Saturday, June 8, 2019

NANCY PELOSI'S 49 MORE MEXIFORNIA JUST AHEAD - 80 ILLEGALS ARRESTED IN MEX-RUN COCKFIGHT IN VIRGINIA

Illegal immigrants are easily able to migrate into Virginia and other states because Congress does not provide border agencies with the legal authority, funds, and resources to catch, jail, and deter migrants, or to jail the many employers who hire hard-working, compliant, low-wage illegal aliens who live in the United States.


Report: Cops Arrest 80 at Mexican-Run Cockfight in Virginia


Report: Cops Arrest 80 at Mexican-Run Cockfight in Virginia
Patrick County Sheriff's Office via Martinsville Bulletin
NEIL MUNRO
716
3:14

Cops arrested numerous suspected illegal aliens and drug-traffickers at an illegal cockfight in Patrick County, Virginia, according to a report in the Martinsville Bulletin.

Eighty people were arrested at the cockfight, while 40 people allegedly escaped on foot as the officers raided the site, said the Bulletin:
Patrick County Sheriff Dan Smith said in an email Sunday that more than 50 officers from multiple law enforcement agencies executed a search warrant at 435 Long Branch Road at 1245 p.m. on Saturday. Smith said the site was the venue, and had been on multiple past occasions, for illegal cockfighting.
Evidence collected during the investigation shows that the operation is Mexican-based, and participants from as far as Texas and Georgia allegedly traveled to engage in the illegal activity, according to Smith. Cock fighting is classified as a felony under Virginia law.
Cash, methamphetamine, firearms, multiple-edged weapons and assorted property, including vehicles, were seized from the property.
The article provides the name of the 80 arrested people. Nearly all have Hispanic names and live in nearby North Carolina. The cockfight was arranged by a Mexican-run operation, the article says.
Police reports say Mexican drug gangs use low-level couriers to distribute small quantities of drugs to rural customers, like pizza delivery services deliver pizzas.
The couriers are often illegal migrants who minimize their legal risks by transporting small quantities of drugs. If caught, they are usually returned to Mexican by the United States and sometimes get back pay from the drug rings.
The same business model was spotlighted in March when a federal grand jury indicted 12 alleged gang members of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel for distributing and selling drugs.
The Department of Justice press release said:
Harrisonburg, VIRGINIA – A federal grand jury sitting in U.S. District Court in Harrisonburg has indicted 12 members of Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), a Mexican-based criminal organization considered by the Department of Justice to be one of the five most dangerous transnational organizations in the world, on federal drug conspiracy charges, United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen announced today.
“CJNG is one of the most dangerous drug cartels in the world, and its members and associates are actively operating in the Shenandoah Valley and Southside Virginia,” United States Attorney Cullen stated today. “Dismantling organized drug activity and staunching the flow of deadly substances like heroin and cocaine into our communities are among my top priorities as U.S. attorney.  I am grateful that our federal, state, and local partners share this goal and for their hard work during the course of this investigation.”
As part of the conspiracy, it is alleged that the defendants maintained a series of residential properties in and around Axton for the purpose of receiving, storing, packaging, and distributing multiple kilograms of cocaine and multiple pounds of marijuana which they had received directly from members of CJNG. These drugs were then allegedly shipped to Winchester, and elsewhere throughout the Mid-Atlantic region, for redistribution.
Illegal immigrants are easily able to migrate into Virginia and other states because Congress does not provide border agencies with the legal authority, funds, and resources to catch, jail, and deter migrants, or to jail the many employers who hire hard-working, compliant, low-wage illegal aliens who live in the United States.

Mass Immigration Poses An Existential Crisis For The West

https://finance.townhall.com/columnists/petermorici/2019/04/29/mass-immigration-poses-an-existential-crisis-for-the-west-n2545545

