UPDATED (2/2/018): Reversion To The Neoconservative Mean On Immigration & In Commentary? Sure Looks Like It.

Donald Trump, IMMIGRATION, Israel, Media, Neoconservatism

Look, the establishment has never been on the same page as the people when it comes to immigration. So, to talk about a reversion to the neoconservative mean is probably slightly inaccurate. But in 2016, when Candidate Trump was in full Deplorable mode, Fox News would have been less neoconservative on immigration. However, as Fox News shifts back to its neoconservative happy place, no discussion of an immigration moratorium will percolate through the noise on that channel (other than on the great Tucker Carlson’s show).

Duly, on January 9, I believe it was, neoconservative broadcaster Tammy Bruce insisted that not sending home Salvadorians temporarily in the US prevents others—Mexicans, Filipinos, Yemenis, in Bruce’s words—from entering the United States. LEGALLY. All this unfolded on The Story with Martha MacCallum.

No doubt, President Trump has shifted the immigration debate immeasurably. But I suspect the consensus in the immigration debate will begin to shift back to the pre-Trump era, as Bruce’s imbecilic quip indicates.

Although an immigration moratorium is desperately needed, at one million individuals a year—legal immigration will continue to be touted as the American Way. The ONLY way. The objection being to illegal immigration only, and not to the transformative powers of mass immigration.

Foreign policy has certainly seen the normalization of neoconservatism, echoed in the hiring by Breitbart of Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick. Glick, whose writing I’m unable to plow through, is hardly an America Firster. However, Deplorables, apparently, need schooling from an Israel First, war-war-monger.

I say this as the quintessential (probably the original ), pro-Israel,  America First, libertarian, Jewish writer. See “The Titan is Tired,” for an example.

Here’s my critique of Glick’s weak One-State solution gibberish: “One State: Is It The Solution Or The Final Solution To The Jewish State?

UPDATE I (2/2/018): It’s spreading, or taking hold again: the neoconservative blight, evinced in “Trump Is Echoing Talleyrand In His Middle East Diplomacy. That’s Right. Talleyrand”:

Talleyrand? Wasn’t he a slightly diluted, cunning Jacobin, responsible for anti-clergy moves during the French Revolution, which was 100 percent the antithesis of the American Revolution? Indeed, conservatives are duped by and enamored of the modern-day Jacobins.

UPDATE II (3/26):

Bolton:

Comments Off on UPDATED (2/2/018): Reversion To The Neoconservative Mean On Immigration & In Commentary? Sure Looks Like It.

Toilet Tidbits About America’s Favorite Immigrant Groups

America, China, Culture, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Etiquette, IMMIGRATION, Multiculturalism, Technology, The West

Labour of lavs”* is a delightfully titled article in The Economist (an excellent source of global news for those of us who’re sick of the cesspool that is the American media, Left and Right).

“… In the past few decades China has done a fairly good job of supplying basic sanitation. Only 2% of Chinese still do their business in the bushes, compared with 40% in India; three-quarters have access to toilets which the World Health Organisation deems acceptable, up from less than two-thirds in 2000. But about 70m still use shared facilities, and 260m continue to rely on bucket loos, open pits and other grungy facilities. Some are literally lethal: last month police traced a huge blast in the port city of Ningbo, which killed two people, back to an exploding septic tank. …”

If toilet habits are so abysmal in China, just imagine what these are like in India.

MORE in “Labour of lavs.

* A combination of “lavatory” and the phrase a labor of love. The image is of a typical Chinese toilet.

UPDATED (6/15): Japanese Leaders Are Patriotic, Rejecting Mass Immigration As An Answer To Declining Birthrates

Asia, Donald Trump, IMMIGRATION, Multiculturalism, Nationalism, Nationhood

It’s shameful—treason, if you are a politician—to suggest that an aging and shrinking population is REASON TO FLOOD A COUNTRY WITH IMMIGRANTS, bringing about the near extinction of the native population.

This I’ve said in all my writing on immigration, and in response to the “demographics are destiny crowd” (Mark Steyn being among them). See: “Beck, Wilders, and His Boosters’ Blind Spot” (2010)

Not being traitors to their own, Japanese leaders are having none of it.

Japan will not accept mass immigration, says Masashi Mori, the mayor of Toyama. Efforts to raise the birth rate have had little success, although there are a few exceptions (see article). The only alternative is to learn to live with far fewer people. That implies great upheaval, which Toyama hopes to minimise.

MORE: “A small Japanese city shrinks with dignity.”

