Illegal immigration

Posted by jonjayray on May 16, 2006, 11:49 PM | #

THE GOP already gets a huge share of the white male vote.  Not much room for movement there

Posted by Donald Miller on May 17, 2006, 12:06 AM | #

A Very Weird Posting By Dr. Ray

Dr. Ray’s predictions need a little fine-tuning. What is more likely to happen is the seizure of the Democratic Party by Latin American immigrants, and the ouster of “white” Democratic Party leaders.

Then the Republican Party goes “white” and without “anti-white” white competition changes its nature completely. Then we will know what multiracialism, multiethnicity, and multiculturalism is all about.

Dr. Ray has adopted the same kind of attitude advertised by Mark Steyn, i.e., it’s all over, we’ve lost, no hope, everything falls to the wayside, the sky is falling, no, wait, it has fallen.

The fact is that we have a radically different situation here in the United States from that in South Africa or other sub-Saharan African-dominated countries. It will probably be a lot more like India (Hindu v Muslim) or Malaysia (Malay v Chinese), in that there will be constant see-sawing and nastiness, but white voters will not disappear over-night or lose political power over-night. Some will even re-interpret their jobs as looking out for other whites. And it will be socially acceptable to do so.

Now then, don’t forget that the Irish immigrants in the 1820-1850 period were very scary to the Americans living here. They were seen as uneducable, not white, poverty stricken, alcoholics. One wonderful thing about the Irish immigrants was a little-known foray they made into international politics.
Irish-Americans were deeply anti-monarchical, and literally formed an army to invade Canada to free it from the crown! They invaded and lost the battle, and came home. As I recall this was in the 1830s.

I can’t wait until Mexican-Americans form an army and invade Mexico to over-throw their home country dominant power clique! So good times lie ahead.

Who Is Promoting the Negative “Non-Hispanic White” Usage?

But where does this nasty “non-Hispanic white” usage come from? That phrase is a code word in the United States that identifies white-haters and white-bashers. Just think about what level of respect it measures when we are named in a negative fashion to an immigrant group. What can bloggers & posters on this board be thinking to use the hateful and disrespectful term “non-Hispanic whites”?

No, we’re who we are…we are not defined by who we are not!

Posted by ben tillman on May 17, 2006, 12:07 AM | #

So GWB has no choice.  He has to go easy on Hispanic immigration or he will hand the next election to the Democrats.

There is no policy that is more of a guaranteed vote-winner than immigration restriction.  Even MEXICANS are 50-50 on the issue.  If the GOP finally got tough on the issue, they would finally see one of their silly dreams come true:  a substantial increase in black GOP voters.

Posted by ben tillman on May 17, 2006, 12:21 AM | #

No, we’re who we are…we are not defined by who we are not!

I agree completely.  “Non-Hispanic white” is an offensive PC incarnation.  Even “Hispanic” standing alone is a bogus Gramscian category.  There may be white Cubans in Florida—I don’t know—but otherwise there are virtually no white Hispanics in the U.S.  And even with respect to those few “Hispanic whites” who can be found here, what is the point of making their “Hispanic” background salient?

Posted by john on May 17, 2006, 01:23 AM | #

Why is it happening? To quote a Vdare writer: “The reason Bush is so adamant on this policy is the same reason that Immigration reform was so systematically eradicated from National Review almost ten years ago. Think about it.”
Liberals, being a waste of space have no policy - it’s happening because the neocons want it to.
Maybe this is a good time to re-read the last chapter of C of C, the one on the neocons.

Posted by Jesse Jameson on May 17, 2006, 05:32 AM | #

Illegal immigration is a problem, yes, but frankly, it’s legal immigration that’s by far the biggest threat.  Because of that idiotic chain migration provision that the White-hating, controlled pawn named Ted Kennedy introduced into the 1965 bill, the extended family is defined so broadly that the whole Third World can practically immigrate legally to the US based on the provisions.  Now, the Senate wants to increase the legal immigration quotas still further, doubling them, so that Whites become a minority in less than a decade.

Even without the idiotic changes proposed by the Senate, the current legal immigration quotas (1.4-1.5 million a year or so) are killing Whites in the US, driving down our birth rates from crowding and crime and the wrecking of our environment, and otherwise making the US uninhabitable.  Where I used to work, so many East Indians were brought in on H1-B’s—willing to work for a tiny fraction of US tech workers and engineers, living in squalid conditions and, uh, skimping on hygiene to keep their own costs down—that hard-working Whites with $70,000 in educational loans were either out of a job, or their wages driven down so low that they could not even pay the rent. 

Even if we could send out all the illegals from the US at once, we’ll have accomplished little of substance unless we also bring the legal immigration numbers way down, to less than 100,000 a year or so.  The problem is, I have my doubts about whether this is really politically feasible, and if that’s true, it means that Whites in the USA are doomed.  With the status quo policies, we’ll be a disenfranchised minority in the US within about 15 years, tops, as we already are in many states like California, other places in the SW and cesspools like much of Illinois, southern Florida, and New York, New England and New Jersey.  That’s not a country I want to live in and contribute my labor and hard-earned tax dollars too.

I fear that only an economic collapse could change the tide, and possibly cause a break-up of the United States of America that would at least provide a new White homeland with actually solid borders and minimal immigration levels (as learned from bitter experience).  Other than this, drastic measures like some form of consolidation in strong White states in the US, and even mass emigration may be the only way to fight the coming marginalization and ruin of White society: 

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/fred_reed_on_the_growth_of_minorities/
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/political_violence_vibrancy_we_can_learn_from/

We must start preparing.

Posted by José María on May 17, 2006, 05:47 AM | #

I find your analysis weak, specially because you forget Corporations, the real power supporting mass immigration. They want cheap labour and they have got it, not only many immigrants are already cheap labour but also Whites will be if don´t want to starve.

So your claim “to have more babies” is wrong, it has nothing to do with that, it has more to do with being conscious of who are ruling us and what are their aims, if we don´t realize we will be slaves forever. What would be the difference if there are more Whites brainwashed, leftist oriented by education and media, without a sense of proud of their own race and traditions?

Posted by Jesse Jameson on May 17, 2006, 05:50 AM | #

“otherwise there are virtually no white Hispanics in the U.S.  And even with respect to those few “Hispanic whites” who can be found here, what is the point of making their “Hispanic” background salient?”

Exactly.  Donald, that’s fascinating history, and thanks for sharing with us—I never knew about the Irish invasion of Canada, that’s quite amazing!

I’m just extremely pessimistic about the current situation.  Many of the pro-immigrationists and open-borders people like to use historical examples of reaction to mass immigration (like those of the Irish) to try to argue, that our current immigration wave would be no different and no problem.  The problem with this line of thought, is that just because something was true in the past, does not in any way mean that it’s true of the future.

Analogies are problematic because the underlying conditions in two different cases may be radically different.  During the period of the Irish wave, the US had vast quantities of open, abundant, and fertile land.  That’s no longer the case.  During the Ellis Island period, Europeans—and almost all Europeans—were fleeing other tyrannical, imperialistic countries to the free (and still underpopulated) USA. 

Now, the situation is totally, utterly different.  Today, the US is the overpopulated, arrogant, imperialistic state, while at least a fraction of European countries (noted in posts above) are actually moving back to the principles of a republic.  It is the US elites who insist on basically destroying the White society here.  It is in the US where Whites, the founding population, are about to become a minority.  Over 95% of the Hispanics are definitely non-White, and if there are any doubts about them, take a look at the photos and mug shots on this page—http://mpdc.dc.gov/mpdc/cwp/view,a,1244,q,543077,mpdcNav_GID,1533,mpdcNav,|31538|.asp

Joe Guzzardi posted this on VDare a while ago, and as you can obviously see, the Hispanics here—the thugs wanted for murder—are definitely not White by any stretch.  They’re a separate ethnic group, and they carry with them all the propensity for vicious criminal activity and hatred that their compatriots back home have.  The Irish were absolutely a world apart, which is why Hispanics are indeed classed separately.  As Ben Tillman is saying, they should just be maintained in the separate category and we should stop with this dumb stratification of “non-Hispanic White” or whatever.  The Whites are White, and the 95+% of Hispanics who are non-White, are non-White, period, a Third World community that is a separate group.

The even scarier thing about those photos, is that they’re in black Washington D.C., yet as Guzzardi pointed out, even there the worst criminals are Hispanic.  Think then about California and other SW states, where the already minuscule White fraction among the Hispanics is almost nil, and the Hispanics are ven more prone to join gangs and engage in criminal activity, and you can see why Whites are deserting such budding Third-World cesspools by the thronging millions.  Even supposedly “better” immigrants like people from East India do ttremendous damage in their own way.  Indians on H1-B visas, coming en masse, are utterly gutting the US tech industry, working for slave wages, skimping on basic things like hygiene, having a dozen of them crowd into the same tenement while doing shoddy programming or engineering work but favored by employers since they supposedly save money.

Again, that’s the key point here—it’s legal immigration even more than the illegal kind that’s destroying us as a nation, turning Whites into a minority, and that’s why we have to curb and bring the levels down to less than 100,000 or so a year.  I’m just not confident that’s politically feasible, which is why I fear that only dramatic measures can have an effect and are necessary:
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/fred_reed_on_the_growth_of_minorities/
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/political_violence_vibrancy_we_can_learn_from/

Again, we have to start preparing, immediately, for the crisis and consolidating ourselves.  White society and Western heritage will survive, but we have to prepare adeptly to enable it.

Posted by Jesse Jameson on May 17, 2006, 06:00 AM | #

BTW, one more thing I should mention, as this has come up elsewhere—I’ve noticed how much the pro-immigrationists in both parties (and the neocons, of course) seem to absolutely despise White southerners.  That’s because White Southerners (outside of the Third-World region of south Florida, basically), and their cultural compatriots in the White Midwest and the Mountain States, represent the one group of people in the US that still unabashedly celebrates our Western, Christian heritage in the US every time they display the old Confederate flag.  This flag didn’t stand for slavery, it stood for freedom from the imperialistic, money-grubbing, corrupt fools from the North who wanted to destroy the South’s culture and eventually bring about the downfall of the founding White majority in the USA. 

Southerners who wave the Confederate flag are among the few holdouts against the creeping Third World takeover here, and they’ll probably be the nucleus of the new White nation—whatever we call it—when the US breaks up, which it will quite soon.  I hope that White Southerners and Whites elsewhere in the US, are able to proudly hold up that flag and wave it, to display it as much as possible, to openly celebrate their White culture and heritage, and to celebrate the courage and toughness of the Confederate heroes.  We need more of that.  We all salute you, and we hope you will continue to wave the flag and proudly and unwaveringly display it as a symbol of defiance against those who would turn us into a minority here, and those who spit on our Whiteness and our Western heritage at every point they can.

Posted by Jesse Jameson on May 17, 2006, 06:24 AM | #

BTW, just as heads-up—be wary of any so-called immigration “reformers” who talk up assimilationist policies and then go on to say that mass 3rd-world immigration is OK.  I’ve met many of these types, they sometimes infiltrate immigration reform groups, and they’re basically open-borders advocates in reformers’ clothing.  Their classic line is, “Sure, we can open up our borders and let in tens of millions of Third-World immigrants, just so long as we can get ‘em good jobs, get ‘em watchin’ American Idol, acting and votin’ like Americans, speakin’ English, fightin’ in wars and wavin’ Old Glory.”

These assimilationist folks are frankly dangerous because they undermine immigration reform from within by masquerading as reformers themselves when they actually want to fling the borders open and turn Whites into a minority even faster.  In my experience, many of the worst immigrants in the neighborhood were somewhat acculturated to the US and had many traits the assimiliationists love to play up, but they were the ones most involved in gangs and crimes, and generally most capable of doing damage to the neighborhood.  They were also among the most alienated.  African-Americans also, who’ve been here for centuries themselves, supposedly fit the assimilation model in some respects that the assimiliationists like to play up, but they were the most threatening in terms of crime, drug-running and gangs.

The solution is not too adopt some feeble attempt at superficial assimilation of tens of millions and then hundreds of millions of Third World invaders entering in massive waves.  The only solution is to stop their entry in the first place, and that means sharply reducing legal as much as illegal immigration numbers, maybe down to 70,000 a year.  As this is probably a non-starter politically, then we likely have to prepare for the unfolding crisis and the break-up of the United States—or whatever we should call this imperialistic shell that’s grown in the place of what we knew as the US, and is intent on attacking its White population and White society with every opportunity that arises.

Posted by rustymason on May 17, 2006, 08:00 AM | #

Legal, schmeagel.  The only thing that really matters is the race/ethnicity of the newcomers.  Are they like us, or different?

Posted by Amalek on May 17, 2006, 08:21 AM | #

Hey, America. Want another 100,000,000 fertile, low-IQ, non-white immigrants over the next 20 years? That’s what the current amnesty/compromise bill would mean: a one-third increase in the population, over and above all the extra passengers the present black and brown element will be adding, according to Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1076.cfm

Your ‘conservative’ NWO presidente is moving behind CIRA, sponsored by two GOP legislators (one of them from Florida called Martinez):

If enacted, CIRA would be the most dramatic change in immigration law in 80 years. In its overall impact on the nation, the bill would rival other historic milestones, such as the creation of Social Security or Medicare.

The bill would give amnesty to 10 million illegal immigrants and quintuple the rate of legal immigration into the U.S. Under the bill, the annual inflow of immigrants with the option of becoming legal permanent residents would rise from the current level of one million per year to more than five million per year. Within a few years, the annual inflow of new immigrants would exceed one percent of the current U.S. population. This would be the highest immigration rate in U.S. history.

Admittedly Rector’s assumptions are arguable. It could be that the influx would be only just over 70,000,000 souls, so no need to panic about running out of oil, water, road, etc.

Naturally, since most of CIRA’s newbies would be legal from Day One, the full welfare wagon would be wheeled out for them with no tedious legal wranglings about their entitlements needed. And they’d be instantly enfranchised to vote for more of those goodies. Feeling rich, Middle America? Give till it hurts as you watch yourselves being turned into a minority in your country. You’ve got to expiate your inherited burden of evil-whiteness somehow, haven’t you? What Abe Foxman said.

Posted by karlmagnus on May 17, 2006, 11:42 AM | #

JJR’s going squishy left in his old age, and fails to comprehend the economic costs of immigration. 

Counting the huge slush funds the governmehnt is forced to pay out, there is NO economic argument for heavy low skill immigration, legal or illegal. 

If the pressure at the border gets too great, spermicides should be sprayed in Mexico’s drinking water to reduce their excessive population growth (this would be a good solution for the problems of the Third World as a whole, although a program of African old age pensions would be less draconian and might achive much of the same objective.) 

If the elite want their lawns mowed, they can mow them themselves, preferably in high summer with a non-power mower, and save the fees at their useless health club.

Moderate amounts of high skill immigration probably help the economy, but the US is far above that point, and has been since at least 1980.

Posted by yoy on May 17, 2006, 12:16 PM | #

If Australia was directly connected to Indonesia I wonder if you’d have ‘virtually no illegal immigrants’