Source: AP Photo/Daniel Ochoa de Olza
  
America needs well-enforced borders but President Donald Trump’s national “emergency” is part of a much larger crisis facing Western nations.
State entropy, widespread violence and economic desperation, prevalent in many parts of Central and South America, the Middle East and Africa, are driving millions north—mostly to America and the European Union. The sheer potential numbers could pose overwhelming challenges of assimilation and undermine the cultural underpinnings of our market economies and democratic institutions.
The recent sharp increase in Border Patrol apprehensions of illegal migrants and asylum seekers has exhausted U.S. recourses to detain those awaiting adjudication. Within several weeks of apprehension, they join 11 million immigrantswithout permanent legal status—driving down wages for lower-paid Americans and overwhelming local cultures in some of the nation’s poorest communities.
Sophisticated technologies—cameras, drones and the like—are more cost efficient than a wall, but only a wall could keep migrants from setting foot on American soil and being released into the general population.
Most asylum claims are questionable. Mexico offers migrants humanitarian visas and the opportunity to work, but politically motivated judges have squashed administration attempts to limit asylum claims.
Sadly, federal courts led by Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts have become quite comfortable arrogating power in response to public sentiment—for example, striking down state statutes prohibiting gay marriage—and acceding to political pressure from Democrats—the peculiar reasoning Roberts applied to declare Affordable Care Act fines are taxes.
Presidential claims about “Obama Judges” and “Trump Judges” have some merit but in any case, Trump’s immigration point man, Stephen Miller, has not done the homework to effectively argue that a national emergency exists.
Trump charges the illegal flood is full of criminals, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, always a comforting presence, counters that Americans commit rape, robbery and homicide too. What matters is whether poor immigrants commit crimes at an alarming higher rate that our indigenous population.
Since 2015, Germany has admitted over 1.4 million asylum seekers—about 2% of its population, and they commit about 14% of the crimes. Surely, the FBI could help Miller to come up with comparable U.S. statistics. Then we could get at the truth—or he has but the administration is not willing to back off on its crime claims.
Polls show most Americans don’t support the wall and believe legal immigration is good for the economy and our culture, and no one has a finger on the pulse of voters like Pelosi, except perhaps Roberts.
The 1976 National Emergency Act empowers a majority in the Congress to nullify presidential declarations. However, with the GOP holding the Senate, lawsuits will decide whether the president can supplement the $1.4 billion authorized by Congress to build 55 miles of border fence by transferring Department of Defense funds to instead build 234 miles of fence.
The NEA does not define a national emergency. Instead that is spread over at least 470 statutory provisions. One states “the Secretary of Defense can ‘undertake military construction projects … necessary to support such use of the armed forces.’”
As Justice Robert Jackson reminded in Youngstown v. Sawyer (1952), which overturned President Harry Truman’s nationalization of the steel industry to support the Korean War effort, presidential discretion is at its peak when it acts with the support of Congress and “at its lowest ebb” when it is “incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress.”
When the Republicans controlled Congress, Trump could not get his wall built, and he campaigned on the issue in 2018 and got shellacked. Now congressional House Democrats have decided there is no pressing need for a wall.
The president recognizes he will get pilloried in the lower courts but expects a fair hearing in the Supreme Court. He should ponder Roberts’s ire regarding his charges about the politicization of the courts—sometimes being right is not enough.
For Americans living in large prosperous cities, the influx of well-educated legal immigrants, especially in STEM disciplines, are welcome, but many illegal immigrants become burdens in the labor markets and on public services in Trump country.
If Trump fails to get his wall, the crisis at the border could easily become a mass migration that imposes incalculable burdens on those Americans least able to bear them.
THE AZTLAN INVASION & THE LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY FOR MEXICAN SUPREMACY
“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.”
MULTICULTURALISM, IMMIGRATION AND AZTLAN
By Maria Hsia Chang Professor of Political Science, University of Nevada Reno
One of the standard arguments invoked by those in favor of massive immigration into the United States is that our country is founded on immigrants who have always been successfully assimilated into America's mainstream culture and society. As one commentator put it, "Assimilation evokes the misty past of Ellis Island, through which millions entered, eventually seeing their descendants become as American as George Washington."1 Nothing more vividly testifies against that romantic faith in America's ability to continuously assimilate new members than the events of October 16, 1994 in Los Angeles. On that day, 70,000 people marched beneath "a sea of Mexican flags" protesting Proposition 187, a referendum measure that would deny many state benefits to illegal immigrants and their children. Two weeks later, more protestors marched down the street, this time carrying an American flag upside down. Both protests point to a disturbing and rising phenomenon of Chicano separatism in the United States — the product of a complex of forces, among which are multiculturalism and a generous immigration policy combined with a lax border control. The Problem Chicanos refer to "people of Mexican descent in the United States" or "Mexican Americans in general." Today, there are reasons to believe that Chicanos as a group are unlike previous immigrants in that they are more likely to remain unassimilated and unintegrated, whether by choice or circumstance — resulting in the formation of a separate quasi-nation within the United States. More than that, there are Chicano political activists who intend to marry cultural separateness with territorial and political self-determination. The more moderate among them aspire to the cultural and political autonomy of "home rule". 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.
Whatever their goals, what animates all of them is the dream of Aztlan. According to legend, Aztlan was the ancestral homeland of the Aztecs which they left in journeying southward to found Tenochtitlan, the center of their new civilization, which is today's Mexico City. Today, the "Nation of Aztlan" refers to the American southwestern states of California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, portions of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, which Chicano nationalists claim were stolen by the United States and must be reconquered (Reconquista) and reclaimed for Mexico. The myth of Aztlan was revived by Chicano political activists in the 1960s as a central symbol of Chicano nationalist ideology. In 1969, at the Chicano National Liberation Youth Conference in Denver, Rodolfo "Corky" Gonzales put forth a political document entitled El Plan de Aztlan (Spiritual Plan of Aztlan). The Plan is a clarion call to Mexican-Americans to form a separate Chicano nation: In the spirit of a new people that is conscious not only of its proud historial heritage, but also of the brutal "gringo" invasion of our territories, we, the Chicano inhabitants and civilizers of the nothern land of Aztlan from whence came our forefathers ...declare that the call of our blood is...our inevitable destiny.... Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops, and not to the foreign Europeans. We do not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent.... Brotherhood unites us, and love for our brothers makes us a people whose time has come .... With our heart in our hands and our hands in the soil, we declare the independence of our mestizo nation. We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan.
How Chicanos are Unlike Previous Immigrants Brent A. Nelson, writing in 1994, observed that in the 1980s America's Southwest had begun to be transformed into "a de facto nation" with its own culture, history, myth, geography, religion, education, and language. Whatever evidence there is indicates that Chicanos, as a group, are unlike previous waves of immigrants into the United States. In the first place, many Chicanos do not consider themselves immigrants at all because their people "have been here for 450 years" before the English, French, or Dutch. Before California and the Southwest were seized by the United States, they were the lands of Spain and Mexico. As late as 1780 the Spanish crown laid claim to territories from Florida to California, and on the far side of the Mississippi up to the Great Lakes and the Rockies. Mexico held title to much of Spanish possessions in the United States until the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American war in 1848. As a consequence, Mexicans "never accepted the borders drawn up by the 1848 treaty."
That history has created among Chicanos a feeling of resentment for being "a conquered people," made part of the United States against their will and by the force of arms. Their resentment is amply expressed by Voz Fronteriza, a Chicano student publication,
which referred to Border Patrol officers killed in the line of duty as "pigs (migra)" trying to defend "the false frontier."
Chicanos are also distinct from other immigrant groups because of the geographic proximity of their native country. Their physical proximity to Mexico gives Chicanos "the option of life in both Americas, in two places and in two cultures, something earlier immigrants never had." Geographic proximity and ease of transportation are augmented by the media. Radio and television keep the spoken language alive and current so that Spanish, unlike the native languages of previous immigrants into the United States, "shows no sign of fading."
A result of all that is the failure by Chicanos to be fully assimilated into the larger American society and culture. As Earl Shorris, author of Latinos: A Biography of the People, observed: "Latinos have been more resistant to the melting pot than any other group. Their entry en masse into the United States will test the limits of the American experiment...." The continuous influx of Mexican immigrants into the United States serve to continuously renew Chicano culture so that their sense of separateness will probably continue "far into the future...." There are other reasons for the failure of Chicano assimilation. Historically, a powerful force for assimilation was upward social mobility: Immigrants into the United States became assimilated as they rose in educational achievement and income. But today's post-industrial American economy, with its narrower paths to upward mobility, is making it more difficult for certain groups to improve their socioeconomic circumstances. Unionized factory jobs, which once provided a step up for the second generation of past waves of immigrants, have been disappearing for decades. Instead of the diamond-shaped economy of industrial America, the modern American economy is shaped like an hourglass. There is a good number of jobs for unskilled people at the bottom, a fair number of jobs for the highly educated at the top, but comparatively few jobs for those in the middle without a college education or special skills. To illustrate, a RAND Corporation study forecasts that 85 percent of California's new jobs will require post-secondary education. For a variety of reasons, the nationwide high-school dropout rate for Hispanics (the majority of whom are Chicano) is 30 percent — three times the rate for whites and twice the rate for blacks. Paradoxically, the dropout rate for Hispanics born in the United States is even higher than for young immigrants. Among Chicanos, high-school dropout rates actually rise between the second and third generations. Their low educational achievement accounts for why Chicanos as a group are poor despite being hardworking. In 1996, for the first time, Hispanic poverty rate began to exceed that of American blacks. In 1995, household income rose for every ethnic group except Hispanics, for whom it dropped 5 percent. Latinos now make up a quarter of the nation's poor people, and are more than three times as likely to be impoverished than whites. This decline in income has taken place despite high rates of labor-force participation by Latino men, and despite an emerging Latino middle class. In California, where Latinos now approach one-third of the population, their education levels are far lower than those of other immigrants, and they earn about half of what native-born Californians earn. This means that, for the first time in the history of American immigration, hard work is not leading to economic advancement because immigrants in service jobs face unrelenting labor-market pressure from more recently arrived immigrants who are eager to work for less. The narrowing of the pathways of upward mobility has implications for the children of recent Mexican immigrants. Their ascent into the middle-class mainstream will likely be blocked and they will join children of earlier black and Puerto Rican migrants as part of an expanded multiethnic underclass. Whereas first generation immigrants compare their circumstances to the Mexico that they left — and thereby feel immeasurably better off — their children and grandchildren will compare themelves to other U.S. groups. Given their lower educational achievement and income, that comparison will only lead to feelings of relative deprivation and resentment. They are unlikely to be content as maids, gardeners, or fruit pickers. Many young Latinos in the second and third generations see themselves as locked in irremediable conflict with white society, and are quick to deride successful Chicano students as "wannabes." For them, to study hard is to "act white" and exhibit group disloyalty. That attitude is part of the Chicano culture of resistance — a culture that actively resists assimilation into mainstream America. That culture is created, reinforced, and maintained by radical Chicano intellectuals, politicians, and the many Chicano Studies programs in U.S. colleges and universities. As examples, according to its editor, Elizabeth Martinez, the purpose of Five Hundred Years of Chicano History, a book used in over 300 schools throughout the West, is to "celebrate our resistance to being colonized and absorbed by racist empire builders." The book calls the INS and the Border Patrol "the Gestapo for Mexicans."
For Rodolfo Acuna, author of Occupied America: The Chicano's Struggle Toward Liberation, probably the most widely assigned text in U.S. Chicano Studies programs, the Anglo-American invasion of Mexico was "as vicious as that of Hitler's invasion of Poland and other Central European nations...." The book also includes a map showing "the Mexican republic" in 1822 reaching up into Kansas and Oklahoma, and including within it Utah, Nevada, and everything west and south of there
"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!



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. 

 

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.



Pew Research: Vast Majority of Illegals, 4-in-9 Legal Immigrants, Not English Proficient



Associated Press
JOHN BINDER
 28 May 2019539
2:28

The vast majority of illegal aliens and a sizeable portion of legal immigrants living in the United States are not proficient in the English language, a survey finds.

A Pew Research Center study finds that an overwhelming majority of the 11 to 22 million illegal aliens living in the U.S. do not define themselves as being proficient in English. Despite a slight uptick in the number of illegal aliens who claim they are English proficient, still only about 34 percent said they are proficient in English.
Likewise, only about 57 percent of legal immigrants — that is, legal foreign-born residents whom the federal government has admitted to the country — are proficient in English, according to the Pew Research study.
Illegal aliens arriving to the U.S. from Mexico, Northern Triangle countries, and other parts of Latin America have exceptionally low English proficiency rates. For example, only about 25 percent of illegal aliens from Mexico said they were English proficient.
Similarly, only 22 percent of illegal aliens from the Northern Triangle said they were proficient in English, as well a minority of 43 percent of illegal aliens from other Latin American countries.
Overall, Pew Research estimates that only about 3.4 million illegal aliens of the entire illegal alien population said they were English proficient.
As Breitbart News has chronicled, foreign language-speakers have increasingly made up the U.S. population, forcing Americans to adapt in their day-to-day lives and work environment to non-English atmospheres.
For example, nearly half of all residents in the country’s biggest cities speak a foreign language at home, according to research by the Center for Immigration Studies.
Every year, a new flow of illegal aliens either cross the U.S.-Mexico border or overstay their visas and compete against the majority of working and middle class Americans for oftentimes entry-level and generally lower wage jobs. Americans are not only subjected to this illegal labor market competition but also must compete against an additional 1.2 million legal immigrants who are admitted to the U.S. annually.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder

 

Coulter: U.S. Isn’t Becoming Europe. We’re Becoming Rome



ANN COULTER
22 May 20192,196
2:48

Can we have a quick reality check and acknowledge that what is happening to America is a million times worse than what’s happening in Europe and is of much greater consequence?

Conservatives regularly point to the mass migration afflicting Europe as if it’s the Ghost of Christmas Future for America. Since waves of Third World migrants began sweeping into the European Union, we’ve seen terrorism, knifings, rape gangs and riots popping up all over the birthplace of Western civilization. Sweden has gone from a country where rape was essentially nonexistent to the Rape Capital of the World.

It’s sweet of Americans to be so concerned about Europe, but maybe they should look at their own country. On account of a mass immigration policy imposed on us by our government, the United States has undergone a transformation 
unprecedented in all of world history.

From 1620 to 1970, the U.S. was 
demographically stable — not to be confused with “a nation of immigrants.” The country was about 85% to 90% white, almost entirely British, German, French and Dutch, and 10% to 15% African American. (The American Indian population, technically in their own nations, steadily plummeted — an example of how vast numbers of new people can displace the old, both accidentally and on purpose.)

In a generation, the white majority has nearly disappeared, while the black percentage has remained about the same, with more than 90% of African Americans still native-born. White Americans are one border surge away from becoming a minority in their own country.
In 2016, non-Hispanic whites were 61.3% of the population and 54% of all births. That was two years ago, before Trump came in and flung open the border to all of Latin America, especially children and pregnant ladies hoping to have an anchor baby.

Back in 1995, the Census Bureau estimated that whites would decline to about 64% of the population by 2020. Today, the Census Bureau projects the nation will be less than 60% white by then. We’re moving faster than even La Raza could have hoped!

This isn’t about race — though it might be of some concern to the rapidly diminishing white population that our cultural overlords are so tormented by “whiteness.”

E.g.:

“The Unbearable Whiteness of Congress” — The Daily Beast

“Whiteness is terrorism” — Trinity College professor Johnny Eric Williams on Twitter

“The Problem of Whiteness” — course at University of Wisconsin-Madison

Abolish the White Race” — Harvard Magazine (“The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists.”)

This stunning demographic replacement matters because American culture is the 
envy of the world. Not only was this wonderful culture created by white Western Europeans, but merely asking immigrants to assimilate to it is generally considered a hate crime.

If everyone assimilated to our culture, who cares what race they are? But given sufficient numbers, they don’t. They don’t need to, and we certainly aren’t asking them to. The reason we successfully assimilated not-so-different European cultures was that we controlled the numbers — essentially stopping immigration for 50 years while we forged an American character.

Let’s compare our demographic situation to the European countries we’re weeping over. France is still about 80% French (85% Western European), and England is about 80% English (85% Western European). Even Holland is still approximately 76% Dutch (80% Western European).

What we’re witnessing in Europe is that continent’s first brush with the joys of diversity.

American conservatives’ obsession with Europe’s snail-like introduction to diversity, while ignoring a demographic tsunami in their own country, is the mirror image of neoconservatives’ fixation on unrest in the Middle East, while ignoring the invasion on our border.

When did it become deplorable, Walmart-y behavior to care about your own country? Not to care more, but merely to care as much as you do about the rest of the world?

It seems as if progress is inevitable, that things always get better and never retrogress. But the Roman Empire had philosophers, literature, science, great buildings, statues and works of art. It had advanced communication, plumbing and transportation systems. It had a universal set of measures, laws and rules.

And then the Dark Ages came. In the blink of an eye, all that was lost. The people no longer had the technological know-how even to repair bridges and aqueducts built by the Romans. They had lost the ability to make cement. They lost many of the works of Aristotle. Roads and plumbing fell into disrepair. Statues crumbled. Nikki Haley would be happy!

Only centuries later did civilization begin to reassert itself, barely climbing back to the accomplishments of several centuries earlier.

Whatever the causes of the fall of the Roman Empire, one thing is for damn sure: There were not vast bands of powerful Romans prattling about “Roman privilege,” demanding that the Huns be given preference over Romans and writing articles with titles like “Abolish the Romans!”

That is the driving impulse of one of our two major political parties. The 
other party can’t bestir itself to care about anything other than tax cuts, abortion and moving our embassy to Jerusalem. 


Mass Immigration Poses An Existential Crisis For The West

https://finance.townhall.com/columnists/petermorici/2019/04/29/mass-immigration-poses-an-existential-crisis-for-the-west-n2545545

Source: AP Photo/Daniel Ochoa de Olza
America needs well-enforced borders but President Donald Trump’s national “emergency” is part of a much larger crisis facing Western nations.


State entropy, widespread violence and economic desperation, prevalent in many parts of Central and South America, the Middle East and Africa, are driving millions north—mostly to America and the European Union. The sheer potential numbers could pose overwhelming challenges of assimilation and undermine the cultural underpinnings of our market economies and democratic institutions.
The recent sharp increase in Border Patrol apprehensions of illegal migrants and asylum seekers has exhausted U.S. recourses to detain those awaiting adjudication. Within several weeks of apprehension, they join 11 million immigrantswithout permanent legal status—driving down wages for lower-paid Americans and overwhelming local cultures in some of the nation’s poorest communities.
Sophisticated technologies—cameras, drones and the like—are more cost efficient than a wall, but only a wall could keep migrants from setting foot on American soil and being released into the general population.
Most asylum claims are questionable. Mexico offers migrants humanitarian visas and the opportunity to work, but politically motivated judges have squashed administration attempts to limit asylum claims.
Sadly, federal courts led by Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts have become quite comfortable arrogating power in response to public sentiment—for example, striking down state statutes prohibiting gay marriage—and acceding to political pressure from Democrats—the peculiar reasoning Roberts applied to declare Affordable Care Act fines are taxes.
Presidential claims about “Obama Judges” and “Trump Judges” have some merit but in any case, Trump’s immigration point man, Stephen Miller, has not done the homework to effectively argue that a national emergency exists.
Trump charges the illegal flood is full of criminals, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, always a comforting presence, counters that Americans commit rape, robbery and homicide too. What matters is whether poor immigrants commit crimes at an alarming higher rate that our indigenous population.
Since 2015, Germany has admitted over 1.4 million asylum seekers—about 2% of its population, and they commit about 14% of the crimes. Surely, the FBI could help Miller to come up with comparable U.S. statistics. Then we could get at the truth—or he has but the administration is not willing to back off on its crime claims.
Polls show most Americans don’t support the wall and believe legal immigration is good for the economy and our culture, and no one has a finger on the pulse of voters like Pelosi, except perhaps Roberts.
The 1976 National Emergency Act empowers a majority in the Congress to nullify presidential declarations. However, with the GOP holding the Senate, lawsuits will decide whether the president can supplement the $1.4 billion authorized by Congress to build 55 miles of border fence by transferring Department of Defense funds to instead build 234 miles of fence.
The NEA does not define a national emergency. Instead that is spread over at least 470 statutory provisions. One states “the Secretary of Defense can ‘undertake military construction projects … necessary to support such use of the armed forces.’”
As Justice Robert Jackson reminded in Youngstown v. Sawyer (1952), which overturned President Harry Truman’s nationalization of the steel industry to support the Korean War effort, presidential discretion is at its peak when it acts with the support of Congress and “at its lowest ebb” when it is “incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress.”
When the Republicans controlled Congress, Trump could not get his wall built, and he campaigned on the issue in 2018 and got shellacked. Now congressional House Democrats have decided there is no pressing need for a wall.
The president recognizes he will get pilloried in the lower courts but expects a fair hearing in the Supreme Court. He should ponder Roberts’s ire regarding his charges about the politicization of the courts—sometimes being right is not enough.
For Americans living in large prosperous cities, the influx of well-educated legal immigrants, especially in STEM disciplines, are welcome, but many illegal immigrants become burdens in the labor markets and on public services in Trump country.
If Trump fails to get his wall, the crisis at the border could easily become a mass migration that imposes incalculable burdens on those Americans least able to bear them.

