences," Brimelow (a Forbes senior editor and a contributor to the National Review) interjects repeatedly through this scattershot, argumentative tract against current immigration policy and practice. Claiming that the 1965 Immigration Act and later legislation in 1986 and 1990 have worsened a host of economic, political, and social problems in the United States, Brimelow cites supporters and critics alike of American immigration policy and his own interpretation of immigration statistics to disprove commonly held beliefs about immigrants' contributions to America, which he believes have been overemphasized. Brimelow argues that our environment is endangered, our public health threatened, our economy strained, our national unity diluted, and our politics fragmented all by an immigration policy that is out of control and captive to a ruling "elite," which he associates with the liberal establishment and political correctness. Though Brimelow scores some points in his shrill attack, his highly politicized and provocative language which often relies on ethnic stereotypes makes this book a polemic guaranteed to rally the faithful and offend most others. 


Who Are We?: The Challenges to America's National Identity

Author Samuel Huntington
Description
In his seminal work The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Samuel Huntington argued provocatively and presciently that with the end of the cold war, “civilizations” were replacing ideologies as the new fault lines in international politics.

Now in his controversial new work, Who Are We?, Huntington focuses on an identity crisis closer to home as he examines the impact other civilizations and their values are having on our own country.

America was founded by British settlers who brought with them a distinct culture, says Huntington, including the English language, Protestant values, individualism, religious commitment, and respect for law. The waves of immigrants that later came to the United States gradually accepted these values and assimilated into America's Anglo-Protestant culture. More recently, however, our national identity has been eroded by the problems of assimilating massive numbers of primarily Hispanic immigrants and challenged by issues such as bilingualism, multiculturalism, the devaluation of citizenship, and the “denationalization” of American elites.

September 11 brought a revival of American patriotism and a renewal of American identity, but already there are signs that this revival is fading. Huntington argues the need for us to reassert the core values that make us Americans. Timely and thought-provoking, Who Are We? is an important book that is certain to shape our national conversation about who we are.


Brokaw: ‘Hispanics Should Work Harder at Assimilation’



 27 Jan 20192,712
1:22
Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former “NBC Nightly News” anchor Tom Brokaw offered theories on as to why Republicans tend to be against immigration from Latin America.
Brokaw identified politics and racial aspects, but went on to add assimilation by Hispanics was a hurdle as well.
“A lot of this, we don’t want to talk about,” Brokaw explained. “But the fact is, on the Republican side, a lot of people see the rise of an extraordinary, important, new constituent in American politics, Hispanics, who will come here and all be Democrats. Also, I hear, when I push people a little harder, ‘Well, I don’t know whether I want brown grandbabies.’ I mean, that’s also a part of it.”
“It’s the intermarriage that is going on and the cultures that are conflicting with each other,” he continued. “I also happen to believe that the Hispanics should work harder at assimilation. That’s one of the things I’ve been saying for a long time. You know, they ought not to be just codified in their communities but make sure that all their kids are learning to speak English, and that they feel comfortable in the communities. And that’s going to take outreach on both sides, frankly.”

MULTI-CULTURALISM and the creation of a one-party globalist country to serve the rich in America’s open borders.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/12/em-cadwaladr-impending-death-of.html

“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR

 

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR

What will America stand for in 2050?

The US should think long and hard about the high number of Latino immigrants.
By Lawrence Harrison
It's not just a short-run issue of immigrants competing with citizens for jobs as unemployment approaches 10 percent or the number of uninsured straining the quality of healthcare. Heavy immigration from Latin America threatens our cohesiveness as a nation.

MEXICO WILL DOUBLE U.S. POPULATION

By Tom Barrett 
At the current rate of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also through Canada) the United States will be completely over run with illegal aliens by the year 2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants who follow US law to become citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion, ILLEGAL aliens and their offspring will be the dominant population in the United States. 


Who Are We?: The Challenges to America's National Identity

Author Samuel Huntington
Description
In his seminal work The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Samuel Huntington argued provocatively and presciently that with the end of the cold war, “civilizations” were replacing ideologies as the new fault lines in international politics.

Now in his controversial new work, Who Are We?, Huntington focuses on an identity crisis closer to home as he examines the impact other civilizations and their values are having on our own country.

