Category Archives: The West

Ilhan Omar IS Emblematic Of Immigration Preferences

Education, IMMIGRATION, Multiculturalism, Race, Racism, The West

Tucker Carlson is quite correct to tether the character of Representative Ilhan Omar to America’s immigration preferences.

By virtue of its main source countries, America’s immigration policy privileges individuals like Omar:

Angry, more likely to be anti-white (because non-white), highly receptive to theories that blacken the West and porcelainize the undeveloped world. This poison, by the way, is hothouses in the U.S.—K to 12 and beyond.

Ilhan Omar, said the Fabulous One, is living proof that the way we practice immigration has become dangerous to this country. … immigration laws are undermining America.” Of course. It’s what we restrictionists have been saying for decades.

* Image courtesy of Jack Wilder-Real American.

Alexander Acosta Did Not Need To Fall On His Sword

Constitution, Justice, Law, Sex, The West

The lynch mob against Alex Acosta, Trump’s former labor secretary, is just that: a lynch mob. Jeffrey Epstein is the slimy sleazebag here, not Mr. Acosta.

I don’t usually agree with broadcaster Michael Medved, who leans heavily left. However, today, Mr. Medved did a bang-up job defending the rules of evidence. Or, what Joe Biden once denounced as Western jurisprudence.

The girls involved with Epstein did not wish to testify. And who can blame them?

And while “[t]he evidence in the original case appears overwhelming—in an interview with the Miami Herald the lead detective recounted phone records, flight logs and instructions for delivering flowers to one of Mr Epstein’s young fixations, alongside her high-school report card”—Epstein’s “original defense team included Alan Dershowitz and Kenn Starr, two lawyers skilled in defending the indefensible.” (The Economist.)

Epstein hired the best lawyers who were unmatched by the prosecution and the limits of the law.

“… his star-studded lawyers,” reports the Daily Beast, “threatened to go to trial in a case prosecutors feared was unwinnable, in part because Epstein’s team dredged up dirt on the victims, including social media posts indicating drug use.”

Dershowitz (who has defended President Trump with his usual legal élan), “told The Daily Beast that his accuser, Virginia Roberts, “has committed perjury and will continue to commit perjury in federal court.”

“I am asking the FBI to come to this trial because perjury will be committed in front of a federal judge and in a federal courtroom,” Dershowitz added. “And I will prove it is she who is committing perjury.”

Even the Economist concedes that it was not at all “obvious that the top federal prosecutor who negotiated the deal, Alexander Acosta, had better options available.”

“… [T]he difficulties of securing convictions in cases of rape or sexual abuse are well known.”

Alex Acosta, whose address to the public I found credible, had to ultimately defer to police and prosecutors in Palm Beach, Florida.

UPDATED (7/6): NEW COLUMN: A July Fourth Toast To Thomas Jefferson—And The Declaration

America, Founding Fathers, History, Nationhood, The West

“Let us, then, toast Thomas Jefferson—and the Anglo-Saxon tradition that sired and inspired him.”Ilana Mercer, July 4, 2019

WND: By Ilana Mercer

The Declaration of Independence—whose proclamation, on July 4, 1776, we celebrate—has been mocked out of meaning.

To be fair to the liberal Establishment, ordinary Americans are not entirely blameless. For most, Independence Day means firecrackers and cookouts. The Declaration doesn’t feature. In fact, contemporary Americans are less likely to read it now that it is easily available on the Internet, than when it relied on horseback riders for its distribution.

Back in 1776, gallopers carried the Declaration through the country. Printer John Dunlap had worked “through the night” to set the full text on “a handsome folio sheet,” recounts historian David Hackett Fischer in Liberty And Freedom. And President (of the Continental Congress) John Hancock urged that the “people be universally informed.”

Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, called it “an expression of the American Mind.” An examination of Jefferson‘s constitutional thought makes plain that he would no longer consider the mind of the collective mentality of the D.C. establishment, “American” in any meaningful way. For the Jeffersonian mind was that of an avowed Whig—an American Whig whose roots were in the English Whig political philosophy of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

By “all men are created equal,” Jefferson, who also wrote in praise of a “Natural Aristocracy,” did not imply that all men were similarly endowed. Or that they were entitled to healthcare, education, amnesty, and a decent wage, à la Obama.

Rather, Jefferson was affirming the natural right of “all men” to be secure in their enjoyment of their “life, liberty and possessions.”

This is the very philosophy Hillary Clinton explicitly disavowed during one of the mindless presidential debates of 2007. Asked by a YouTubester to define “liberal,” Hillary revealed she knew full-well that the word originally denoted the classical liberalism of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. But she then settled on “progressive” as the appropriate label for her Fabian socialist plank.

Contra Clinton, as David N. Mayer explains in The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson, colonial Americans were steeped in the writings of English Whigs—John Locke, Algernon Sidney, Paul Rapin, Thomas Gordon and others. The essence of this “pattern of ideas and attitudes,” almost completely lost today, was a view of government as an inherent threat to liberty and the necessity for eternal vigilance.

Jefferson, in particular, was adamant about the imperative “to be watchful of those in power,” a watchfulness another Whig philosopher explained thus: “Considering what sort of Creature Man is, it is scarce possible to put him under too many Restraints, when he is possessed of great Power.”

“As Jefferson saw it,” expounds Mayer, “the Whig, zealously guarding liberty, was suspicious of the use of government power,” and assumed “not only that government power was inherently dangerous to individual liberty but also that, as Jefferson put it, ‘the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.’”

For this reason, the philosophy of government that Jefferson articulated in the Declaration radically shifted sovereignty from parliament to the people.

But Jefferson‘s muse for the “American Mind” is even older.

The Whig tradition is undeniably Anglo-Saxon. Our founding fathers’ political philosophy originated with their Saxon forefathers, and the ancient rights guaranteed by the Saxon constitution. With the Declaration, Jefferson told Henry Lee in 1825, he was also protesting England‘s violation of her own ancient tradition of natural rights. As Jefferson saw it, the Colonies were upholding a tradition the Crown had abrogated.

Philosophical purist that he was, moreover, Jefferson considered the Norman Conquest to have tainted this English tradition with the taint of feudalism. “To the Whig historian,” writes Mayer, “the whole of English constitutional history since the Conquest was the story of a perpetual claim kept up by the English nation for a restoration of Saxon laws and the ancient rights guaranteed by those laws.”

If Jefferson begrudged the malign influence of the Normans on the natural law he cherished, imagine how he’d view our contemporary cultural conquistadors from the South, whose customs preclude natural rights and natural reason!

Naturally, Jefferson never entertained the folly that he was of immigrant stock. He considered the English settlers of America courageous conquerors, much like his Saxon forebears, to whom he compared them. To Jefferson, early Americans were the contemporary carriers of the Anglo-Saxon project.

The settlers spilt their own blood “in acquiring lands for their settlement,” he wrote with pride in A Summary View of the Rights of British America. “For themselves they fought, for themselves they conquered, and for themselves alone they have right to hold.” Thus they were “entitled to govern those lands and themselves.”

For the edification of libertarians prone to vulgar individualism, the Declaration of Independence is at once a statement of individual and national sovereignty.

And, notwithstanding the claims of the multicultural noise machine, the Declaration was as mono-cultural as its author.

Let us, then, toast Thomas Jefferson—and the Anglo-Saxon tradition that sired and inspired him.

©By ILANA MERCER

* Image courtesy of WND.

UPDATE (7/6/019):

 
“She is brilliant!
Many a radio host intimidated by her writing and brains. Otherwise she would be on many shows.”
“What an inspiring, informative, patriotic, reasoned, accurately historical article is this! I learned a lot, especially from the British end of things. Much gratitude for this substantial article — and admiration for its able writer! God bless you and yours…”
 

‘Who Spawned The Christchurch Killer?’

Criminal Injustice, Donald Trump, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Terrorism, The West

It’s been a while since Pat Buchanan wrote about the fallout from decades of centrally planned mass immigration and the attendant forced integration. When he does, Pat is second to none.

“Who spawned the Christchurch killer?:

… Now, there are no excuses, or defenses, for what happened in Christchurch. But there is an explanation.
… without the people’s consent, the great experiment began:

America’s doors were thrown open to peoples of every religion, race, culture and creed, to create a different nation that mirrored all mankind in its diversity, in Ben Wattenberg’s phrase, a universal nation.

The problem: A universal nation is a contradiction in terms. A nation of all races, religions and tribes had never before existed.

The liberal democracies that embraced this ideology, this idea, are at war with human nature, and are losing this war to tribalism and authoritarianism.

As for Christchurch, unfortunately, such horrors appear to have become the new normal. But Brenton Tarrant alone is responsible for what he did. And it was not Trump but the New World Order globalists who fertilized the soil that spawned him. …