 

 

 

Gaffney: 'You Can't Assimilate Vast Numbers of People Who Don’t Want to be Part' of U.S.A.


By Michael W. Chapman | March 22, 2019 | 11:56 AM EDT
Frank Gaffney. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
During a discussion about the need for immigrants to assimilate into American society and the spectre of sharia (Islamic law) in U.S. communities, Center for Security Policy Chairman Frank Gaffney said it is imperative to keep in mind "that you cannot assimilate vast numbers of people who simply don’t want to be part of your society." Gaffney, a former assistant secretary for Defense in the Reagan administration, added that Judge Jeanine Pirro is being suppressed because she dared to ask a question about the origins of the anti-Israel views expressed by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
When asked about assimilation during a March 20 interview on Breitbart News Daily, Gaffney said to host Alex Marlow, This topic "reminds me of the old story that conservatives are liberals who’ve been mugged by reality, and the thing you're describing, Alex, is being mugged by the reality that you cannot assimilate vast numbers of people who simply don’t want to be part of your society."
"They want to transform it into something very different and ultimately, at some point, you either resist or you submit," he said. "Submission is going to be pretty ugly, and it’s happening in parts of Europe already, and there’s more in the offing, I’m afraid. [Garbled] This rising tide of sharia supremacism, it’s chilling.”
He continued, "The trouble is, it’s not simply a problem in its own right, it’s a foretaste of what the Ilhan Omars and the Keith Ellisons and the AndrĂ© Carsons, Rashida Tlaibs, and so on, would have in mind for America, too, if they had their way. This is the really vexing problem of our time.”
“Again, not all Muslims want to live under sharia," said Gaffney.  "They don’t want to impose it on the rest of us. But enough of them do and the authorities of the [Islamic] faith certainly do."
As for Judge Jeanine Pirro, whose program on the Fox News Channel has been suspended for a second week, Gaffney said, "Jeanine Pirro, who is a friend of mine and much-admired former public servant and now, extraordinary resource, on her program, Justice w/Judge Jeanine, was suspended last week and may be again this week, and maybe – who knows – indefinitely."

Jeanine Pirro.  (Photo by Stephen Chernin/Getty Images)
“The faux-Fox [News Channel] is suppressing Jeanine Pirro explicitly – as you know, Alex – because she dared, even in a question, to connect the dots between what Ilhan Omar is doing with anti-Semitism, on the one hand, and the traditions, teachings, and practices of sharia, as we’ve come to know it," said Gaffney.
On her March 9 program, Jeanine Pirro said, “This is not who your party is" in reference to the Democrat Party. “Your party is not anti-Israel, [Omar] is. Think about this. She’s not getting this anti-Israel sentiment doctrine from the Democrat Party. So if it’s not rooted in the party, where is she getting it from? Think about it. Omar wears a hijab, which according to the Quran 33:59, tells women to cover so they won’t get molested."
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
“Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?” said Pirro.
Comments and tweets made by Rep. Omar have been condemned by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) as "anti-Semitic" and "deeply offensive."  


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. 

(POPULATION 9-2018)

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.

 

US now has more Spanish speakers than Spain – only Mexico has more

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/29/us-second-biggest-spanish-speaking-country

 

·         US has 41 million native speakers plus 11 million who are bilingual
·         New Mexico, California, Texas and Arizona have highest concentrations

 

DYING AMERICA: Poverty, Open Borders, Widespread Homelessness, Housing Crisis, Opioids, Corrupt Politicians and Then Suicide!

"In a state like Florida, where immigrants make up about 25.4 percent of the labor force, American workers have their weekly wages reduced by perhaps more than 12.5 percent. In California, where immigrants make up 34 percent of the labor force, American workers’ weekly wages are reduced by potentially 17 percent." JOHN BINDER
*
*
"In the last decade alone, the U.S. admitted ten million legal immigrants, forcing American workers to compete against a growing population of low-wage foreign workers. Meanwhile, if legal immigration continues, there will be 69 million foreign-born residents living in the U.S. by 2060. This would represent an unprecedented electoral gain for the Left, as Democrats win about 90 percent of congressional districts where the foreign-born population exceeds the national average."

Atlantic Op-Ed: The Migration Wave Has Barely Begun


File Photo: John Moore/Getty
  11 Mar 201926
3:27

Americans need to reform their immigration laws before hundreds of millions of foreigners decide to take up residence in the United States, says David Frum, an author at the pro-globalist Atlantic magazine.