America was founded by British settlers who brought with them a distinct culture, says Huntington, including the English language, Protestant values, individualism, religious commitment, and respect for law. The waves of immigrants that later came to the United States gradually accepted these values and assimilated into America's Anglo-Protestant culture. More recently, however, our national identity has been eroded by the problems of assimilating massive numbers of primarily Hispanic immigrants and challenged by issues such as bilingualism, multiculturalism, the devaluation of citizenship, and the “denationalization” of American elites.

September 11 brought a revival of American patriotism and a renewal of American identity, but already there are signs that this revival is fading. Huntington argues the need for us to reassert the core values that make us Americans. Timely and thought-provoking, Who Are We? is an important book that is certain to shape our national conversation about who we are.

 

Atlantic Magazine: Immigration is Fracturing America into Rival Tribes


John Moore/Getty Images
 23 Sep 20181,266

Immigration is splitting the United States into warring tribes, says an unusual article in the strongly pro-migration Atlanticmagazine.

The article, headlined “The Threat of Tribalism,” admitted:
The causes of America’s resurgent tribalism are many. They include seismic demographic change, which has led to predictions that whites will lose their majority status within a few decades; declining social mobility and a growing class divide; and media that reward expressions of outrage.
But the mass immigration of 44.5 million people is the primary cause of the three other factors — “declining social mobility and a growing class divide; and media that reward expressions of outrage.”
Yet the authors do not even suggest any changes whatsoever to the replacement-level immigration which brings in one foreigner every year for every four Americans who turn 18, which lowers wages, and ensures an expanding array of rival languages and civic rules in the United States:
In 2017, there were 85 cities in which a majority of residents spoke a foreign language at home. These include:

- Hialeah, Fla. (95%);
- Laredo, Texas (92%);
- East Los Angeles, Calif. (90%)
- Elizabeth, N.J. (76%);
- Skokie, Ill. (56%);
https://cis.org/Report/Almost-Half-Speak-Foreign-Language-Americas-Largest-Cities 