UPDATE (6/15):

Trump tells Shinzo Abe, “You don’t have this (immigration) problem, but I can send you 25 million Mexicans and you’ll be out of office very soon.” Brilliant audacity.

Comments Off on UPDATED (6/15): Japanese Leaders Are Patriotic, Rejecting Mass Immigration As An Answer To Declining Birthrates

The Conservative Cult Of Dr. Martin Luther King, Communist, Plagiarist, And Worse

BAB's A List, Boyd Cathey, Communism, Conservatism, Cultural Marxism, Ethics, History, Intellectualism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Morality, Republicans

I almost lost my lunch listening to a radio rerun of Sean Hannity’s odes to Martin Luther King Jr.  To declare the schmaltzy, sub-intellectual fare of  King Jr.  to be the greatest thinking ever is to kill one’s intellectual credibility and affront the history of thought. I read Plato—yes yes, he was a statist—and I think, “Just wow,”and “what genius.” I listen to the “I Have a Dream” speech, and I think, “Oprah,” and “what kitsch.”

Barley A Blog correspondent Dr. Boyd Cathey fills in the blanks:

For the past thirty-five years (officially since 1986) the third Monday in January has been celebrated as a federal holiday, Martin Luther King Day. Federal and state offices and many businesses either close or go on limited schedules. We are awash with public observances, parades, prayer breakfasts, stepped-up school projects for our unwary and intellectually-abused children, and gobs and gobs of over-the-top television “specials” and movies, all geared to tell us—to shout it in our faces, if we don’t pay strict attention—that Martin Luther King Jr. was some sort of superhuman, semi-divine civil rights leader who brought the promise of equality to millions of Americans, a kind of modern St. John the Baptist ushering in the Millenium. And that he stands just below Jesus Christ in the pantheon of revered and adored historical personages…and in some ways, perhaps above Jesus Christ in the minds of many of his present-day devotees and epigones.

It seems to do no good to issue a demurrer to this veritable religious “cult of Dr. King.” There are, indeed, numerous “Christian” churches that now “celebrate” this day just as if it were a major feast in the Christian calendar. In short, Martin Luther King has received de facto canonization religiously and in the public mind as no other person in American history.

Mention the fact that King plagiarized as much as 40 percent of his Boston University Ph.D. dissertation [cf. Theodore Pappas, Plagiarism and the Culture War: The Writings of Martin Luther King, Jr, and Other Prominent Americans, 1998, and Martin Luther King Jr Plagiarism Story, 1994], or that he worked closely with known Communists throughout his life, or that he advocated American defeat in Vietnam while praising Ho Chi Minh, or that he implicitly countenanced violence and Marxism, especially later in his life [cf., Congressional Record, 129, no. 130 (October 3, 1983): S13452-S13461]—mention any of these accusations confirmed begrudgingly by his establishment biographers David Garrow and Taylor Branch, or mention his even-by-current-standards violent “rough sex” escapades (which apparently involved even under-age children) [cf., Cooper Sterling, January 13, 2018]—and you immediately get labeled a “racist” and condemned by not just the zealous King flame-keepers on the Left, but by such neoconservatives like James Kirchick and Dinesh D’Souza who supposedly are on the Right.

Indeed, in some ways Establishment “conservatives” such as Jonah Goldberg, Rich Lowry (National Review), D’Souza, Glenn Beck, the talking heads on Fox and the furious scribblers at The Weekly Standard, and many others, not only eagerly buy into this narrative, they now have converted King into a full-fledged, card-carrying member of “conservatism inc.”—the (contemporary) “conservative movement,” a “plaster saint” iconized as literally no one else in our history.

Celebrating King becomes a means for these ersatz conservatives to demonstrate their “civil rights” and “egalitarian” bona fides. The neocons, with their philosophical and ideological origins over on the Trotskyite Left of the 1930s and 1940s, when they made their pilgrimage towards conservatism in the 1960s and 1970s, brought with them a fervent believe in a globalist New World Order egalitarianism that characterized Trotskyite Marxist ideology, and the determination to redefine and re-orient the traditional American Rightwing, and to re-write, as well, American history.

Thus, the purges of the old conservative movement in the 1980s and 1990s—there was no room for Southern conservatives like Mel Bradford, no room for traditionalist Catholics like Frederick Wilhelmsen or Brent Bozell Sr., no room for paleolibertarians like Murray Rothbard, no room for Old Right anti-egalitarians like Paul Gottfried, and no room for “America Firsters” like Pat Buchanan … And those traditional conservatives who were too significant in the “pantheon of greats,” like a Russell Kirk, they attempted to simply whitewash and give new, cleaned up images and identities (part and parcel of their “rewriting” of conservatism). Thus, Kirk’s opposition to the civil rights bills of the 1960s and 1970s, his staunch arguments against egalitarianism—are all swept under the carpet or carefully ignored.

In this, in fact, the dominant necons have joined with their cousins on the “farther Left,” to the point that Bush consultant guru and Fox pundit, Karl Rove, could boast that hardcore Marxist/Communist historian Eric Foner (who lamented the collapse of Soviet Communism) was his favorite historian (when examining Reconstruction) [See Dr. Paul Gottfried’s incisive critique of Foner and those “conservatives” who have praised him, “Guilt Trip,” The American Conservative,” May 4, 2009, pp. 21-23].

King Day becomes, then, for the Conservative Movement an opportunity for it to beat its chest, brag about its commitment to civil rights and the American “dream, the unrealized idea of equality (that is, to distort and re-write the history of the American Founding), and to protect its left flank against the ever increasing charges that it could be, just might be, maybe is—“racist.”

And for the “farther Left,” that catapulting cultural Marxist juggernaut that continues to move the societal and political goalposts to the Left, King Day becomes as a major ideological blitzkrieg, a weaponized cudgel used to strike down and silence anyone, anywhere, who might offer the slightest dissent to the latest barbarity and latest “advance” in civil rights, now expanded to include not just everything “racial,” but also same sex marriage, transgenderism and abortion on demand. Martin Luther King–that deeply and irredeemably flawed and fraudulent figure imposed upon us and our consciousness—has become an icon, a totem, who serves in martyred death the purposes of continuing Revolution.

The heavily-documented literature detailing the real Martin Luther King is abundant and remains uncontroverted and uncontested. During the debates over establishing a national “King Day” in the mid-1980s, Senators Jesse Helms and John East (both North Carolinians) led the opposition, supplying the Congress and the nation, and anyone with eyes to read, full accounts of the “King legacy,” from his close association and collaboration with the Communist Party USA to his advocacy of violence and support for the Communists in North Vietnam, to implicit support for Marxist revolution domestically. Ironically, it was Robert Woodson, a noted black Republican, who highlighted, in a lecture given to honor the “conservative virtues of Dr. Martin Luther King” at the Heritage Foundation on November 5, 1993, the difficulties in getting black advocates of the older generation to respect King’s role as a Civil Rights leader. According to Woodson, as quoted in an excellent essay by Paul Gottfried,

“When Dr. King tried to bring the Civil Rights movement together with the [Marxist] peace movement, it was Carl Rowan who characterized King as a Communist, not Ronald Reagan. I remember being on the dais of the NAACP banquet in Darby, Pennsylvania when Roy Wilkins soundly castigated King for this position.” [Paul Gottfried, “The Cult of St. Martin Luther King – A Loyalty Test for Careerist Conservatives?” January 16, 2012]

But not only that, behind the scenes there were voluminous secretly-made FBI recordings and accounts of King’s violent sexual escapades, often times with more than two or three others involved in such “rough sex” trysts; and of his near total hypocrisy when discussing civil rights and other prominent civil rights leaders. It is, to put it mildly, a sorry record, scandalous even by today’s standards…Indeed, King makes Harvey Weinstein look like a meek choirboy in comparison.

But you won’t hear any of that mentioned by the slobbering Mainstream Media or the media mavens on Fox News. In fact, such comments will get you exiled to the far reaches of the Gobi Desert and labeled a “racist,” quicker that my cocker spaniel gobbles down his kibble.

THERE IS MORE HERE.

==========================================

~ DR. BOYD D. CATHEY is an Unz Review columnist, as well as a Barely a Blog contributor, whose work is easily located on this site under the “BAB’s A List” search category. Dr. Cathey earned an MA in history at the University of Virginia (as a Thomas Jefferson Fellow), and as a Richard M Weaver Fellow earned his doctorate in history and political philosophy at the University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. After additional studies in theology and philosophy in Switzerland, he taught in Argentina and Connecticut before returning to North Carolina. He was State Registrar of the North Carolina State Archives before retiring in 2011. He writes for The Unz Review, The Abbeville Institute, Confederate Veteran magazine, The Remnant, and other publications in the United States and Europe on a variety of topics, including politics, social and religious questions, film, and music.