“If Americans want to shape their own national destiny, rather than have it shaped by others, they have decisions to make now,” says Frum, a Canadian-born Never Trump advocate who is also a consistent voice for the immigration reforms which would help young Americans rejuvenate American society.
Frum writes:
With immigration pressures bound to increase, it becomes more imperative than ever to restore the high value of national citizenship, not to denigrate or disparage others but because for many of your fellow citizens—perhaps less affluent, educated, and successful than you—the claim “I am a U.S. citizen” is the only claim they have to any resources or protection. Without immigration restrictions, there are no national borders. Without national borders, there are no nation-states. Without nation-states, there are no electorates. Without electorates, there is no democracy. If liberals insist that only fascists will enforce borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals refuse to do.
Americans are entitled to consider carefully whom they will number among themselves. They would be irresponsible not to consider this carefully—because all of these expensive commitments must be built on a deep agreement that all who live inside the borders of the United States count as “ourselves.” The years of slow immigration, 1915 to 1975, were also years in which the United States became a more cohesive nation: the years of the civil-rights revolution, the building of a mass middle class, the construction of a national social-insurance system, the projection of U.S. power in two world wars. As immigration has accelerated, the country seems to have splintered apart.
Many Americans feel that the country is falling short of its promises of equal opportunity and equal respect. Levels of immigration that are too high only enhance the difficulty of living up to those promises. Reducing immigration, and selecting immigrants more carefully, will enable the country to more quickly and successfully absorb the people who come here, and to ensure equality of opportunity to both the newly arrived and the long-settled—to restore to Americans the feeling of belonging to one united nation, responsible for the care and flourishing of all its people.
Frum’s article was written before homeland security chief Kirstjen Nielsen said March 6 that 900,000 migrants may cross the southern border this year. That is one migrant for every four Americans who will be born in 2019.
However, Frum’s task of persuasion is difficult because there are enormous social and professional pressure on his college-educated readers to go along with the cheap-labor immigration policies which are moving income and wealth from young employees up to older CEOs and investors
In Frum’s urban, college graduate, Internet surveillance environment, young people get exiled from their jobs when they notice that their wages are being shrunk, their rents are being inflated, and their politics are being poisoned by Wall Street’s use of immigration to stimulate corporate and stock growth.
Amid the threat of economic and social ostracism, few young graduates have the nerve and economic security to apply the law of supply and demand to the labor market, or to object as their jobs and hoped-for careers are quietly allocated to people who will rationally work for Spaghetti-Os and citizenship.


Immigration to America Is Not What It Used to Be




Speaking at a naturalization ceremony in Texas on March 18, former President George W. Bush said immigration to America “is a blessing and a strength.” He also said that “borders need to be respected,” and praised the work of border patrol agents, but that’s not what the media seized upon.
The Washington Post inserted “blessing and strength” into the lead of its story, headlined “George W. Bush: ‘May we never forget that immigration is a blessing and a strength’,” also working into the first sentence the following dig at Donald Trump: “a message that sharply contrasts with President Trump’s rhetoric on the issue.”
CNN Politics covered the speech, making sure to note “the rhetoric and policy positions from Bush came in contrast to much of the modern Republican Party and President Donald Trump.” The BBC said, “Mr Bush’s comments were seen as an implicit rebuke to President Donald Trump’s administration.”
And on and on. CBS News: “Bush urges politicians to ‘dial down rhetoric’ on immigration.” The Boston Globe: “described immigration as ‘a blessing and a strength,’ a message that sharply contrasts with President Trump’s rhetoric on the issue.” People: “it was a soft rebuke of the prevailing anti-immigrant position of some members of the Republican Party, including President Donald Trump.”
Get it? George W. Bush has won his grim battle with history. Various photos showed him inviting dozens of new citizens up to the podium, including Muslims in headscarves, Hispanics, and Africans. Apparently including anyone of European descent would have been bad optics.
And never mind that if Bush II hadn’t bombed, invaded and occupied Iraq, the Middle East might be relatively stable today. Iraq, for all its problems, would nonetheless provide a strategic counterweight to Iran. We would have saved trillions of dollars and spared millions of lives, and additional millions of refugees would have stayed home.
What’s Really Happening
The problem with all this media-spun anti-Trump “wisdom” from Bush is simple: President Trump is right, and the spin is wrong.
It is true that America was enriched in the past by waves of new immigrants. It is true that in the past, these waves of new immigrants benefited the economy. And it is true that even now, if immigration were brought under control, reduced somewhat, and reformed so that only highly skilled immigrants with a commitment to learning English were vetted and admitted, it would again be beneficial to our economy and enrich our culture. But that’s not what’s happening.
According to CarryingCapacity.org, the United States “now accepts over one million legal immigrants each year, which is more than all of the other industrialized nations in the world, combined.” Additionally, according to ImmigrationCounters.com, nearly 28 million illegal immigrants currently live in the United States.
Attempting to quantify the costs and benefits of immigration into the United States is not easy. According to a study conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the cost to America taxpayers to provide illegal immigrants government funded education, health care, justice and law enforcement, public assistance, and general government services is estimated at $135 billion per year. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “63% of non-citizen households access welfare programs compared to 35% of native households.”
Statistics abound—and for every study suggesting that America’s immigration is creating a burden on the economy, there is another that concludes the opposite, that immigrants continue to provide a net economic benefit to the economy. So rather than provide yet another regurgitation of battling statistics, it is important to note some crucial qualitative differences between immigration trends in America today, compared with past centuries in America.
Why Immigration to America Today Is Different
  1. Immigrants today are not coming from nations of equal or greater economic achievement. In the past, immigrants from Europe, for the most part, were emigrating from nations that were as advanced as the United States was, if not more so. Today the overwhelming majority of immigrants are coming from developing nations.
  2. Immigrants in the past came primarily from European nations which had cultural values—educational, religious, and political—that were, if not nearly identical to American cultural values, at shared a similar trajectory towards achieving those values. Immigrants today come from nations that, relatively speaking, have far fewer cultural similarities to America than past waves of immigrants.
  3. Immigrants today, for the most part, are coming from nations that are rapidly increasing in population and, in aggregate, dwarf the United States in population. Related to this is the fact that in the past, the people already in America were themselves rapidly increasing in population, but this is no longer the case, except among populations of recently arrived immigrants.
  4. Immigrants today arrive via 10-hour hops on an airliner. In the past, waves of immigrants spent 10 months traversing land and sea in a journey of staggering expense and significant dangers. While this isn’t universally true, particularly for the overland migrants that cross America’s southern border, the general point stands: coming to America today does not require the commitment it required in the past.
  5. Similarly, in the past, immigrants pretty much renounced their countries of origin. They made a one-way trip and they adopted the language and values of America. Today, retaining cultural unity with one’s country of origin is a few clicks on the internet, a cheap telephone call, an affordable airfare. Technology has greatly eroded the forces that used to impel immigrants to become Americans.
  6. Immigrants in the past arrived in an America that had a voracious need for unskilled workers. Today the American economy is relentlessly automating jobs that used to require unskilled labor, and the American population already has a surplus of unskilled workers.
  7. Immigrants today are arriving in a welfare state, where they are assured of food, shelter, and medical care that are, in general, orders of magnitude better than anything available to them in their native countries. This creates a completely different incentive to today’s immigrants. In past centuries, immigrants came to America to find freedom and to work. Today they are offered a smorgasbord of taxpayer-funded social services.
  8. Immigrant students today—especially in the coastal urban centers where most of them settle—enter a public education system that teaches them with a reverse-racist, anti-capitalist bias. They are taught in our public schools not to assimilate, but to “celebrate diversity”; not to earn opportunities through hard work, but through fighting discrimination. They are taught, often in their native language, that they have arrived in a nation dominated by racist and sexist white males, who exploit the world to amass evil profits.
Recipes for Disaster
These final three points are the most troublesome. If immigration reform advocates made those a priority and addressed them decisively with new policies, the other concerns might be manageable. But we must address the problems caused by immigrants with low job-skills, who encounter the welfare state, and are subjected to anti-Western cultural messaging.
To suggest Americans should resist competing with highly skilled immigrants, for example, is not only xenophobic, but it smacks of an entitlement mentality. Allowing immigrants into the United States who are qualified to join our ranks of scientists, engineers, researchers and doctors will only help our economy and overall standard of living. Allowing unskilled immigrants into this country, however, when we already have tens of millions of unskilled workers who are either in our prisons or unemployed and collecting welfare—who themselves could perform this work—is much more likely to constitute a drain on our economy.
Similarly, it is a recipe for disaster to allow immigrants into an America where the curricula in K-12 schools and universities—beholden to powerful left-wing teachers and faculty unions—indoctrinates immigrants to resent the alleged evils of capitalism and the incorrigible racist, sexist core of our American culture. This is particularly true when accompanying this siren song of corruption is easy access to social services of all kinds, including welfare. If new immigrants are taught the cards are stacked against them, and at the same time they are offered a free ride that provides a standard of living many times greater than what they knew in the countries they came from, why work?
Clearly an increasing population, all else held equal, does cause overall economic expansion. It isn’t clear at all, however, that this is the optimal way to create economic expansion. First of all, global human population is destined to level off by 2050 anyway, so rather than expanding the population through immigration, economic policy needs to search for the answer as to how to continue to experience economic growth despite a stable, aging population. In Japan, they have already made this policy decision—with zero net immigration and the oldest population on earth, Japan leads the world in the development of androids that will, presumably, become caregivers to the elderly. Economic growth oriented towards improving the quality of life for the elderly is one example of a sustainable growth sector—economic growth dependent on an immigrant-fueled population expansion is not sustainable.
There is another factor, of course, that makes immigration today far more problematic than it was in previous generations. Now more than ever, mass immigration of unskilled economic migrants and political refugees has become a strategy to move America sharply to the Left by dramatically transforming the electorate.
What the establishment uniparty is doing in America today is a deliberate devaluation of American votes, and a deliberate thwarting of the political rule of  Americans who have lived and worked in America for generations. Trump’s bellicosity may scare the soccer moms, but they along with everyone else who loves America ought to reflect on his actions instead of his tone. He is the only major politician in modern times who has tried to do anything to stop this. George W. Bush, God bless him, should stop letting the media use his words as weapons in their war against Trump.
Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com.
Photo Credit: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images
About the Author: Edward Ring
Edward Ring is a Senior Fellow of the Center for American Greatness. He is a co-founder of the California Policy Center, a free-market think tank based in Southern California, where he served as their first president. He is a prolific writer on the topics of political reform and sustainable economic development. Ring, a fifth-generation Californian, has an undergraduate degree in political science from UC Davis, and an MBA in finance from the University of Southern California.

No comments: