"The American Southwest
seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a
single shot." --- Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico
“The radicals seek nothing less than
secession from the United States whether to form their own sovereign state or
to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification with Mexico are
irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost" territories in the
American Southwest.” Maria Hsia Chang
Professor of Political Science, University of Nevada Reno
Atlantic Magazine:
Immigration is Fracturing
America into Rival Tribes
Immigration is Fracturing
America into Rival Tribes
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/23/atlantic-magazine-immigration-is-spiking-tribalism-in-america/
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:
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:
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.
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 prices, widens 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.
MICHELE MALKIN
The rise of the Mexican LA RAZA supremacy fascist
welfare state built by the Democrat Party
Understanding LA RAZA / UNIDOSus:
The U.S. tax dollar funded Mexican fascist party
which is the fastest growing political party in America
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/07/michelle-malkin-understanding-us-funded.html
Only in America could critics of a group called
"The Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing
identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have
succeeded in redefining all opposition as "hate."
Previous
generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to
Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica, by Jose Vasconcelos,
Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to
this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal
State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards,
blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack
enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is
replacing them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD
BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag
PAUL KRUGMAN
The disintegration of California,
a Mexican satellite welfare state of poverty, crime and high taxes
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2013/04/paul-krugman-look-at-california-under.html
"Chairman of the DNC Keith Ellison was even
spotted wearing a shirt stating, "I
don't believe in borders" written in Spanish.
According to a new CBS news poll, 63 percent of Americans in competitive
congressional districts think those crossing illegally should be immediately
deported or arrested. This is undoubtedly contrary to the views
expressed by the Democratic Party.
Their endgame is open borders, which has become evident over
the last eight years. Don't for one second let them convince you
otherwise." Evan Berryhill Twitter
@EvBerryhill.
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.
FINISHING AMERICA OFF: THE
FOREIGN INVASION FOR “CHEAP” LABOR
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-fall-of-america-by-invitation-tens.html
Open the floodgates of our
welfare state to the uneducated, impoverished, and unskilled masses of the
world and in a generation or three America, as we know it, will be gone. JOHN
BINDER
But many less-skilled migrants play their largest
role by simply shifting small slices of wealth from person to person, for
example, by competing up rents in their neighborhood or by competing down wages
in their workplace. The crudest examples can be seen in agriculture.
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.
"Critics argue that giving amnesty to 12 to 30 million illegal aliens in the U.S. would have an immediate negative impact on America’s working and middle class — specifically black Americans and the white working class — who would be in direct competition for blue-collar jobs with the largely low-skilled illegal alien population." JOHN BINDER
The U.S.-born baby is,
of course, a U.S. citizen, whose illegal alien parents are eligible to receive,
on the baby’s behalf, food stamps, nutrition from the Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC) program, and numerous tax benefits, including the EITC.
Most importantly, the
newborn is deportation insurance for its parents. Illegal aliens facing
deportation can argue that to deport one or more parents would create an
“extreme hardship” for the new baby. If an immigration officer agrees, we’ve
added a new adult to the nation’s population. At age 21 the former birthright
citizen baby can formally apply for green cards for parents and siblings, and
they, in turn, can start their own immigration chains.
VIDEO:
THIS AMERICAN LIFE
NPR PROGRAM ON
AMERICA UNDER LA RAZA OCCUPATION – GRIM!
No comments:
Post a Comment