Almost Half Speak a Foreign Language in America's Largest Cities | @CIS_org


·        
·        
The two Yale authors, professors Amy Chua and Jed Rubenfeld, describe the diversity created by immigration:
All of this has contributed to a climate in which every group in America—minorities and whites; conservatives and liberals; the working class and elites—feels under attack, pitted against the others not just for jobs and spoils, but for the right to define the nation’s identity. In these conditions, democracy devolves into a zero-sum competition, one in which parties succeed by stoking voters’ fears and appealing to their ugliest us-versus-them instincts.
Again, the authors do not suggest any immigration changes that could lower public fears over the elite’s determination to change the nation’s identity to suit their elite interests.
Elite groups openly acknowledge that immigration is the force which now drives American politics — including the shocking election of real-estate developer Donald Trump in 2016. As New York Magazine says in a review of Chua’s earlier book:
Perhaps the most bitter of all contemporary political battles — and a Trump favorite — is immigration, which behind the ideological posturing is a referendum on whose tribe will control the country’s demographic future …
Similarly, a new study by authors from the University of Michigan argues that the nation’s tribal polarization is driven by rising racial and ethnic conflict:
Race/ethnicity now cleaves the parties more neatly than ever, and not simply because Democrats and Republicans disagree in their attitudes about race itself. In fact, whites are sorting out of the Democratic party at a significant rate while minorities are standing pat. Figure 1 presents evidence in this regard using the American National Election Studies time-series data starting from 1952. The growing racial gap between the two parties is evident. As the share of Whites among self-identified Democrats is rapidly decreasing (outpacing demographic changes in the country as a whole), the Republican Party remains overwhelmingly White. Our conjecture is that it is these changes in race and ethnicity that drive most of the affective polarization we have witnessed over the last 30 years.
By failing to identify immigration’s role in the problem, the two Yale authors are left with a few recommendations so vague as to be useless.
They urge that conservative Americans step up their efforts to persuade minorities that they are equal — as if Americans have not been trying to do that at enormous expense since the civil war, and as if immigration does not fuel the ethnic politics which denies equality between Americans and immigrants.
The Atlantic authors do offer some cautious criticism of the progressive left which has worked with business to impose and preserve mass migration, even after the 2016 election:
For its part, the left needs to rethink its scorched-earth approach to American history and ideals. Exposing injustice, past and present, is important, but there’s a world of difference between saying that America has repeatedly failed to live up to its constitutional principles and saying that those principles are lies or smoke screens for oppression.
But neither of those two recommendations address what the Yale authors admit is the primary cause of rising tribalism — the elite’s policy of importing foreign workers and their tribes into the United States.
Nor did they provide readers even a cursory description of President Donald Trump’s promised fix, his Four Pillars reforms.
Moreover, neither author acknowledges the basic reality that their peers in the elite do want tribalism to overthrow Americans’ shared, non-racial, civic culture, which the elites prefer to dismiss as merely a “white” culture. Chua indirectly admits this goal in her 2018 book, Political Tribes: Group Instinct and the Fate of Nations, as the New York Magazinereviewer describes:
Better-educated whites, who dominate the country’s political and cultural institutions and are the main beneficiaries of the globalized economy, have adopted as their “tribal” identity a sort of post-national cosmopolitanism, defined against what they regard as the provincial culture of poor whites …
it seems inevitable that American whites will lose their majority status sometime around the middle of the current century. More cosmopolitan whites tend to view this prospect with indifference or even excitement.
Reihan Salam, a conservative author, writes in the Sept. 21 Wall Street Journal:
it is clear to many thoughtful liberal scholars and journalists that immigration-driven cultural change has greatly contributed to right-wing populism. On the other, they view slowing the pace of immigration as a complete non-starter. As they see it, the only option is to double down on the status quo and hope that the storm passes—even if this approach risks triggering a crisis for open societies, such as the one we are arguably living through today. It is as though these thinkers are convinced that … that conservatives who worry about the pace of cultural change must be crushed rather than accommodated.
For example, Bloomberg writer Noah Smith welcomes the government-imposed foreign populations because it means that Americans cannot expect the millions of foreigners in their midst to follow Americans’ collective civic rules about how people are supposed to behave. Smith claims:
Diversity provides a backstop defense against the natural tendencies of homogenization and conformity … A country with institutions strong enough not to have to rely on homogeneity will be the strongest country imaginable.
But the civic culture destroyed by diversity includes shared expectations of civic equality within freedom, of Internet-enabled free speech and organization, and of debates over facts not feelings. The civic rules help Americans prevent their elite from segregating themselves into “oligarchical socialism,” globalist virtue-signaling, elite colleges and gated communities, stock-market wealth, and technological power over political debate.
Smith does admit his experiment with imposed civic variety may prove disastrous to American people:
I believe that there is a chance our experiment might fail. That building a free society from people of all races, religions, and national origins might in fact prove too hard a task …
But no matter the risk to 300 million non-elite Americans, Smith insists “the America experiment [with diversity] must continue.”
Smith counters polite criticism of his diversity-first argument by describing his critics as racists, so exemplifying the tribalism which Smith uses and which the two Atlantic authors claim to oppose:

1/Tucker Carlson's question - "How is diversity our strength?" was not asked in good faith, but for purposes of racist demagoguery.

But I will try to answer it in good faith, because it's an important question in its own right.
https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1038222675322318850 


·        
·        
Tom Jawetz is the vice-president for immigration policy at the Democrats’ primary think-tank, the Center for American Progress. He argues that immigration is about the treatment of all people worldwide, not about Americans’ concerns. That radically universal view demotes his moral duty to his fellow Americans down to the same level as his moral duty to distant peoples of Singapore, Lichtenstein, Nepal or Indonesia.
Conversations about #migration are about something so much more fundamental. They are about how we value other human beings. They are about whether we stand by our universal principles. @MJRodriguesEU #GlobalCompactMigration
·        
5
·        
So of course, ordinary Americans — of all colors and classes and variations — are collectively pushing back against their hostile or uncaring elite. New York Magazine insists on defining them see as “whites,” but the members of Trump’s multi-colored coalition have:
defined their tribal identity in opposition to the [elite] Establishment, which they perceive as a distant, occupying foreign power, indifferent to their interests and intent on elevating minorities and foreigners to pride of place within “their” country.
The Atlantic article can be read here.
Four million young Americans will join the workforce this year, but the federal government will also import 1.1 million legal immigrants, and allow an army of at least 2 million visa-workers to work U.S. jobs, alongside asylum-claiming migrants and illegal aliens.
Overall, the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap white-collar and blue-collar foreign labor.
That flood of outside labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions. Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because investment flows towards the large immigrant populations living in the coastal states.


No comments: