Category Archives: IMMIGRATION

UPDATED: Just Like Hitler (Not)

Federalism, IMMIGRATION, Law, States' Rights

The outrage of it! Imagine giving local police the “authority to check the immigration status for individuals during traffic stops and other minor violations.” Can there be anything more heinous than the “police checking the immigration status of persons who are lawfully stopped or taken into custody”! What next? Take them off the streets if they’ve committed a crime? The mind boggles.

Lawmakers in Arizona, Mississippi, Indiana, Utah, South Carolina and Alabama have successfully passed strong enforcement legislation against illegal immigration … The U.S Department of Justice has moved forward with lawsuits against four of those states, and Arizona’s well-known bill, S.B. 1070, will be reviewed by the United States Supreme Court some time next spring. … The main focus of the DOJ lawsuits are laws that give local police authority to check the immigration status for individuals during traffic stops and other minor violations.

(NumbersUSA)

According to the Los Angeles Times, federal judges have responded by blocking these “strict new immigration laws adopted by conservative legislatures in half a dozen states …” However, “legal experts believe the Supreme Court’s conservative majority will take a sharply different approach.”

The high court said it would hear the Arizona immigration case in April, and Eastman said he expected the justices to divide along the same lines as in the May ruling upholding Arizona’s sanctions on employers who hire illegal workers. Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined with Roberts in that case.

(LA Times)

As a legal immigrant, I went through an ordeal to get into the US. About me, Uncle Sam knows, for instance, that I do not carry any dread diseases. (I suspect some of you are relieved to know that the new immigrants at your kid’s school are TB free, right? Oh, they’re illegal?) Would I mind if a cop asked me for my ID, if he had reason to suspect I was up to no good? Why would I? The last time a cop asked me for an ID was when I applied for a license to carry concealed. That seemed eminently reasonable.

UPDATE (Dec. 30): Myron, unchecked crime is no answer. What a terrible position a liberal American is in: He much admit that as an upstanding citizen who obeys the law, he should be left unmolested by those who’ve sworn to protect him, whereas those who are not in this category should be sent packing. The upshot of this hue and cry over checking the immigration status of individuals who’ve broke the law will be that the poor natives will continue to be molested by the homegrown terrorists of the TSA, whereby your average illegal drunk driver, a lethal weapon, will leave the scene of an accident having obtained all the protections the ACLU can agitate for.

UPDATED: RIP GOP & Party of Liberty

Democracy, Democrats, Elections, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Republicans

Smug, self-satisfied left-libertarians like to dream that their constituency is differently derived, but the demographic facts are straightforward. As the GOP goes, so goes the libertarian movement. We know this, but reminders are necessary: The upshot of continued, unfettered, mass immigration—as it is currently practiced and preached by American central planners—is the triumph of tribalism, pillage politics, and left-liberalism.

Over to Patrick J. Buchanan, in “Suicide of a Superpower”:

“White Americans, who provide nine out of ten Republican votes every presidential year, have fallen to less than two-thirds of the U.S. population and three-fourths of the electorate. Meanwhile, the number of people of color is growing, both as a share of the population and as a share of the electorate. An in presidential elections, people of color vote Democratic—in landslides. Asians vote 60 percent Democratic, Hispanic 60-70 percent, and African American 90-95 percent.” (Page 338.)

POIGNANTLY PUT, “Either the Republican Party puts an end to mass immigration, or mass immigration will put an end to the Republican Party.” (Page 423.)

[SNIP]

Ditto the future of a philosophy (libertarianism) which offers far fewer distributive spoils than does the Republican Party, yet demands from voters more by way of reason, for they must understand that less loot is better for them and their posterity.

The future dispensation of America, once the host population has been swamped and consigned to minority status, will be that of a third-world dominated, dominant-party state.

UPDATE: Texas is most certainly not “stubbornly Republican,” it is barely Republican; it is hanging on to a Republican slim majority by the proverbial hairs of its chinny chin chin:

“For the first time in the state’s history, Texas is now a majority-minority state, and the new round of redistricting will likely create at least one, and probably two majority-minority districts in Texas.” (via Race 4 2012)

Texas won’t be Republican for long.

Michel Cloutier: Canada has a different immigration complexion. It also has a different immigration process. Canada has something of a merit system, although, like the US, the overwhelming numbers of incomers result from the family unification aberration. However, in Canada legal immigration is driven by a point system. You get points for education, language (only English or French: OMG, how chauvinistic) and age. Your profession should also be in-line with the country’s needs. The US is a work-visa system, with one, not-always worthy sponsor acting as a ticket for a tribe.

As Michel points out, Canada has large Chinese and Indian immigration populations, which are somewhat less welfare dependent, more educated and socially conservative, and have less of a representation among the ranks of law-breakers. Are they less inclined to vote liberal?

UPDATED: Liberty’s Civilizational Dimension

Foreign Policy, History, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Liberty, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Old Right, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Republicans, Ron Paul

LIBERTY & CIVILIZATION. In the post “STRASSEL’s Non Sequitur,” it was pointed out that whether Ron Paul’s statements about Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum were true or not, “Paul has taken a classic Chris-Matthews kind of ad hominem swipe against Bachmann: she hates Muslims. Santorum hates gays and Muslims. Siding with the Left by adopting its arguments may be situationally advantageous, but it will backfire on a Republican candidate in the long run. This tactic, even if it was tantamount to a not-so-funny joke, damages Ron Paul’s effectiveness from the vantage point of conservative libertarians who think that liberty cannot be reduced to the non-aggression axiom and has a cultural and civilizational dimension.”

In their demands for an explanations, my libertarian readers seemed to forget that “conservative libertarians” are the majority who matter.

This writer is a paleo-libertarian; a libertarian of the Right. If libertarianism is ever to appeal to middle America, it is this libertarianism, as it is rooted in the founding ideas, which is also why I prefer classical liberalism as a philosophical label.

As I pointed out in “Libertarianism Lite,” “A certain establishment-endorsed libertarianism is currently being touted on the Fox News and Business channels as the only legitimate brand of libertarianism. This life-style libertarianism, or libertarianism-lite, as I call it, tends to conflate libertinism with liberty, and appeals to hippies of all ages, provided they remain juveniles forever.”

These sinecured TV types appeal to middle America not at all. “Ordinary, gun-toting, homeschooling, bible-thumping Middle Americans remain unmoved by people who draw their paycheques from foundations, think tanks, and academia, and wax orgiastic about MTV and Dennis Rodman. This stuff might appear sophisticated, but it is reductive and shallow—a post-graduate cleverness that lacks philosophical depth.”

More crucially: If you are driving a libertarianism that hates the whites BHO described derisively as clinging to their bibles, bigotries and guns—you are a marginal and insignificant force in American politics, and so you will remain.

True, salt-of-the-earth America (the founding stock of this great nation) is diminishing fast thanks to immigration central planning: mass immigration from the third world.

In “The Sequel to ‘Suicide of A Superpower’” I wrote: “…almost all the immigrants replacing the host population in the U.S. come from ‘Asia, Africa, and Latin America.’ Given America’s preference for welfare-dependent, third-world immigrants, pillage politics will proliferate. Thirty years on, when the Rubicon is crossed, most Americans will be poorer, less educated, and more welfare-dependent. One party will represent this majority. This party will serve as an instrument of perpetual oppression of the minority by a politically powerful majority. … America is destined to degenerate into a dominant-party state.”

The party of choice for this socially engineered America will never ever be Republican or libertarian leaning (capital or lower case “l”). Never ever.

A candidate who dismisses the national questions, namely immigration, affirmative action, the centrality to America of Christianity and the English language, etc.—fails to appreciate the civilizational dimension of ordered liberty.

Like it or not, the libertarian non-aggression axiom has a cultural and civilizational dimension, stripped of which it has no hope of being restored. I’m not saying that in her fumbling iterations on Islam Ms. Bachmann evinces such an understanding; far from it. But Bachmann is instinctively using Islam and Jihad as proxies for arguments that have become politically too dangerous to make.

For a conservative candidate to mock individuals who do so is a grave error.

UPDATE: “Two new polls show that Ron Paul is now the undisputed leader in Iowa, while Newt Gingrich has deflated and Rick Perry may be on the verge of making a small comeback.”

Insider Advantage (12/18)

Ron Paul 24%
Mitt Romney 18%
Rick Perry 16%
Newt Gingrich 13%
Michele Bachmann 10%
Rick Santorum 3%
Jon Huntsman 4%

UPDATED: Importing Monstrous Morals (The Utouchables)

Business, Ethics, Family, Government, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Labor, Media, Multiculturalism, Political Correctness, Pop-Culture, The West

The excerpt is from “Importing Monstrous Morals,” now on WND.COM:

“In its contempt for women, India, our democratic ally, has advanced little since the time it practiced Sati, ‘the custom of burning a widow alive on the funeral pyre of her husband.’

Then, Western values had valiant defenders like General Sir Charles James Napier. When ‘Hindu priests complained to him about the prohibition of Sati by British authorities,’ Napier replied:

“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.” (Via Wikipedia. )

Nowadays, our ‘national customs’ are exemplified by ‘enlightened’ observers—ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas, for example—who gather and disseminate spotty, decontextualized data, in this case, about “the systematic, widespread elimination of India’s baby girls.” Vargas traveled to India for the current affairs program ’20/20.’

Back in the 1800s, Napier understood “Sati” as a cultural barbarity.

In 2011, Vargas is somewhat vague. Critical faculties dulled by the belief in the equal worth of all cultures and peoples, Vargas failed to firmly finger the sacred cultural cow to which Indians sacrifice a million girls every year. (The Economist is more optimistic, putting the number of girls who go missing as a result of a gender preference for boys at 600,000.)

… poverty and lack of education play almost no role in this morally monstrous practice. …

In utero and outside of it, the elimination of women in India is not about what we here in the US call “reproductive rights.” This is about the right to life. In India, a woman’s life, fetus or fully formed, is worthless.

… Empirical proof of these impregnable positions was provided by the University of California, San Francisco. UCSF conducted a “qualitative study of son preference and fetal sex selection among Indian immigrants in the United States,” showing that “Indian immigrant women are using reproductive technologies and liberal abortion policies in the United States to abort female fetuses.” The study was published in Social Science & Medicine. Therein, the objects of observation are quoted as saying that, “There is such a thing as too many daughters, but not too many sons.”

The complete column is, “Importing Monstrous Morals.” Read it now on WND.COM.

********
STAIRWAY PRESS HAS LAUNCHED A HOLIDAY GIVEAWAY AND FACEBOOK EVENT FOR MY BOOK, Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa.

Invitation have gone out from The Cannibal’s Facebook Fan page. (“Like” The Cannibal when you pop by.) On offer is Mercer merchandise galore. Every fifth buyer of Into the Cannibal’s Pot will receive a free copy of my libertarian manifesto Broad Sides: One Woman’s Clash with a Corrupt Culture, together with a CD of the progressive rock guitar virtuoso and composer Sean Mercer.

Order NOW and The Publisher will endeavor to deliver in time for Christmas.

And do please “Like” Into the Cannibal’s Pot’s Fan Page.

UPDATE (Dec. 16): Pam Maltzman: About the US getting India’s best and brightest: It’s probably the opposite, as those who come here are likely untouchables fleeing the cast-system in India and seeking a better station in life. It is well known, if not documented—for who would have the courage?—that Indians working in our massive high-tech conglomerates, as I stated in the column, are often very average in technical skills. They do, however, excel in exercising bureaucratic power; are quarrelsome, arrogant, and can talk up a storm. As soon as they are in positions of power, they are in the habit of hiring their own kind, often irrespective of merit, and to the detriment of The Other Kind. Massive companies, flush with billions, work much like government, within which fiefdoms with power structures develop. In these chieftainships, the relationship between productivity and profit is loose, at best. So long as the Chief has a good connection to the next top dog, he can chug along for years, before his little nexus collapses. Looking diverse is one of the main goals of the multinational with billions to blow. If a project collapses with a female at the helm, for example, a lot of musical chairs and cover-up action will ensue, as females are a prized minority too.