The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
New Yorker: "Trump’s Opponents Aren’t Arguing for 'Open Borders'—But Maybe They Should"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From The New Yorker:

Our Columnists

Trump’s Opponents Aren’t Arguing for “Open Borders”—But Maybe They Should

By Masha Gessen June 22, 2018

… During the weeks of controversy surrounding the policy of separating families at the border, the Trump Administration has succeeded in framing the debate as one between supporters of enforcing immigration law and supporters of open borders. When he cited the Bible as justification for the family-separation policy, Attorney General Jeff Sessions also used it to attack his imaginary opponents: “I don’t think there is a scriptural basis that justifies any idea that we must have open borders in the world today.” At a rally in Minnesota on Wednesday, Trump declared, “The Democrats want open borders.”

Sadly, this is not true: no voice audible in the American political mainstream is making the argument for open borders. Since Trump’s apparent concession on the issue of separating families, two prominent commentators on the right have argued for fortified border security, and even for the wall itself; some pundits have encouraged Democrats to move further to the right on immigration. No counterargument has emerged from the left. The existence of borders, and the need and right to police them, are among the unquestioned assumptions in the conversation.

Establishment personages like Masha Gessen, former head of US government propaganda activities in Russia, don’t want to get stuck having to explicitly defend Open Borders because it’s obviously an insane policy (look at what percentage of Puerto Ricans now live in the Fifty States). So Masha tries out various passive-aggressive formulations that allow her to back off if seriously challenged.

Even more common is not defending Open Borders, just demonizing anybody or any mechanism for partially closing borders. Hence, anti-anti-Open Borders sentiment is now the conventional wisdom, while defending the existence of borders is seen as hate-filled extremism. For a white gentile to have an opinion on who should not be let in is tantamount to Discrimination and thus unthinkable.

And more and more Establishment voices are coming out as more or less Open Borders advocates. For example, NYT neoconservative columnist Bret Stephens recently called for Open Borders for everybody except people he, personally, dislikes:

I’ll be accused of wanting open borders. Subtract terrorists, criminals, violent fanatics and political extremists from the mix, and I plead guilty to wanting more-open borders. Come on in. There’s more than enough room in this broad and fruitful land of the free.

Masha goes on:

Outside the political mainstream, activists and academics have questioned the certainty that borders must be protected, or that those who live within the borders are automatically entitled to enforce them. In a recent academic collection, Kieran Oberman, a political theorist at the University of Edinburgh, makes the case for a human right to immigration. He argues that the right to enter a country and spend any amount of time there—though not necessarily the right to obtain citizenship—flows naturally from universally declared human rights to freedom of movement, freedom of association, and freedom of occupational choice. In an interconnected world, it is often necessary to cross borders for personal, professional, and political reasons. …

Sarah Fine, a political philosopher at King’s College, in London, who is working on a book on the “right to exclude,” or the right of states to keep people out, has raised another provocative argument. If democracy is a system that guarantees the right of the governed to participate in the governing process, then democracy confined to protected national borders contains an internal contradiction. Those who are banned from entering a country are, in effect, governed—the Central American mother at the border whose child is ripped away from her by U.S. Border Patrol agents is being governed in the extreme—yet they have no say in the rules, or in the election of those who make them.

It’s obviously a betrayal of the principles of American democracy that people who aren’t American citizens and who don’t live in America aren’t even allowed to vote on whether they should be allowed to move to America. It would be like that homeless guy you step over on the sidewalk outside your house not having a say in whether he gets to move in with you. Well … no, it’s not like that at all. But you know what I mean.

In contrast, Russian Facebook ads are a violation of American sovereignty that justifies going all DEFCON 1 on Putin. (To Gessen’s credit, she’s less nuts about about Russian social media war than many other pundits.)

Neither Oberman’s nor Fine’s lines of thought are arguments for open borders, though perhaps they should be. …

Masha Gessen, a staff writer, has written several books, including, most recently, “The Future Is History: How Totalitarianism Reclaimed Russia,” which won the National Book Award in 2017.

Of course, letting anybody from anywhere move to America anytime they feel like it is hardly the end of our obligations to the other seven billion people on Earth. Once they get here, they will need elaborate government programs, special privileges, and veto powers over American culture to feel at home. For example, Ms. Gessen wrote a book, THE BROTHERS: The Road to an American Tragedy, about how America let down the Tsarnaevs, the Boston Bomb Brothers. From the review in the Washington Post:

… Gessen contends that the United States was as responsible as the misguided youths for the explosions near the marathon finish line that killed three and injured more than 260.

Similarly, the Soviet-born Ms. Gessen feels the need to scold Americans incessantly in famous American periodicals over how America is just not living up to her expectations.

By the way, as I suggested in 2015:

In fact, what immigration patriots should do is create a new federal immigration bureaucracy staffed with otherwise unemployable graduates of anthropology, cultural studies, comparative religion, ethnic studies, and psychology majors to review all applications for asylum and immigration from the perspective of whether the United States is too racist, culturally insensitive, religiously bigoted, capitalistic, etc. for the poor innocent foreigner to have a reasonable chance to not be offended by having to live in America.

It would be called the Federal Bureau for the Protection of The Other.

It would be given a veto over the immigration of any foreigner likely to suffer insensitivity from Americans, such as children asking to touch his or her hair, or Americans getting confused over which country he or she is from — e.g., the only way to prevent insensitive Americans from wounding the psyche of Iraqi newcomers by confusing them with Iranians and vice-versa is to not let in any more Iraqi and Iranian potential victims of nativist ignorance. The same goes for Eritreans and Ethiopians.

For example, how punching down of me to have once asked the thin-nosed beige skinned ladies in elaborate dresses in Uptown if they were Ethiopians, and they were offended because they were Eritreans; and Ethiopians, who live in the same block in Uptown in Chicago so they can shop at the Eritrean/Ethiopian grocery store, are their mortal enemies. How much better these poor Eritreans would have been if instead of being in mindless Uptown they had been home with their cultural peers who understand that all Ethiopians must die and other unquestionable verities of Eritrean culture.

Clearly, the current immigration bureaucracy is overly infected with low-brow ideas of American exceptionalism. We need to hire an entire bureau of leftist grad students who understand how America crushes the innocent dreams of The Other, and we will pay them bonuses for protecting The Other by not letting The Other into our country. This bureau of Howard Zinn and Masha Gessen fans should not be allowed to initiate or approve immigration applications, but it should be allowed to veto applications on the grounds that hateful America doesn’t deserve these immigrants.

For example, the Tsarnaevs and Todashev were just carrying out ancient Caucasus traditions of berserker raids upon enemy tribes and ritual assassinations of Jews that go back to the hashish-besotted Assassins of the Caucasus observed by Marco Polo. Back home, this tradition is deep rooted and honored, but in ignorant, insensitive America, few seem to grasp that they were just behaving like good Chechens lads down through the centuries. How much happier they would have been staying home in their native cultural milieu where they would have been afforded the dignity attaining to the perpetrators of acts of carnage.

What America needs is a giant bureaucracy stuffed with leftist liberal arts majors who are getting salary, health care, and pension far beyond what they can earn in the private sector whose only mission is to protect would-be immigrants from being traumatized by exposure to hate-filled Americans by not letting them in to the country.

 
Hide 210 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. syonredux says:

    Sarah Fine, a political philosopher at King’s College, in London, who is working on a book on the “right to exclude,” or the right of states to keep people out, has raised another provocative argument. If democracy is a system that guarantees the right of the governed to participate in the governing process, then democracy confined to protected national borders contains an internal contradiction. Those who are banned from entering a country are, in effect, governed—the Central American mother at the border whose child is ripped away from her by U.S. Border Patrol agents is being governed in the extreme—yet they have no say in the rules, or in the election of those who make them.

    Does this mean that the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza should have the right to enter Israel?That they should have the right to vote in Israeli elections?

    Testing this kind of thing on a small state like Israel makes a good deal of sense……You know, before we start applying it to a big country like the USA…..

  2. Svigor says:

    (((Gessen)))
    (((Stephens)))
    (((Oberman)))
    (((Fine)))

    Last two are just some educated gessin’.

    • Agree: Malcolm X-Lax
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    , @DFH
    , @YetAnotherAnon
  3. The problem with all the open borders advocates is that they have no skin in the game. Hence, their advocacy is dishonest. That dishonesty would not be a problem in some circumstances, but here, their success means we will be serfs at best, and Gulaged at worst.

  4. Karl says:

    how many people here are aware that recently, the US military office in charge of propagating and disseminating the internet to the various US military LANs….. blacklisted “gatesofvienna.blogspot.com” for being a “hate and racism site” ??

    • Agree: jim jones
  5. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    Appeal to ‘Hope’ and ‘Guilt’ to push Broken Borders.

    But what sane person hopes for invasion?

    And if ‘guilt’ has any value in national policy, it must be about redressing wrongs done to a particular people. So, whites owe something to Indians(in the US) and to Aborigines(in Australia). They do NOT owe anything to the rest of the world since whites didn’t take land from them.

  6. Masha Gessen….It’s gender will keep you guessing.

    • LOL: Escher
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @ThreeCranes
  7. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    open borders

    Call it Broken Borders.

    Open Borders is an oxymoron. What’s the point of borders IF they’re open? ‘Open borders’ is like ‘naked clothing’. If borders are ‘open’, they are not borders. They are nothing.

    Once you let gatecrashers smash the gate, there is no more gate. Its not an open gate. It’s no gate.

    We need to end the Gate Crimes of Mass Invasion.

    • Replies: @harmonshoal
  8. MarkinLA says:

    no voice audible in the American political mainstream is making the argument for open borders.

    Just like no voice audible ….. is making the argument for amnesty. They just call it something else and pretend it isn’t amnesty.

    I get it that these people are part of an organized campaign to spread this nonsense in the hope that it catches on, but really, if the argument is so ridiculous, don’t they see that they really are hurting their cause.

    There was recent one about Stephen Miller at one of those rags SLATE, I think. Somebody wrote an article about how in the 3rd grade Miller was “infatuated” (for lack of a better word) with glue and tape. This was so ridiculous the comments were brutal.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  9. Saw her on MSNBC this morning. She’s a disturbing and disturbed person. And, hey, what else? Another Russian Jew!

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @pyrrhus
  10. joun says:

    American jews are so totally radicalized by the absence of persecution, when their entire secular religion demands they are persecuted at all times, that they are isolated from even the fairly radicalized jews of Europe and Israel. They are going crazy.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
  11. So now it’s “No deportation without representation”?

  12. Tiny Duck says:

    Colonizer murderous whites STOLE America from the Indians and forced Blacks to build it up

    We NEED demographic change to rectify this injustice

    Once People of Color are a majority we can finally have a good country and do away with the memory of the price of crap racist founders

    Huge grandkids will not look like you. Your daughters will hear Childrrn of Color

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    , @Mr. Anon
    , @Pericles
  13. MarkinLA says:
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Another Russian Jew!

    Another Lying Russian Jew Who Hates Trump. There fixed it for you.

  14. Abe says: • Website

    Steve, you’ve done such a good job of tweaking globohomo American soccer fags I can’t believe you haven’t picked up on this story yet:

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44586587

    Basically two ‘Swiss’ (ethnic Albanian) soccer players make the Albanian double-headed eagle symbol during their World Cup victory celebrations over Serbia. The headline basically writes itself:

    DEPLORABLY NATIONALIST AMERICAN SPORTS FANS SHOWN A BETTER WAY BY BALKAN SOCCER STARS FROM COUNTRIES WHICH DEMI-GENOCIDED THEMSELVES IN 90’S

  15. Jefferson says:

    “For a white gentile to have an opinion on who should not be let in is tantamount to Discrimination and thus unthinkable.”

    White Jews who are anti-open borders also get shitted on, which is why The Left always compares Stephen Miller to Literally Adolf Hitler and a Nazi.

    The Left also compares ICE to Nazis and Literally Adolf Hitler, even though half of ICE agents are Hispanics. But since ICE Hispanics are bad Hispanics and not good progressive Social Justice Warrior Hispanics like The National Council Of La Raza for example, than ICE Hispanics will be transformed into White Hispanics and lose their Hispanic Hispanic status.

  16. Escher says:

    Messrs Boot and Gessen should take the lead by moving to rural Nebraska or Missouri. Making the point that America is open for settlement (displacement).

  17. Masha Gessen is one of my faves. I sincerely cannot get enough of her insanity and the surreal respect she receives in the media and academia.

    The open borders argument is one that I have been using effectively for years. Get the Left to embrace the logical and inevitable consequences of their ideology. Once they embrace open borders, non-partisans start thinking the Left is crazy. I have known for some time that open borders is the ideology driving the Left on immigration, but it is truly astounding to see it expressed in public.

    Trump and Stephen Miller have pushed the Left to express its true agenda on immigration, I hope this gambit pays off. My fear is that the public will be won over to open borders. Crazier things have happened.

    Case in point, New York was once semi-sensible when compared to California. Not anymore…

  18. Jefferson says:
    @joun

    “that they are isolated from even the fairly radicalized jews of Europe and Israel. They are going crazy.”

    When Fox News’s Jeanine Pirro went to Israel she found a lot of Donald Trump supporters among Israeli Jews.

    When you are a Jew who lives in close proximity to hostile neighbors (Muslim Arabs) who want to murder you, you are less likely to be a Social Justice Warrior compared to a Jew who lives in a safe gated ivory tower in Malibu or Manhattan.

  19. Wilkey says:

    It’s weird. Open borders is like an open conspiracy of tens of millions of people, including every last damn politician in the Democratic Party, who somehow manage to hide from the larger public the fact that they will never, never ever support any policy whatsoever that would help secure our borders.

    Most of them will lie straight to your face and say that “of course” they support border security, but will vehemently object to anything that would actually do that. Those who do admit that they favor open borders will claim that if we did have open borders there is no way we would ever get anything more than a trickle of immigrants as a result, notwithstanding what we have already seen happen in Europe.

  20. Sarah Fine, a political philosopher at King’s College, in London, who is working on a book dismissing the “right to exclude,” or asserting the right of rapists to rape, has raised another provocative argument. If rape laws are intended to guarantee the rights of those involved to participate in the decisionmaking process, then rape laws confined to protecting the woman contain an internal contradiction.

    Those who are banned from raping a woman are, in effect, governed, yet they have no say in the rules, or in the election of those who make them.

    Sarah Fine is pure evil.

  21. Rosie says:
    @MarkinLA

    no voice audible in the American political mainstream is making the argument for open borders.

    Right. They’re just making various arguments against any border enforcement measures that would actually be effective.

    You can’t fool all the White people all the time!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  22. Wilkey says:
    @Svigor

    )))Russell M Nelson(((
    )))Mitt Romney(((
    )))Orrin Hatch(((
    )))Gary Herbert(((
    )))Mia Love(((
    )))Jeff Flake(((
    )))Harry Reid(((

    It would be nice to be able to lay this open borders bullshit at the feet of the Jews. That would at least provide some sort of rational explanation to the insanity that’s taking place. Jews may be disproportionately for open borders, for all I know, but the psychosis has spread far and wide. I live in a very WASP, Mormon state, and even our leaders are fully on board with it. The Mormon Church has been all in on open bordsrs for over a decade now, if not longer. Now they have gone even further, supporting unlimited importation of refugees and Muslims. Unless the elders of the Mormon Church (and pretty much every other church) are being blackmailed by the Elders of Zion you’ll have to come up with some alternative explanation.

  23. @Clifford Brown

    I like your full-throated embrace of the lunacy. It’s a great time to have a dark sense of humor.

    Stuff like thus really makes me think Trump is the genius people like Thomas Wictoe says he is. He’s maneuvered the left into openly stating what they used to be able to imply.

  24. Rosie says:

    Of course, letting anybody from anywhere move to America anytime they feel like it is hardly the end of our obligations to the other seven billion people on Earth. Once they get here, they will need elaborate government programs, special privileges, and veto powers over American culture to feel at home.

    The language of rights (libertarianism) is used to justify mass immigration. Border enforcement is coercive, and therefore violates the NAP or whatever. Then, the language of duty is used to demand further concessions from the native population. Coercive silencing and taxation of the public to support their replacements is self-evidently moral and only a racist nazi bigot would object.

  25. Jefferson says:

    “Subtract terrorists, criminals, violent fanatics and political extremists from the mix, and I plead guilty to wanting more-open borders.”

    And how will open borders prevent terrorists, criminals, violent fanatics, and political extremists from entering The U.S?

    How did open borders work out for Angel Families, a group of mothers who have all lost a child as a result of violent illegal immigrants.

  26. MarkinLA says:
    @Wilkey

    Well of course there are others. It is just they seem to be the driving force (in money and media exposure) and about 9,990 in 10,000 of Jews support it.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
  27. @Wilkey

    It would be nice to be able to lay this open borders bullshit at the feet of the Jews.

    Why? Why would you want to scapegoat?

    That would at least provide some sort of rational explanation to the insanity that’s taking place.

    Well, there you go . . . .

    Jews may be disproportionately for open borders, for all I know, but the psychosis has spread far and wide.

    And somebody did the spreading.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    , @Cagey Beast
  28. Wilkey says:
    @Tiny Duck

    “Colonizer murderous whites STOLE America from the Indians and forced Blacks to build it up”

    LOL. I know Tiny is the resident troll, but it’s useful here to remind you that in 1860 the overwhelmingly white Northern USA was far richer than the slaveholding South. Northern industry was built with the muscle and brainpower of white workers, not African slaves.

  29. Jefferson says:
    @Wilkey

    “Now they have gone even further, supporting unlimited importation of refugees and Muslims.”

    Utah is distinctly known as being a Mormon state. You demographically replace Mormons with Muslims than Utah ceases to be culturally Utah. It is no longer Utah, it’s The United Arab Emirates with a lot colder winters.

  30. OT-

    The FBI is not sending their Best.

    What the hell has happened to our country? Look at these schlubs.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-22/meet-mystery-fbi-agent-5-who-sent-anti-trump-texts-while-clinton-taint-team

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    , @ben tillman
  31. For a white gentile to have an opinion on who should not be let in is tantamount to Discrimination and thus unthinkable.

    And, as you probably know, discrimination is a fundamental aspect of life. The immune system’s whole damn raison d’etre is discrimination between self and non-self. If your immune system can’t discriminate, you die.

    • Agree: AndrewR, Mishra
  32. From my blog, which has links:

    Jun 24, 2018 – Fake News About Immigration

    Most Americans are confused by the massive propaganda for open borders. The world’s billionaires want open borders to drive down wages, destroy the remaining unions, shatter national pride, and increase their own power and profits. They have directed their major media to warn that only racists oppose open borders, and twisted the positive term of “nationalist”, which means someone who is proud of their nation and wants to protect it, to mean an evil Nazi.

    The billionaires have begun another political offensive to bribe and threaten US Congressmen to grant a third amnesty to illegal aliens, something opposed by the majority of Americans. This is disguised as overdue immigration reform, but will only increase the problem of illegal immigration in the coming years, especially from Africa, which is producing hundreds of millions of excess people each year. Meanwhile, corporate America spins stories that higher wages will eliminate jobs because it makes automation attractive, while also claiming a labor shortage exists. How often to you see job advertisements seeking unskilled workers? Never!

    [MORE]

    Public opposition is so strong that most of our corrupt Congress is not following orders from sponsors for open borders, like the powerful US Chamber of Commerce. Few Americans know that President Trump agreed last year to give the so-called “Dreamers” amnesty, but insisted on other reforms to inhibit the flow of unneeded immigrants. This was rejected by the world’s billionaires and their political organization known as the Democratic Party because they want open borders. President Trump is hated by most of his fellow billionaires because he wants to end mindless immigration laws that hurt US citizens, like allowing family chain immigration, admitting refugees, and phony asylum visas. Why should poor, elderly parents of recent immigrants be allowed to move to the USA and eventually apply for welfare benefits? Why can’t the USA aid refugees by sending aid, rather than entry visas? Why has asylum for political reasons become asylum for any reason?

    The billionaires launched a new propaganda campaign to label those who oppose open borders as child abusers. For the past month, stories have filled our corporate media about “family separation” that occurs when illegals are arrested for committing crimes. American law enforcement has done this for decades and no one objects because it makes sense. If parents are arrested, law enforcement does not leave children abandoned. They are transported to the local child protective services agency for care until a parent is released or another relative agrees to take them. This is done everywhere, even in San Francisco.

    Yet suddenly, President Trump and American immigration officers are labeled as evil child abusers by our corporate media for arresting criminals. One of America’s leading corporate propaganda outlets, Time magazine, published a disgusting cover story showing evil President Trump smirking at a crying child. This wasn’t denounced as distasteful and unfair, other corporate stooges applauded. A few days later, this was uncovered as fake news, the girl had not been separated from her mother. Her mom had left her hard working husband in Honduras, traveled for days to the USA and walked across demanding asylum. She could have applied for asylum after crossing the border into Mexico, but that nation does not offer perpetual free food, free housing, and free medial care to illegal immigrants.

    Millions of homeless Americans would love to stay in these immigration detention facilities with showers, free food, and healthcare, but are not allowed, nor is their plight approved for news stories in the USA. These are much nicer than jails and prisons where two million US citizens are held for criminal offenses, but our media rarely does stories about them, or their separated children. This truth is hard to find but can be read on obscure websites like Information Liberation.

    Corporate America is angry because they might be forced to raise wages if millions of desperate foreign workers are no longer imported each year. They press their faux “left wing/liberal/progressive” media to support open borders, which is the most anti-worker policy imaginable. Most Democrats know this, but are terrified to speak the truth because their greatest fear is being called a racist, even though immigration harms poor American minorities more than any other group. Few Democrats know their leaders once opposed amnesty for illegals. One great Democrat was Barbra Jordan. Watch her 1995 speech explaining that immigration is not a right, but a privilege granted by American citizens in limited cases, and that “illegal immigration” must stop and violators must be promptly deported.

    If Americans are angry about family separation, they should march down to their local police station and demand this stop. But then they must decide if police should leave children abandoned or toss them in adult prisons with their parents, or don’t arrest people for crimes if they have children. These options are absurd, but not arresting illegal immigrants is the solution demanded by our corporate media. Hauling along children should not result in automatic entry into the USA with welfare benefits. President Obama promoted open borders before he left office, which caused massive problems that President Trump must deal with. Here is G2mil repost about this sabotage of America.

    May 31, 2014 – Open Border Chaos Worsens

    President Obama’s gradual opening of America’s border continues, despite overwhelming opposition by working people. Our corporate media mostly ignored news that not only have regular deportations ended, but over 36,000 criminal aliens were released from prisons into American cities. Read this “USA Today” article about the U.S. Border Patrol’s solution to Obama’s dictate not to deport children or their parents. Poor families are flooding across the border and hope they are caught, because the Border Patrol will provide free housing, food, and medical care.

    But the Border Patrol hasn’t the resources to run massive refugee camps and developed a solution. These penniless families are put on Greyhound buses and sent to the city of their choice. If they have no relatives or friends to help, they remain at the Greyhound station to fend for themselves. (Newly arrived “undocumented” immigrants forwarded inland courtesy of the Feds, then abandoned at a city bus station are pictured.) Local communities and charities are overwhelmed trying to cope with Obama’s “do not deport” yet “do not support” policy.

    A new illegal entry strategy has emerged. Don’t avoid the Border Patrol, seek them out. In the past, the Border Patrol quickly sent illegal crossers back to Mexico. Obama now requires them to be “processed” by ICE. After that, most are released into the USA because they didn’t commit a serious crime. Meanwhile, Obama has threaten to act as a dictator and change laws himself because Congress refuses to authorize instant work visas along with social security cards to the millions of illegals in the USA.

    He also wants to import thousands more skilled workers to replace skilled Americans, spinning the myth that Americans are to stupid to fill such jobs, despite numerous studies that show no shortage of science, technology, engineering, and math “STEM” workers in the USA. And Obama doesn’t care that America’s biggest high-tech employer, Hewlett-Packard, just announced that it would lay of 50,000 workers in the USA this year! I’d bet none of their lower paid foreign workers here on STEM visas will lose their jobs.

    Big business strongly supports Obama, knowing this will drive down wages further, and more consumers equal more profits. The American Chamber of Commerce is threatening to end support for Congressmen who fail to vote for immigration “reform.” Yet even our corrupt Congress is afraid to endorse this disastrous idea. Issuing millions of social security numbers to foreigners will result in long lines at state welfare offices and cost governments billions of dollars each month. Millions more poor foreigners will flood northward so the Border Patrol can welcome them and provide transportation to their city of choice. America’s embarrassing homeless camps will grow into homeless cities, full of new immigrant refugees and American citizens who lost jobs to this flood of cheap labor.

  33. Jefferson says:
    @ben tillman

    “Why? Why would you want to scapegoat?”

    Why should the pro-open borders Goyims and Hispanics be left off the hook?

  34. Wilkey says:

    no voice audible in the American political mainstream is making the argument for open borders

    My discussions with open borders nuts have always gone something like this:

    Me: We should deny drivers licenses to illegals
    Them: Won’t work. They’ll drive anyway.
    Me: We should deny them in-state titian
    Them: Theyre going to be here anyway, so we might as well educate them.
    Me: We should have a border wall
    Them: Show me a 50 foot wall…
    Me: We should deny them public education, food stamps. Head Start, etc.
    Them: That’s just cruel

    The next time you have a conversation I suggest just bypassing all that, because all of them will give you the same answers. Simply ask them exactly what measures they would support to secure the border (other than “legalize them all”) and then enjoy listening to the crickets chirp.

  35. Jefferson says:
    @Clifford Brown

    I wonder what percentage of female FBI agents were only hired because of affirmative action?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  36. @Wilkey

    Right you are. The Chinese and Irish had a greater role in building America than did blacks.

  37. @Clifford Brown

    Hilarious! It’s like bride of Sasquatch!

  38. Jefferson says:
    @Wilkey

    What percentage of the American billionaires on the Forbes 400 list got wealthy because their ancestors owned African slaves? Like ZERO.

  39. newrouter says:

    “Masha Gessen”

    OCCUPY MASHA GESSEN’S APARTMENT NOW!!11!!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  40. It’s just a minor quibble, Steve, but I think you meant DEFCON 5 (or at least 4).

  41. syonredux says:

    David Frum tries to restore sanity to the Left on the subject of open borders:

    It is disgusting and wrong to equate human beings with insects and animals, as Trump so disgracefully does. Illegal immigrants are committing no moral wrong. They are doing what we might do in their place—as we, by defending borders, are doing what they would do if they were in ours. Like so many human institutions, borders are both arbitrary and indispensable. Without them, there are no nations. Without nations, there can be no democracy and no liberalism. John Lennon may imagine that without nations there will be only humanity. More likely, without nations there will only be tribes.

    Trump and his brutish methods are radicalizing his opponents. But those opponents still retain the choice not to be radicalized. The spreading view that immigration is a civil right and that immigration enforcement is totalitarian is an attack on democratic legality. It subordinates rules and norms to desires and passions. It is also a corrosion of the ideal of a constitutional state. Social-media outrage is manipulative and dangerous even when it appeals to generous sentiments. The generous sentiment quickly becomes a foundation for yet more of the division and anger ripping apart this American community.

    I was born in one country and am now a resident of another. So was my mother. So were all four of my four grandparents. I speak from inside the issue, and I am here to plead: Understand its power for good and for harm. In Europe and America, border laxness has empowered extremism—and trying to counter that extremism with still more extremism will do no good for any principle of freedom.

    When managed lawfully and in reasonable numbers, immigration can be a tremendous addition to a society’s dynamism, wealth, and power. But management is indispensable. Legality is indispensable. Immigration control is both conservative and progressive: progressive because it enhances equality and mobility; conservative because it binds societies more cohesively together and strengthens the connection between a society’s past and its future.

    It’s not easy to decide what to do about the accelerating surge of illegal immigration from Central America—or about the surges that will soon follow from the rest of the planet if the present surge is not checked. But the decision will surely be better made by means of rational discussion than in response to emotive images.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/need-for-immigration-control/563261/

  42. @Rosie

    Yeah, they use that language for this issue, Rosie, but it’s about the ONLY time they ever use it. Free speech, right to bear arms, and all that – you never hear a peep from them. That’s how you know they are completely full of it and just making it up as they go along.

  43. I sat through the Sarah Fine podcast that Gessen links. Ivory-tower mad-hatter-dom delivered in a pleasant reasonable voice. If the UK started taxing French citizens, that would be unreasonable, yes? And yet, isn’t refusing admission to a foreigner who wants to enter the country, somehow the same thing, and therefore comparably unreasonable? I can’t tell if she deliberately set out to be the Lewis Carroll of immigration policy, or if it just comes naturally to her.

  44. Abe says: • Website

    Sarah Fine, a political philosopher at King’s College, in London, who is working on a book on the “right to exclude”

    Mr. Derbyshire, in his wonderful novel SEEING CALVIN COOLIDGE IN A DREAM, mentioned the story of 4-Knows Zhang (or something like that, I forget the exact name), a magistrate who became a folk hero because of his incorruptibility (told by a supplicant no one would know the bribe about to be offered, he remonstrated “Heaven would know! The earth would know!” Etc., etc.) I mention that because the Chinese do have a hunger for justice, and their tragedy is largely having lived too many centuries among other Chinese. When in America, especially as 1st generation immigrants, they very demonstrably show gratitude for the relative lack of corruption in American society, and make excellent friends and neighbors.

    I have several friends of this variety, and therefore don’t appreciate the casual Asian-bashing that goes on here (which is not to say I want any American city to become like Vancouver, BC either). To the point- someone on here called the Chinese a nation of autists yet who is the one who comes up with these sort of autistic one-note philosophies and then drives them off the cliff? Before this anti-“right to exclude” we briefly were treated to Samantha Power’s crazy “right to protect”. Before that, about 15 years ago, serious adults had to debate Peter Singer’s theories about why we should kill our senescent elderly or disabled young so that we could feed their carcasses to hungry pack animals and thus serve the greater good. And before that John Rawls’s flap doodle. And before that and before that… Kant’s categorical imperative about not misleading a wannabe murderer about the location of his intended victim. The Chinese would never in a million years guide social policy by such monomaniacal nonsense. Why are we always the WEIRD ones?

    • Replies: @Marty
    , @snorlax
  45. Mr. Anon says:
    @Tiny Duck

    Huge grandkids will not look like you. Your daughters will hear Childrrn of Color

    Did you all hear that? Your grandkids will be fat, and your daughter will hear the Children of the Corn.

    Or Something.

    Maybe you ought to lay off the Aristocrat vodka and stick to the top-shelf liquor, Tiny. It’s more expensive, so you won’t be able to drink as much.

  46. Anonymous[679] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s obviously a betrayal of the principles of American democracy that people who aren’t American citizens and who don’t live in America aren’t even allowed to vote on whether they should be allowed to move to America. It would be like that homeless guy you step over on the sidewalk outside your house not having a say in whether he gets to move in with you. Well … no, it’s not like that at all. But you know what I mean.

    Scott Alexander addressed this very comparison:

    In one model, immigration is a right. You need a very strong reason to take it away from anybody, and such decisions should be carefully inspected to make sure no one is losing the right unfairly. It’s like a store: everyone should be allowed to come in and shop and if a manager refused someone entry then they better have a darned good reason.

    In another, immigration is a privilege which members of a community extend at their pleasure to other people whom they think would be a good fit for their community. It’s like a home: you can invite your friends to come live with you, but if someone gives you a vague bad feeling or seems like a good person who’s just incompatible with your current lifestyle, you have the right not to invite them and it would be criminal for them to barge in anyway.

    It looks like many Clinton supporters believe in the first model, and many Trump supporters in the second model. I think this ties into deeper differences – Clinton supporters are more atomized and individualist, Trump supporters stronger believers in culture and community.

    In the second model, the community gets to decide how many immigrants come in and on what terms. Most of the Trump supporters I know are happy to let in a reasonable amount, but they get very angry when people who weren’t invited or approved by the community come in anyway and insist that everyone else make way for them.

    http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/

  47. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says: • Website
    @Wilkey

    The Mormons want more Mormons which is why they are being imported from Mexico and Samoa. The church, like every other religious organization in the country gets millions a year from the tax payers for refugee resettlement.

  48. Jefferson says:

    “universally declared human rights to freedom of movement, freedom of association, and freedom of occupational choice.”

    Since when is open borders a Human right? Also China has the 2nd largest economy on the planet and 92% of it’s population belong to one ethnic group. Does this mean China is violating Human rights because they are an economic powerhouse who do not believe in “give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”?

    Also if diversity is the greatest strength how did China which is 92% homogeneous become such an economic powerhouse without diversity?

    How did China become an economic powerhouse without Mexicans, El Salvadorians, North Africans, Syrians, and Pakistanis?

    • Replies: @Buck Turgidson
  49. Jefferson says:

    “universally declared human rights to freedom of movement, freedom of association, and freedom of occupational choice.”

    Since when is open borders a Human right? Also China has the 2nd largest economy on the planet and 92% of it’s population belong to one ethnic group. Does this mean China is violating Human rights because they are an economic powerhouse who do not believe in “give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”?

    Also if diversity is the greatest strength how did China which is 92% homogeneous become such an economic powerhouse without diversity?

    How did China become an economic powerhouse without Mexicans, El Salvadorians, North Africans, Syrians, Somalis, and Pakistanis?

  50. istevefan says:
    @Clifford Brown

    Once they embrace open borders, non-partisans start thinking the Left is crazy.

    I would think that too except I thought the same about gay marriage. I thought gay marriage and the trannies in the bathroom crap would scare off the non-partisans. But 40% of Whites still vote dem.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    , @Anon
  51. Mr. Anon says:
    @Wilkey

    )))Russell M Nelson(((
    )))Mitt Romney(((
    )))Orrin Hatch(((
    )))Gary Herbert(((
    )))Mia Love(((
    )))Jeff Flake(((
    )))Harry Reid(((

    And do you imagine that the people who contribute to the campaigns (i.e., the people who buy the right to jerk the chain) of these members of Congress are all themselves gentiles? Take for example this guy:

    Donor Details – Paul Singer

    He stuffed a lot of money into the coffers of the Senate Leadership Fund (millions of dollars in the 2016 election cycle), an organization that spent a lot of money defending Jeff Flake’s seat against a primary challenge. And although he is one of the bigger spenders among billionaires he is by no means alone. I would bet that similar chains of sponsorship could be found for the other office holders on your list.

  52. Jefferson says:
    @MarkinLA

    “and about 9,990 in 10,000 of Jews support it.”

    A quarter of Jews in The U.S voted for Donald Trump, so 9,990 in 10,000 Jews supporting open borders is a vast overexaggeration.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  53. istevefan says:

    Re: Masha Gessen

    Take anything she says with a big grain of salt because there are ulterior motives. Let’s not forget what she said about gay marriage.

    Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there. Because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change and it should change, and again, I don’t think it should exist.”

  54. Jefferson says:
    @istevefan

    “But 40% of Whites still vote dem.”

    And in many states the percentage of Whites who vote Democrat is even higher than 40%.

    Hillary Clinton won the majority of the White vote in the Pacific Northwest (Washington, Oregon) as well as in California, certain Midwest states (Illinois, Minnesota) and The New England states.

    If White people were not so politically diverse and were a political monolith like Hispanics, African Americans, and Asians than Donald Trump would have also won the popular vote.

    • Replies: @istevefan
  55. Mr. Anon says:

    That cartoon avatar of Gessen is much more flattering than an actual picture of her would be.

  56. Jefferson says:
    @istevefan

    The LGBTQABCDEFG community finally got same sex marriage legalized in all 50 states, yet groups like GLAAD are still bitching about how they are supposedly “sytematically oppressed”. Even when they win major victories in the culture wars they still can’t give up the oppression Olympics, relax, chill, and smell the coffee. They are still not satisfied, which makes me think what is the end goal with GLAAD? Wasn’t legalizing same sex marriage suppose to be the end goal?

    Well apparently not. There was a memo that came out recently which revealed GLAAD wants 50% Homosexual representation among all characters in film and television.

    Now keep in mind that even the Homosexual capital of America San Francisco is nowhere near 50% LGBTQABCDEFG, in San Francisco it’s 15% LGBTQABCDEFG.

    So even in the Gayest city in America Heterosexuals still make up 85% of the population.

  57. istevefan says:
    @Wilkey

    Jews may be disproportionately for open borders, for all I know, but the psychosis has spread far and wide.

    For what it is worth, here is an excerpt from an essay written by sociologist E. A. Ross in 1914, that happens to be archived here at unz.com.

    Hence the endeavor of the Jews to control the immigration policy of the United States. Although theirs is but a seventh of our net immigration, they led the fight on the Immigration Commission’s bill. The power of the million Jews in the metropolis lined up the Congressional delegation from New York in solid opposition to the literacy test. The systematic campaign in newspapers and magazines to break down all arguments for restriction and to calm nativist fears is waged by and for one race. Hebrew money is behind the National Liberal Immigration League and its numerous publications. From the paper before the commercial body or the scientific association to the heavy treatise produced with the aid of the Baron de Hirsch Fund, the literature that proves the blessings of immigration to all classes in America emanates from subtle Hebrew brains. In order to admit their brethren from the Pale the brightest of the Semites are keeping our doors open to the dullest of the Aryans!

    United States senators complain that during the close of the struggle over the immigration bill they were overwhelmed with a torrent of crooked statistics and misrepresentations by the Hebrews fighting the literacy test.

    So it appears they have been pushing for looser immigration for quite some time. I could understand somewhat this stance before the creation of Israel. But once they had their own state, one would think they would have dialed down their stance on immigration given how they now have their lifeboat.

  58. @Wilkey

    The reality is that a substantial proportion of the general population are ignorant on many issues (mostly being distracted by the day-to-day banality of their lives and various types of entertainment/tv/sportsball). Many of these people are social conformist and hungry to fit in with what’s “acceptable.” So if you control the media outlets (and also the entertainment industry), you can shape what people think on different issues. There certainly are many dissenters who are not susceptible to propaganda, but most appear to be easily influenced.

    Now imagine you have your hands on the levers of power. You’re able to punish those who deviate from the standard orthodoxy. You can have even dissenters fired, socially ostracized, or even blackballed from polite society. That sort of power gives you the ability to keep the dissenters in line. This becomes even more true when you live in a society in which the super competitive, unequal job market relegates dissenters to lives of economic marginalization. This becomes even more especially true if you live in a society full of people who are too soft, timid, and cowardly to bear the consequences of dissent.

    Now imagine you live in a society which is extremely socially atomized. In that type of society, even the boldest of dissenters won’t be able to oppose the ruling class. Just because their social network is going to be too small and weak-knit to form any meaningful opposition.

    America is a country full of people who are socially atomized, cowardly, conformist, and often ignorant. So Americans can easily be propagandized to by our media&entertainment elites and, if Americans fight back in any way, punished. So the elites have an enormous amount of power…….

    A very large percentage of America’s elite opinion-shapers happen to be Jewish. According to estimates I’ve seen, the proportion could exceed 50%. When you consider that such a large, cohesive segment of our elites are Jews, that goes a long way to explaining why Americans believe what they believe.

    • Agree: ben tillman, Brutusale
  59. istevefan says:
    @Jefferson

    And in many states the percentage of Whites who vote Democrat is even higher than 40%.

    True and even more disturbing.

    If White people were not so politically diverse and were a political monolith like Hispanics, African Americans, and Asians than Donald Trump would have also won the popular vote.

    If white people voted as a monolith like the aforementioned groups, there would be no point in having an election. It would be a forgone conclusion.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
  60. @Jefferson

    What’s the oldest fortune on the Forbes 400? Last I checked there were 4 Hearsts on the lists. That fortune starts with a silver strike in Nevada in 1859.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    , @Ed
  61. istevefan says:
    @Wilkey

    …remind you that in 1860 the overwhelmingly white Northern USA was far richer than the slaveholding South.

    By 1865, what wealth the slaveholding South had built up was pretty much destroyed.

  62. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan

    I would think that too except I thought the same about gay marriage. I thought gay marriage and the trannies in the bathroom crap would scare off the non-partisans. But 40% of Whites still vote dem.

    The vertical beam is missing. There is no top-down unity. The world is going with horizontalism(with the exception of Israel where top-down verticalism is still operative).

    Nationalism used to be verticalist. Society was made of elites, upper middle, middle, working class, and lower class. There were differences in wealth, status, and education, but they had something in common in race, culture, history, values. So, American elites looked toward lower levels of American society for unity and identification. And French elites looked toward lower levels of French society for unity and identification.

    But as the US became more Jewish-dominated, verticalism went out the window. Upon looking at the lower levels of society, Jews saw a lot of goyim and didn’t feel much identification with them. They just saw a whole bunch of Christians or Pitch-Forks.
    Also, Jewish elites didn’t want white elites to identify mainly with lower levels of whiteness. Jewish elites wanted white elites to work with and serve Jewish elites. (Trump did that, and Jews are angry with him.) So, globalism meant Jewish elites and white elites looking not downward but sideways for identification. In other words, Elites should identify with other elites around the world. And since Jewish elites rule the US, the lone superpower, elites around the globe would have to be sing to the Jewish-US tune. (Israel was one exception where the elites could look downward for identification and unity.) This is why the homo stuff was useful to the horizontalist elites. Homos are like the conduits among the globo-elites around the world. They are to the globalist elites what Hermes/Mercury was to the Greek gods.

    Because elites control all the media, the middle and even the bottom came to swallow homo stuff. They had no idea that it was meant to serve elite horizontal power while undermining and destroying verticalist nationalist unity. After all, vain Homos will do anything to rise high to dilly dally with the People of Privilege. But because it was sold as the ‘new leftism’ and ‘progressivism’, so many middle folks and lower folks fell for the bait and came to embrace ‘gay pride’ as a matter of ‘social justice’. It was really way for the elites to snub the middle and the low. It was a way of the elites saying that they will use ‘gay’ networks to spread horizontalist world of globalist privilege. And the hell with the people.

    The problem with the horizontalist elites is this: As long as there is a national middle and national lower class, they will seek to rebuild the vertical beam to lock the national elites into place to serve the national middle and national lower class. But the elites don’t want to be held by the vertical beam. They want to fly around like the CASTLE IN THE SKY. They don’t heed the wisdom, “you and the land are one”. They wanna be like the independent head that flies around in ZARDOZ. All head, no body.

    But the national body calls on the head to pay it some heed. The people want the elites to serve the national masses. But the elites are too spoiled in power and privilege to be moored and anchored to the homeland masses. So, how can the elites destroy the vertical beam so that they can fly around horizontally to meet with other elites around the world?

    Mass Invasion and Diversity. When a nation becomes all mixed and confused, the multi-culti post-national body will no longer know what it is. Also, the invasive masses, though lowly, will help the elites in destroying the nationalist vertical beam because they want to replace the native masses and partake of the goodies(that may not be much but are still much more than what they had at home).

    In time, the middle will disappear. Some of the middle will rise to the top, and the rest will fall to the bottom. It will become more and more California-like.

    Now, one danger faced by the horizontalist top is the possible development of the horizontalist bottom, i.e. if the elites around the world cooperate and identify with each other, there is the possibility that the the lower masses around the world will do likewise and form a vast human wave of anti-elite folks. But there is much less chance of that happening because the lower masses are too numerous, too uneducated, too crude, too ill-informed, and too short-sighted to agree on anything.
    After all, it is much easier for Jewish elites, white elites, Asian elites, brown elites, and etc.(who all attended the same or similar schools and rub shoulders at cocktail parties) to coordinate their mutual economic and status interests in California than it is for the lower masses of white, Asian, brown, black, and etc folks to coordinate any kind of united front strategy. Diversity is far less problematic at top than at bottom. The elites can overlook ethnic differences in favor of rich rewards of money and status. In contrast, there’s less to go around for the lowers, and therefore, desperation and pettiness among the masses undermine unity. It’s like rich folks at dinner table comport themselves with better manners than lower folks driven by base drives of raw hunger.

    It’s no wonder a few men on horseback can control 1000s of cattle.

  63. Whiskey says: • Website
    @Clifford Brown

    The public will fall in line for Open Borders by force and action. ICE in Portland and many other cities are under blockade and occupation. Police don’t help. US flag replaced by Refugees Welcome flag. Trump is now in catch and release mode.

    There will be 50 million Mexicans here by next year. Trump removed and either Hillary or Harris installed … Bet on Harris.

    Being anti White male is always a winner. White women love it nursing grudges and admiring bad boy murderers like the Tsarnaevs. Nothing excites women like mass murder . Having ME 13 killers is a threat to White men and lady thrills to White women.

    The media, deep hereditary state, women and anti f a plus academic will create facts on the ground. Open Borders and serfdom of White men is fait accompli.

  64. Jefferson says:
    @istevefan

    The Democratic Party really dodged a bullet and got lucky Whites do not vote based on identity politics, because if that happened Hillary Clinton would have gotten a Walter Mondale level ass whopping.

  65. syonredux says:

    In my opinion, a central part of the whole idea of America is that people’s worth – how much they deserve to share in the American dream – shouldn’t be judged by their effect on racial demographics.

    Some of us don’t believe in the American Dream….. There was a time before the Dream. As a part of the discourse, it only dates back to the 1930s….Which means that Lincoln, Washington, Franklin, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson all managed to get along without it….Of course, they had the American Reality….

    Racial nativists tend to think that because their goal is to make America more white, the goal of immigration advocates is to make America less white.

    Dunno, Noah. Have you read the statements made by advocates of mass immigration? Most of them are very enthusiastic about Anglo-America becoming majority non-European….

    GETTING NEW NEIGHBORS IS NOT REPLACEMENT

    GETTING NEW NEIGHBORS IS NOT REPLACEMENT

    GETTING NEW NEIGHBORS IS NOT REPLACEMENT

    GETTING NEW NEIGHBORS IS NOT REPLACEMENT

    GETTING NEW NEIGHBORS IS NOT REPLACEMENT

    It is when the new neighbors make the neighborhood unlivable……

    Racial nativists think that when a person of a different race moves in next to them, they’re being “replaced”.

    Isn’t that kind of insane? If a Bangladeshi guy moves in next to me, have I been replaced??? No!!

    What if millions of Bangladeshis move in…..

  66. syonredux says:
    @Wilkey

    LOL. I know Tiny is the resident troll, but it’s useful here to remind you that in 1860 the overwhelmingly white Northern USA was far richer than the slaveholding South. Northern industry was built with the muscle and brainpower of white workers, not African slaves.

    A pretty good article on the topic:

    http://www.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/law-economics-studies/olmstead_-_cotton_slavery_and_history_of_new_capitalism_131_nhc_28_sept_2016.pdf

  67. Jefferson says:
    @Steve Sailer

    And Nevada was not exactly crawling with West African slaves in 1859, so the Hearsts definitely did not become billionaires off of free Black labor.

  68. syonredux says:
    @Wilkey

    LOL. I know Tiny is the resident troll, but it’s useful here to remind you that in 1860 the overwhelmingly white Northern USA was far richer than the slaveholding South. Northern industry was built with the muscle and brainpower of white workers, not African slaves.

    Indeed. Industrialists and inventors like Edison, the Wright Bros, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morse, and Henry Ford are the men who made the USA a great power, not cotton and slaves.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
  69. wren says:

    I don’t know if it has been posted here in the comments, but the conservative tree house guy has been posting for several months about Mexico’s next president, who plans to Make America Mexican Again.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/06/22/mexicos-next-president-tells-country-they-must-leave-their-towns-and-find-a-life-in-the-united-states/

    • Replies: @wren
  70. Jefferson says:
    @syonredux

    “Racial nativists think that when a person of a different race moves in next to them, they’re being “replaced”.

    Than African Americans are also racial nativists because whenever White people move into their neighborhoods they see it as racial replacement. African Americans see gentrification as racial replacement, they don’t see it as racially homogeneous Black neighborhoods being enriched with more racial diversity with the presence of Whites.

  71. @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    We sane/nationalist folks really need to wave the bloody shirt on the totalitarian nature of the immigration enthusiasts.

    Make the case plain and simple: You are welcome to have open borders–for yourself–but it is totalitarian (and genocidal) to impose it on we natives who do not want it.

    The truth is there are absolutely *no* good arguments for mass immigration. It is driven entirely by
    – ethnic animus,
    – more power of the “left”/big-state parties,
    – cheap labor shilling
    – virtue signaling (by conformist types, including especially lots of women)

    The further truth is that if native whites are *free* to not participate … then no one actually wants to live in the open borders utopia. The rich capitalist doesn’t actually want to live in the rainbow hued utopia, he wants to live in a white nation, but where his white employees can be beaten down or replaced with compliant immigrant labor. Brett Stephens, Massa Gessen, David Brooks, Paul Krugman, Jennifer Rubin, etc., etc., don’t actually want to live in the open borders utopia, they want to live in the United States with all the white gentile developed institutions and prosperity, but with white gentiles themselves castrated, disempowered.

    We need to stop pussyfooting around and say it. “Totalitarian”. The “pro-immigration” agenda isn’t about immigrants or letting people live in their diversitopia. It’s about denying white gentiles the right to have their nations and live as they like amongst their own people with their own culture. These “globalists” are totalitarian and genocidal.

  72. Jefferson says:
    @syonredux

    “Indeed. Industrialists and inventors like Edison, the Wright Bros, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morse, and Henry Ford are the men who made the USA a great power, not cotton and slaves.”

    African slavery definitely does not equal prosperity. Here is an international example instead of always using the American South as an example, the most dirt poor state in Colombia for example is Choco. And Choco is the region of Colombia that had the most African slaves during the Spanish colonization of Colombia. Choco is much poorer than Bogota.

  73. syonredux says:
    @DFH

    For a female academic, not bad.

  74. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @syonredux

    Harvey Weinstein supposedly beat Israel to it. After all, if liberalism is a system that guarantees the rights of people to do what they want with their own body, then liberalism confined to women having the ability to say no contains an internal contradiction. Those who are banned from entering a woman are, in effect, governed from being able to do what they want with their own body.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  75. @syonredux

    Frum is a Canadian, and like every sane Canadian, he is fully aware of what would happen if Canada had an open border with the USA.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  76. Jefferson says:

    How many Jews, Roma Gypsies, and Homosexuals were trying to sneak into Germany when it was still run by Adolf Hitler and the Nazis?

    The Left say America is Nazi Germany under Donald Trump so why are Mexicans and Central Americans trying to immigrate to Nazi Germany instead of trying to stay as far away from it as possible?

    So Mexico and Central America are such shitholes that even Nazi Germany that is run by Adolf Donald Trump Hitler is a vast improvement from their homelands.

    Mexicans and Central Americans would rather deal with Nazis than deal with Mexican drug cartels and MS-13.

    Mexicans and Central Americans would rather live in Auschwitz than live in the Sicario land of Ciudad Juarez.

  77. Escher says:
    @syonredux

    Sarah should be (((Fine))) with it.

  78. Jefferson says:

    The Left say Mexicans and Central Americans are coming to The U.S to flee from the out of control violence in their nations.

    The question I have is why don’t The Left compare violent Mexicans and violent Central Americans to Nazis for driving so many of their fellow countrymen out?

    Why isn’t Mexico and Central America compared to Nazi Germany? After all these are dysfunctional societies that terrorize it’s own population.

  79. @Svigor

    About half of Obermans and Fines in the UK seem to be Jewish, though there seems to be a small Welsh Fine cluster that aren’t. FreeBMD is your go-to resource on English surnames, with most of the births, marriages and deaths between 1837 and 1983.

    What are the odds on a non-Jewish Fine/Oberman becoming both

    a) a cited academic
    b) an open borders enthusiast

    ?

    There does appear to be a tendency where pundit A quotes academics B and C, who just happen to belong to the same small ethnic group as pundit A.

    (I see Noah Smith seems to have blocked Steve’s responses on twitter)

    • Replies: @DFH
  80. Jefferson says:

    The Left will not even compare Turkish genocide of Armenians with Nazi Germany, but they will compare securing The U.S border with Nazi Germany.

    Armenians are not seen as being as equally vibrantly diverse as Mexicans and Central Americans.

    Armenians are seen as the new Italians/Sicilians. Swarthy but still not dark enough for the oppression Olympics.

  81. Anonymous[109] • Disclaimer says:

    What a crock of shit!

    Is this man REALLY SERIOUSLY telling us that he has never heard of Tony Blair’s New Labour Open Door immigration policy?

    Is he really that ignorant of the EU’s open door to massive boat borne African immigration?

    The obvious abuses of the Geneva Convention?

    The Merkel madness?

    The endless tireless screeching of The Economist – *the* voice of the Deep State?

  82. Anonymous[109] • Disclaimer says:
    @syonredux

    To Noah Smith.

    Perhaps not, but obviously your neighbor was replaced.

  83. Anonymous[109] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wilkey

    Strangely enough, the earliest Mormons wanted to keep their distance from the duskier races of mankind.

  84. Anonymous[109] • Disclaimer says:
    @RabbiHighComma

    She’s breaking-in those teeth for Seabiscuit.

  85. @Jefferson

    “A quarter of Jews in The U.S voted for Donald Trump, so 9,990 in 10,000 Jews supporting open borders is a vast overexaggeration.”

    I think it’s more that elite Jews (like elite whites) are keen. In the UK (admittedly a small sample in Lord Ashcrofts polls) a small majority of Jews voted for Brexit – but you’d never get that impression from reading Jewish academics and op-ed writers.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  86. Pericles says:
    @Wilkey

    “We support border security, just not enforcing it.”

  87. @Wilkey

    You summarize quite well my impression of the New York Times’s editorial stance on the question. If any reader can name an instance in which the Times argued for enforcement of the border or for the expulsion of illegal entrants, I am willing to re-evaluate my impression.

  88. @Achmed E. Newman

    Actually, DEFCON 1 is the most dire stage (it works in descending order, not ascending). I learned that from watching “Wargames”, the 1983 Matthew Broderick nuclear thriller.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  89. @Wilkey

    Jews are just avatars and a vanguard of a general managerial liberalism… it’s too easy just to scapegoat them directly.

  90. @Rosie

    It is worthwhile to distinguish the true libertarian position from that of people like Gessen. Libertarians of course deny the legitimacy of the state in all things, including the creation and enforcement of borders. On the other hand, they also reject every sort of government-imposed welfare system and every sort of anti-discrimination law. They also suppport property rights, including the right to exclude and expel, as well as gun rights. Liberals like Gessen, on the other hand, seem to want everyone to be allowed in AND to be covered by all sorts of governmental protections. In my view, the libertarians are at least coherent, even if wacky and utopian and dangerous, whereas the liberal position is patently incoherent. What most annoys me about the liberal position is that they never view a nation’s culture as an accomplishment that is vulnerable to dissolution, that requires continual sustaining through time and generations; they seem to regard it as a wonderful freak of nature that the whole world has an immediate right to enjoy.

  91. IHTG says:

    Steve, you just restated what Ross Douthat pithily said a while ago:

    You should post something about what Andrew Sullivan tweeted the other day.

  92. Rosie says:
    @syonredux

    Racial nativists tend to think that because their goal is to make America more white, the goal of immigration advocates is to make America less white.

    This is so bizarre. Trying to stop people like Noah making the US less White is not made right or wrong by virtue of whether or not they are doing it deliberately. In fact, his insistence that they are not doing it deliberately is an admission that they are acting against White interests. There is no need to vociferously deny intentionally doing something harmless.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  93. Rosie says:
    @AnotherDad

    The truth is there are absolutely *no* good arguments for mass immigration. It is driven entirely by
    – ethnic animus,
    – more power of the “left”/big-state parties,
    – cheap labor shilling
    – virtue signaling (by conformist types, including especially lots of women)

    – cheap labor shilling (by greedy types, including especially lots of men)
    – virtue signaling (by conformist types, including especially lots of women)

    Fixed it for ya.

  94. JackOH says:

    Slightly askew from topic: ICE detained about 160 Guatemalans working at a local meatpacking plant here, maybe 1500 miles from the Mexican border. It’s a union shop. The comments beneath the local newspaper article follow the usual contour lines.

    Long story short: after three years of reading Unz Review I’m beginning to think that willful, deliberate “race replacement” is sort of supportable as a motive of our overlords. At the very least, willful, deliberate “race replacement” has met some sort of minimum threshold of plausibility for me. I sure as hell don’t like thinking that, either.

  95. DFH says:
    @syonredux

    wtf is ‘Jacobite mag’

  96. Ed says:
    @Steve Sailer

    DuPont family goes back to early 18th century. As a family they make the richest family lists but don’t think they’re any individual DuPonts in the 400.

    There are 14 members of the Cargill family that appear individually in Forbes 400. The private company was incorporated in 1865.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargill

    http://www.businessinsider.com/cargill-family-has-14-billionaires-2015-3

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @Lot
  97. Call it Broken Borders

    Actually it shoukd be “No Borders” for nation states, and thus no national jurisdiction and thus no nation.

    Of course there is no obvious moral reason why the “no borders” principle cannot be applied to smaller scales of organization. After all, every local organization is a centre of governance and ought thus be subject to global democratic membership and rule.

    Thus no borders for:

    Companies
    Universities
    Sporting Clubs
    Homes
    Rooms
    Toilets

    Indeed why stop at institutional borders? Why not incarnational borders, like that exclusivist membranes surrounding your body. Xenophobic immune systems are also an obvious no-no.

  98. @istevefan

    It is well that Masha is on record saying this, because it is the template for everything liberals do. You can substitute for “marriage” anything else that liberals obsess about: “borders”, “gun ownership”, “immigration reform”, “civil rights”, “America”, “western civilization” and the statement still rings true.

  99. @syonredux

    Not only that. This would also mean Israelis voting in Iranian elections. And of course, US citizens voting in Venezuela elections. I’m starting to like this view.

  100. Open borders isn’t really the worst of the issue.

    The government refuses to do its duty to protect Americans — ourselves and our posterity.

    But it vigorously and aggressively protects the invading forces.

    When they kill one of us, they get probation. If we kill one of them, 20 year minimum.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  101. @ben tillman

    Jews may be disproportionately for open borders, for all I know, but the psychosis has spread far and wide.

    And somebody did the spreading.

    Yes, the global village, open borders, cheap labour consensus was pushed unrelentingly by Anglosphere liberals first and foremost. I mean “liberals” in the widest sense. In the US and England especially, the liberalism came before the tikkun olam. The Jews have clearly taken the reigns in recent decades but the WASPs were for open borders and cheap labour when America and England had only a tiny handful of Sephardic and German Jewish families living among them.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
  102. Hibernian says:
    @Jefferson

    As I’m sure most of us here are probably aware, lawsuits have been filed against Lehmann Brothers, at least one of the insurance giants whose roots go a long way back, and others, on the basis that they owned or insured human property or lent money accepting human property as collateral, and profited thereby. Don’t know the outcomes so far; seems there’d be a statute of limitations issue. Some cities including Chicago have required prospective bond underwriters to reveal any slavery connected history, mainly of predecessor companies, in order to get the city’s business. This was done at least in part with a view to providing evidence for this type of lawsuit.

  103. People who want open borders should be able get what they want as long as those of us who want tighter borders get what we want as well. Those who want to live in a sanctuary city should be accommodated but they should also suffer the penalties and cost of damages done by their imported friends when they do something wrong.

    If, for example, San Francisco can’t live another day without a Guatemalan gentlemen, let them have him. He must stay within their city limits and pay for any damage he does to San Franciscans or others. That would help make their abstract moral position far more grounded and tangible.

    Both Italy and France have a migrant crisis on their hands. They even have a problem with migrants repeatedly being dumped on the French at the Italian border. Monaco seems to have steered clear of this, despite being right beside all the action. Why? Perhaps it’s because the Monégasques know it would be them, personally, who would have to bear the burden if they made Monte Carlo a “sanctuary city”. Maybe the same burdens should be felt by the residents of the Bay Area or New York City? I think they’d change their tune if they did.

  104. Dr. X says:
    @Wilkey

    )))Russell M Nelson(((
    )))Mitt Romney(((
    )))Orrin Hatch(((
    )))Gary Herbert(((
    )))Mia Love(((
    )))Jeff Flake(((
    )))Harry Reid(((

    Obviously, they can’t do it on their own. They need shabbos goyim. But that doesn’t discount their central role.

    Remember, Emanuel Celler was the principal House sponsor of the 1965 immigration moratorium repeal. He spent practically his entire life in Congress and advocated overturning the 1924 restrictions for forty years before he actually accomplished it.

  105. Anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @syonredux

    ((David Frum)) but of course that is never noted when someone is advocating for the non-leftist position.

    • Replies: @DFH
  106. @Karl

    Did you mean https://gatesofvienna.net/ ? Because that is where they are now. They moved from the blogger site in 2013.

  107. Yak-15 says:
    @Wilkey

    There are many, many reasonable Jews. This anti-semitism needs to stop as it’s not helping the cause.

    • Disagree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  108. pyrrhus says:
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    In my experience, Russian Jew generally equates to high level insanity, and Gessen is no exception…

  109. Sadly, this is not true: no voice audible in the American political mainstream is making the argument for open borders.

    Didn’t the Wall Street Journal propose at least once a year the Constitutional Amendment “There shall be open borders” and only stop after 11 September 2001?

  110. @Achmed E. Newman

    I am pretty sure DEFCON 1 is the highest level, with 5 being the lowest. So I think Steve is correct.

  111. Jefferson says:

    51% of Americans believe overpopulation is a bigger problem than underpopulation in The U.S.

    http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/june_2018/americans_see_overpopulation_as_a_bigger_problem_than_underpopulation

    So that means 51% of Americans are Literally Adolf Hitler/Nazis/Alt-Right by the logic of pro-open borders Leftists who believe The U.S needs a population that is well into the billions because of muh huddled masses that’s who we are.

    The pro-open borders crowd want us to live like sardines in a can.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  112. Anonymous[170] • Disclaimer says:
    @Clifford Brown

    Canadians think it’s OK to be flooded with foreigners so long as they’re not American?

  113. @syonredux

    To accept Smith’s screed as sincere, you’d have to believe that the Left’s anti-white race obsession expressed in all things (including the long-term electoral stratagem of the U.S. Left Wing Party to win by “browning America”) simply stops short of the issue of immigration and is overtaken by positive “neighbor-ism.” Positive “neighbor-ism” is merely giving native born Americans neighbors they don’t want or need – often in abrogation of U.S. Law – for the Americans’ own good. The fact that the new neighbors meet the economic and political needs of the people who despise native born white Americans is mere coincidence if this is permitted to be noticed at all.

    Has there ever been a case in World history in which the Left considers giving People of Color(s) white neighbors against their will anything other than an atrocity? I suppose they stop short of accusing urban gentrifiers of atrocities but they veil the reclamation of desirable urban areas as seeking out diversity, and they still view any conflict between white gentrifiers and the descendants of great migrators who pushed the former’s grandparents out of those same urban areas as “problematic.”

  114. @27 year old

    Open borders isn’t really the worst of the issue.

    The government refuses to do its duty to protect Americans — ourselves and our posterity.

    But it vigorously and aggressively protects the invading forces.

    When they kill one of us, they get probation. If we kill one of them, 20 year minimum.

    Open Borders and the coddling of foreign criminals is just a dimension of Anarcho-tyranny, a psychological operation to demoralize the masses.

    It’s present in some way in all of the Left’s causes and controversies.

  115. Tyrion 2 says: • Website

    It would be possible to isolate cases of how voting for or against a medical entitlements bill would kill a specific John Doe in the chosen eventuality. Vociferously denying that it was your intention in making your vote to kill said John Doe is to be expected, and hardly evidence of any nefarious designs against John Doe.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  116. Blubb says:

    All the “academics” she (they?) quotes are trolls. Seriously.

    “… Right of freedom of association…” Well, what about the residents’ right of freedom of association? Maybe they want no white-child-raping Muslim next door?

    “… The right of the governed…” The precise issue is that of you’re a Guatemalan, you’re governed in Guatemala.

    You have to say, this is trolling level EPIC.

    I’ve been trying to convince people that brown people shouldn’t be let into racist Europe for their own protection for years, but when I bring this up, I mostly get panicky, fish-eyed stares…

  117. @Rosie

    Racial nativists tend to think that because their goal is to make America more white, the goal of immigration advocates is to make America less white.

    This is so bizarre. Trying to stop people like Noah making the US less White is not made right or wrong by virtue of whether or not they are doing it deliberately. In fact, his insistence that they are not doing it deliberately is an admission that they are acting against White interests. There is no need to vociferously deny intentionally doing something harmless.

    It does make a difference from the standpoint of the overton window of public discourse though – which is why they need to disguise the fact that this is a deliberate program rather than an inevitable natural occurrence. The masses have been conditioned not to think much about race and to say even less. But one of the things that gets their attention is deliberate programs of racial engineering.

    Smith and his fellows need the perception to be that this is a spontaneous, natural and inevitable browning rather than a deliberate program designed to harm the core American population by dispossessing them and overwhelming their political agency. This is why they fight to maintain the incredible idea that there is no plan or program at work in mass third world immigration in spite of all of the evidence to the contrary.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  118. Catdog says:

    Scott Adams suggests that we use the term “uncontrolled borders” rather than “open borders”.

    But I see a benefit from the inevitable conflation of the term “open borders” with support legal or illegal immigration of any kind. You can’t have immigrants if the borders aren’t at least a little bit open, after all.

    Let’s make our opponenta define and hedge their positions. Do you support open borders, yes or no? If yes, you can be dimissed as a loon. If no, you don’t want *totally* open borders, then who do you think should be excluded, and why are you such a bigot?

  119. @Tyrion 2

    It would be possible to isolate cases of how voting for or against a medical entitlements bill would kill a specific John Doe in the chosen eventuality. Vociferously denying that it was your intention in making your vote to kill said John Doe is to be expected, and hardly evidence of any nefarious designs against John Doe.

    What if the Bill specifically exempted coverage for treatment for Sickle Cell Anemia or Tay-Sachs Disease or HIV from all health insurance plans? Can you draw any conclusions with regard to motives from this behavior?

    Of course, you’re neglecting the fact that many or most of the people who support mass third world immigration simultaneously express open hostility to the native born core U.S. population and its culture and mores and talk openly about an immanent time horizon when they won’t even need to try to appeal to these people in electoral contests because they will have assembled an unstoppable coalition of brown newcomers.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
  120. SMK says: • Website
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Stephen’s contention that “more open borders” and massive increases in nonwhite and Third-World immigration, legal and illegal, will improve the country (for almost everyone, supposedly) and his reasons why this is so are smokescreens, ruses to conceal his true motives and intentions; namely, what is “good for the Jews,” or so he thinks. Strategically, transforming the U.S. into a nonwhite-majority country will prevent the rise of a Nazi-like regime. Emotionally, transforming the U.S. into a nonwhite-majority hell-hole and dystopia in which the majority of European-Americans will be an increasingly dispossessed and persecuted minority is revenge for Nazism and the Holocaust.

  121. SMK says: • Website
    @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Subtract terrorists, criminals, violent fanatics, and political extremists,” and Stephens would support “more open borders.” The only way to prevent an invasion of “terrorists, criminals, violent fanatics, and political extremists” is to build a wall on the Mexican border and end all Third-World immigration from Mexico and Central America and North Africa and the Middle-East and black Africa and the Caribbean. Precise what and who is a “political extremists”? And who decides. On immigration, Stephens and his ilk are extremists and fanatics who invite and abet terrorism and criminality and political extremism and fanaticism.

  122. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Alec Leamas

    To be honest, I think it is impossibly complicated but you’re probably right for some of the people.

  123. @syonredux

    Based upon Fine woman’s reasoning why would any immigrant have the need to obey ANY of the laws on the books of the host country. After all, “they (had) no say in the rules, or in the election of those who make them.”

  124. @Anon

    Open border is not a contradictory term because taxes have to begin somewhere.

  125. syonredux says:
    @Ed

    DuPont family goes back to early 18th century. As a family they make the richest family lists but don’t think they’re any individual DuPonts in the 400.

    And, like the Hearsts, that’s another fortune that was not due to cotton+slavery.

    • Replies: @Ed
  126. vinteuil says:
    @syonredux

    Democrats routinely go on about how great it is that demographic change will soon make whites a minority in America. Has Noah Smith ever called them out for doing so?

    • Replies: @Jefferson
  127. Marty says:
    @Abe

    I once represented a Chinese national who claimed (to my mandarin-speaking paralegal) to be an agent of China’s “CIA.” He was being sued on a debt by a Chinese actress working in Hollywood. At the arbitration hearing, held at a tony SF law firm which, a few years later, was shot up by an unhappy client, I suddenly felt tapping on my leg from under the table. It was my client, attempting to hand me a stack of $100 bills for passage to the arbitrator.

  128. @Tyrion 2

    After all, if liberalism is a system that guarantees the rights of people to do what they want with their own body, then liberalism confined to women having the ability to say no contains an internal contradiction. Those who are banned from entering a woman are, in effect, governed from being able to do what they want with their own body.

    The open borders to rape analogy writes itself.

    In fact, it’s not even an analogy in Europe. The men coming in realize that Euro-men are too weak and spineless to defend against entering their territory, so–quite logically–assume they are too weak and spinelss to defend against entering their women.

    In some ways it’s bizarre to see a female academic writing this nonsense–writing a whole book essentially to tear down “the right to exclude” without seeing what “the right to exclude” actually is. But then most women aren’t the most logical/abstract thinkers. (Go for it Rosie!) (In fact, the CollegeBoard pulled the old verbal analogies from the SAT, because “women and minorities hardest hit”.) And the pull of virtue signalling conformity seems to be quite powerful. Still “right to exclude” … it’s hard to get more obvious.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
    , @Rosie
    , @Lot
  129. Brutusale says:
    @DFH

    There’s only one Doctor Fine.

  130. @AnotherDad

    In some ways it’s bizarre to see a female academic writing this nonsense–writing a whole book essentially to tear down “the right to exclude” without seeing what “the right to exclude” actually is. But then most women aren’t the most logical/abstract thinkers.

    English common law held that “the right to exclude” was first among the “bundle of rights” in real property. I imagine that this phrase may have been purposely chosen to undermine the idea that the real property within the borders of a State belongs exclusively to the State and its people.

    Notice also that they will probably push the “right to migrate” and undermine the “right to exclude” while nevertheless insisting that the ancient doctrines of jus soli and jus sanguinis remain in place.

  131. @Wilkey

    “Jews may be disproportionately for open borders, for all I know”

    You mean, you don’t know whether Jews are disproportionately for open borders? Like it’s an open question? Really?

  132. Rosie says:
    @Alec Leamas

    It does make a difference from the standpoint of the overton window of public discourse though – which is why they need to disguise the fact that this is a deliberate program rather than an inevitable natural occurrence.

    I know. I just find it very strange. I think it’s a good idea to constantly accuse them of conspiring against Whites. I can only imagine that at least some Whites will wake up when they hear anti-Whites vehemently denying that the incontrovertible, ongoing destruction of our race is a deliberate program, thus tacitly admitting that they know this destruction is underway, and are hysterically opposed to any attempt on our part to save ourselves.

  133. Altai says:

    Steve notes it in the text, but the fact that the most strident and brazen arguments for open borders are coming from neocons is hardly surprising. It’s open ethnic hatred.

    Like Judge Dredd, everything you need to know about Masha Gessen you can discern from a picture of them. Gessen is still living in that Russian Empire Pale in her mind. She is a meme that I honestly didn’t think was possible, she ticks all the Culture of Critique boxes perfectly.

    She and the other neocons ultimately are doing what their antecedents did in Russia and Germany. It looks like the US is starting to slip out of their control and now they’re panicking and want to finish off white gentile America.

    What is most galling is simply how stupid her argument is, it’s like something a 15 year old might come up with if they were pressed to make the argument in a debate for open borders.

    Are they still publishing this because they think it will convince people or because the blue ticks are so deep in a bubble they are trying to convince themselves? They have to know how her and Stephens are intensifying the noticing. These kinds of arguments are deeply offensive to even the most stupid of people whose interests this is designed to hurt.

  134. snorlax says:
    @Abe

    The Chinese would never in a million years guide social policy by such monomaniacal nonsense.

    Erm… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution

  135. Ed says:
    @syonredux

    The father of the founder of DuPont was opposed to slavery.

    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/w/wsfh/0642292.0042.008/–slavery-on-the-balance-sheet-pierre-samuel-dupont-de-nemours?rgn=main;view=fulltext

    Pierre-Samuel Dupont de Nemours, a young economic theorist and editor of the journal, argued that slavery was not only morally reprehensible, but also economically wasteful, and that the added expenses required to purchase, maintain, and discipline slaves and to track down and capture runaways made it a more costly system than free labor

  136. Lot says:
    @AnotherDad

    “The truth is there are absolutely *no* good arguments for mass immigration.”

    Outed as a non 1%er.

  137. Lot says:
    @Ed

    Piketty believes the Forbes lists miss a lot of old money billionaires. And a few times they’ve added people, not with new money, but old fortunes they just never noticed.

  138. Mr. Anon says:

    Also calling for open borders is the current front-runner to be Mexico’s next presidente, Andrés Manuel López Obrador:

    http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/22/mexican-candidate-immigration-speech/

    You can tell that Senor Obrador, or AMLO as he is called, is a genuine representative of the cosmic latino race because he looks like Welsh/Cornish-American character actor Ken Jenkins:

    https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0420898/?ref_=tt_cl_t3

  139. Jefferson says:
    @vinteuil

    “Democrats routinely go on about how great it is that demographic change will soon make whites a minority in America. Has Noah Smith ever called them out for doing so?”

    Some Democrats try a different method to try to convince the White masses that open borders is good for them, by claiming that the “refugees”/DACA Dreamers will all magically become White, so you see open borders actually makes The U.S Whiter, not Browner.

    Just do a Google search and you will find such articles.

    So that crying Brown Honduran girl in the Time Magazine cover, 10 years from now she is going to be a Becky White Gringa girl because she will assimilate into Whiteness.

    They pass this off by saying that White is a social construct and that anybody can become White.

  140. @Jefferson

    If immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador, N Africa etc. all contribute such economic power growth and dyamism, why are not China Japan Nigeria Saudi Arabia and others not tripping over one another trying to import more of them?

  141. istevefan says:
    @AnotherDad

    The “pro-immigration” agenda isn’t about immigrants or letting people live in their diversitopia. It’s about denying white gentiles the right to have their nations and live as they like amongst their own people with their own culture. These “globalists” are totalitarian and genocidal.

    Demographic change or dilution has always been used as a weapon to help an aggressor control another population. You had the English bringing the Scots to Northern Ireland to help rule over the Irish. You had the Ottomans bringing in the Jews to help rule over the Greeks. You had Stalin bringing in ethnic Russians to water down the Baltic States. And today you have the Chinese bringing in the Han to pacify Tibet.

    What is happening in the Euro world today is different only in that the aggressors happen to be a part of us and not a foreign force.

    • Replies: @Lot
  142. Rosie says:
    @AnotherDad

    In fact, the CollegeBoard pulled the old verbal analogies from the SAT, because “women and minorities hardest hit”

    I suspect if they had been telling the truth, they would have just said, “minorities hardest hit.”

    • Replies: @3g4me
  143. Jason Liu says:

    If democracy is a system that guarantees the right of the governed to participate in the governing process, then democracy confined to protected national borders contains an internal contradiction.

    This is why I’m adamant that democracy is the primary cause of western society’s problems. For some on the right, that’s too abstract a connection to make. Now you’re hearing it straight from the horse’s mouth.

    Oh, and if the population of China and India and Africa were to flood in through open borders, Masha would be on the first plane to some little town in Canada.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
  144. Lot says:

    “For a white gentile to have an opinion on who should not be let in is tantamount to Discrimination and thus unthinkable.”

    Oh yeah but Jews are perfectly safe from from the PC police, right Mr. Miller, (former) Prof. Wienstein, and Prof. Wax?

  145. Lot says:
    @istevefan

    “You had the Ottomans bringing in the Jews to help rule over the Greeks.”

    I never heard of this. The Ottoman elite were heavily Greek Muslim-converts, with a fair dose of Slav and smaller bits of Italian and German. But they seemed to rule Greece itself by co-opting and converting to Islam the more ambitious slice of the population. It wasn’t too hard to run Greece by that time either as it was ruined and depopulated by 1500 years of Roman civil wars and having its population taxed and drafted to fund the Byzantine wars.

    A tiny Albanian elite under Muhammad Ali took over Egypt for about 150 years, initially with the Ottoman blessing, and until the British conquered it. They were technically part of the Ottoman Empire, but de facto independent and sometimes fighting wars with it.

    I think you have to be careful about using the Court Jew/tax farmer model to explain ethnic policy outside of greater Germania.

    • Replies: @istevefan
    , @istevefan
  146. Lot says:
    @AnotherDad

    “the CollegeBoard pulled the old verbal analogies from the SAT, because “women and minorities hardest hit””

    The point was to make the test a little bit less accurate at the very extreme end of verbal IQ, which is where the male higher IQ SD really kicks in.

  147. istevefan says:
    @Lot

    I believe the Ottomans invited in many of the Jews who were expelled from Spain. At one point Salonika (Thessaloniki) became a heavily Jewish town.

    During the Ottoman period, the city’s population of Ottoman Muslims (including those of Turkish and Albanian origin, as well as Bulgarian Muslim and Greek Muslim convert origin) grew substantially. According to the 1478 census Selânik (سلانیك), as the city came to be known in Ottoman Turkish, had a population of 4,320 Muslims, 6,094 Greek Orthodox and some Catholics. No Jews were recorded in the census suggesting that the subsequent influx of Jewish population was not linked[85] to the already existing Romaniots community.[86] Soon after the turn of the 15th to 16th century, however, nearly 20,000 Sephardic Jews immigrated to Greece from the Iberian Peninsula following their expulsion from Spain by the 1492 Alhambra Decree.[87] By c. 1500, the numbers had grown to 7,986 Greeks, 8,575 Muslims, and 3,770 Jews. By 1519, Sephardic Jews numbered 15,715, 54% of the city’s population. Some historians consider the Ottoman regime’s invitation to Jewish settlement was a strategy to prevent the ethnic Greek population from dominating the city.[88]

  148. GSR says:

    Masha Gessen, hmm. Irish?

  149. istevefan says:
    @Lot

    I think you have to be careful about using the Court Jew/tax farmer model to explain ethnic policy outside of greater Germania.

    I do think the Jews assisted in the Ottoman administration of Greece. I have heard that Jews helped the Ottomans in collecting the “child tax” of which Jewish children were not subjected to. About 1 out of every 5 Greek boys were periodically taken to become soldiers of the Ottomans. Greeks would try to hide their kids, but local officials on the ground were used to help find the missing kids. This probably contributed to the ill feelings between Greeks and Jews. It might explain why the Greeks did so little to help them when the Germans invaded in 1941.

  150. DFH says:
    @Anonymous

    I don’t think the fact that Israel first warmonger and die hard anti-Trumper David Frum is a Jew helps your position as much as you want it to

  151. 3g4me says:
    @Rosie

    @127 Rosie: “I suspect if they had been telling the truth, they would have just said, “minorities hardest hit.”

    It was women, not minorities (plenty of whom were admitted under affirmative action), who brought the lawsuit that forced the easing of the Foreign Service Exam, because so many of them failed it. I passed it the first time I took it. It was not the perfect exam for the FS (which is primarily composed of fools, knaves, and traitors), but it was in no way discriminatory against women.

    Why should the SAT be any different? Subsequent to renorming, I believe more women became national merit scholars. Does the fact that more undergrads are now female than male reflect better educational standards? More rigorous academics?

    Your reflexive defense of womyn is akin to Jack D’s reflexive defense of Jews.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Jim Don Bob
  152. DFH says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    About half of Obermans and Fines in the UK seem to be Jewish

    I think it is much lower than that for ‘Fine’. She doesn’t look at all Jewish to me. More caution is necessary in calling people Jewish, because it’s irritating to have to constantly check this because so many false accusations are made.

  153. Rosie says:
    @3g4me

    Your reflexive defense of womyn is akin to Jack D’s reflexive defense of Jews.

    If you have any evidence for the various claims you make in this comment, let’s see it. I know nothing about the history of the foreign service exam, but I can tell you this. The thing about lawsuits is that you only need one plaintiff to agitate for measures that actually have little or no public support. I mentioned Loving v. Virginia the other day. Have you seen the plaintiffs in that case?

    Does this White man represent you?

    Subsequent to renorming, I believe more women became national merit scholars.

    I wouldn’t know. I’m preoccupied with an international conspiracy to submerge my race in a flood tide of migrants from the Third World. Again, if you’d like to show me some evidence, I’ll be happy to take a look.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  154. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    Like I was saying …

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/affirmative-action-white-women_us_56a0ef6ae4b0d8cc1098d3a5

    67% of White women opposed affirmative action as of 2014, slightly higher than the percentage opposed among Whites as a whole.

  155. @Cagey Beast

    Yes, the global village, open borders, cheap labour consensus was pushed unrelentingly by Anglosphere liberals first and foremost. I mean “liberals” in the widest sense. In the US and England especially, the liberalism came before the tikkun olam.

    No, the tikkun olam came first and spread quickly to Dutch Jews’ nextdoor neighbors in East Anglia.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @Cagey Beast
  156. wren says:
    @wren

    If this guy wins in Mexico, like he is expected to, and he follows through with his promises to send Mexicans to the US, Trump and even the Republicans are set to win for a long time.

    Unless the Republicans do something dumb, like listen to the msm, which even they are getting smarter about.

    Most people don’t like stuff like this.

    I think.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/06/thousands-of-mexicans-take-over-l-a-streets-celebrating-soccer-win-video/

  157. syonredux says:
    @ben tillman

    No, the tikkun olam came first and spread quickly to Dutch Jews’ nextdoor neighbors in East Anglia.

    Tikkun olam , back then, was about observing every jot and tittle of Jewish law. The melioristic interpretation came much, much later.And the 17th-18th century Puritans were highly xenophobic (One of the reasons why the Pilgrims left the Netherlands was because they didn’t want their children to get “Dutchified).

    • Replies: @ben tillman
  158. @RabbiHighComma

    That’s Steve Buscemi’s sister.

  159. @Anon

    Very good analysis.

    Especially this last part.

    Now, one danger faced by the horizontalist top is the possible development of the horizontalist bottom, i.e. if the elites around the world cooperate and identify with each other, there is the possibility that the the lower masses around the world will do likewise and form a vast human wave of anti-elite folks. But there is much less chance of that happening because the lower masses are too numerous, too uneducated, too crude, too ill-informed, and too short-sighted to agree on anything.
    After all, it is much easier for Jewish elites, white elites, Asian elites, brown elites, and etc.(who all attended the same or similar schools and rub shoulders at cocktail parties) to coordinate their mutual economic and status interests in California than it is for the lower masses of white, Asian, brown, black, and etc folks to coordinate any kind of united front strategy. Diversity is far less problematic at top than at bottom. The elites can overlook ethnic differences in favor of rich rewards of money and status. In contrast, there’s less to go around for the lowers, and therefore, desperation and pettiness among the masses undermine unity. It’s like rich folks at dinner table comport themselves with better manners than lower folks driven by base drives of raw hunger.

    It’s no wonder a few men on horseback can control 1000s of cattle.

    The more diverse a society, the more trouble commoners will have in forming resistance groups. Diversity atomizes a society, sows distrust, and diminishes cohesion. So it’s easier to rule over a diverse populace.

  160. @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Their grandkids will suffer. Recession to the mean is real. Plenty of descendants of old quasi-aristocratic families in Latin America who lost their lands and other sources of wealth in the tumult of the last century (dictatorships, revolutions, civil wars, etc) and now find themselves out of the protective net of wealth and connections and now have to live as a white face among the lower middle class brown hordes. It’s not fun for them.

  161. @3g4me

    Your reflexive defense of womyn is akin to Jack D’s reflexive defense of Jews.

    Jack’s defense is better. And not reflexive.

  162. Anonymous[170] • Disclaimer says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    As a recall, nobody knows how British Jews voted in the Brexit referendum because the polls that were taken contradict each other. An even split of opinion seems a reasonable assumption, but this is uncertain.

    (I do remember in the days after the referendum following a discussion on a British lefty forum where the Jews present were visibly nervous at the result. One of them described the feeling of being ‘trapped’. That comment stuck in my mind.)

  163. J1234 says:

    Sadly, this is not true: no voice audible in the American political mainstream is making the argument for open borders.

    “No borders! No nations! No deportations!” How many times have we heard that on the news?

    With the left, any ideas on the left that aren’t in the “American political mainstream” will be in 15 to 20 years. That’s the design, all part of the inclusivity mandate. Where was the transgender bathroom debate 20 years ago? Nowhere to be seen, as I recall. This author seems to think her role is making open borders an “official” thing on the left…after all of those ordinary people on TV had been screaming for it for so long.

    And the role of the New York Times seems to be presenting ideas outside of the mainstream left as within the mainstream left. They’re deluded as to how people perceive their paper, though.

  164. Anonymous[368] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wilkey

    It’s not that strange if you have paid attention to the gun control groups and the dems for the last couple decades. They act exactly the same way, and quite often it’s the same media figures and politicians involved with both. It’s often the same people funding both causes, too. Soros, bloomberg, etc.

  165. @Jefferson

    Cogent, well thought out, rational arguments won’t work with Leftists. cf. Nick Diaz, Corvinus, Mishra, JohnnyWalker123

  166. Anon[160] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    “The rich capitalist doesn’t actually want to live in the rainbow hued utopia, he wants to live in a white nation, but where his white employees can be beaten down or replaced with compliant immigrant labor. ”

    Yes, the point of my article some years ago, “The Gilmore Girls Occupy Wall St.” The rich liberal lives/wants to live in a small town (Hamptons, Martha’s Vinyard, etc.) stripped of the BadWhites who built and lived in it.

    https://www.counter-currents.com/2011/11/the-gilmore-girls-occupy-wall-street/

  167. @DFH

    So the rapist has a pass because something, something, and something. I wonder whether Dr. Fine has snatch-embedded razor blades. Because otherwise, her visit to Rotherham might be, well, suboptimal for her.

    But her Pakistani overlords will be most appreciate of her theoretical enabling of the abuse of the good doctor.

    If you did not believe in pure evil previously, you cannot evade the unarguable result that this woman is the spawn of Satan.

    Literally. (Or close enough for government work).

  168. @Tono Bungay

    In my view, the libertarians are at least coherent,

    No. Talk to a Libertarian that the first thing they says is “well, I don’t support that, but the government should not…”

    Libertarians are asperby realitarians. They know liberalism is a train wreck, but their focus is primarily navel gazing with occasional interruptions from reality.

  169. MarkinLA says:
    @Yak-15

    If any criticism of Jews is anti-Semitism then that doesn’t help the cause either.

    • Replies: @Yak-15
  170. Pericles says:
    @Tiny Duck

    Your daughters will hear Childrrn of Color

    Whoops, some Lizard People mouth there. Just calm down and you can imitate the Humansss passably.

  171. Pericles says:
    @syonredux

    Trump and his brutish methods are radicalizing his opponents.

    Sure, Frum means acts like doxxing ICE personnel; attacking supporters of political opponents with paid mobs; prosecuting the opponents for defending themselves; using their corrupt tool the IRS against political opponents; sending crazed murderers against opposing political representatives; and trying to trigger a coup against the democratically elected president. Things like that.

  172. “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” is not an immigration plan. It is a political coalition. Their demands are nothing more than a wish list compiled by all their members and when all accounts are added up it basically amounts to open borders.

    The problem for the CIR coalition is that mass immigration is not popular and the people promoting it are a minority. What they have going for them is that they are motivated by racism and money which gives them great drive and makes them focused while regular Americans are not. This means that if the CIR coalition fails to act in unison they will get picked apart and once that begins they will lose completely.

    This makes their coalition very rigid and unable to compromise. This is one reason they can never give in anywhere, including on the wall. Out of all the things we could be doing to stop illegal immigration, the wall is somewhere in the middle. A normal person would conclude that it would be worth trading away to the conservatives but if they did, then groups like the Ag Lobby and the Chicanos would drop out of the coalition fatally weakening the coalition. Same for the HB1 visas. The Latino lobby should not care but if the business lobby stops funding the coalition they will lose clout as well.

    This is why Trump is so confident that the CIR coalition will never agree to anything. They are simply incapable of change and are completely rigid. Trump’s best strategy is to get one thing accomplished, even the smallest because once the CIR coalition gets rolled, they might just collapse completely.

  173. Logan says:

    For example, the Tsarnaevs and Todashev were just carrying out ancient Caucasus traditions of berserker raids upon enemy tribes and ritual assassinations of Jews that go back to the hashish-besotted Assassins of the Caucasus observed by Marco Polo.

    Probably not important, but the Assassins were not particularly associated with the Caucasus. Their strongholds were in Syria and Persia. The greatest being Alamut, which was in the Alburz range of what is now Iran. Not a long ways from Caucasus, but not in it.

  174. @Wilkey

    Jews may be disproportionately for open borders, for all I know, but the psychosis has spread far and wide. I live in a very WASP, Mormon state, and even our leaders are fully on board with it.

    You are mostly right. Of course the open border movement is well beyond Jews. And there are prominent Jews leading the movement for immigration restriction against open borders: Mickey Kaus, Stephen Miller, Dennis Prager, Mencius Moldbug, Alain Finkielkraut, Eric Zemmour, etc. And I do find the petty repeated snipes at ((Jews)) tiresome, annoying, and somewhat racist.

    There is still one exception. There is a circle of very prominent Jews that is nakedly hypocritical on this issue and really does deserve critique: David Brooks, Bret Stephens, Bari Weiss, Bill Kristol, Max Boot, and the writers at Commentary Magazine. They promote nationalism+tribalism for me but not for thee. They are quite passionate about Israel restricting immigration aggressively, yet promote open borders on US + Europe + Canada. And beyond the narrow issue of immigration, they are passionate about their Jewish identity, they support Jewish exclusive schools, grants, Jewish-identity think tanks, Jewish inter-marriage, etc. And they fanatically oppose the same things for non-Jewish whites.

    I’d also say, I like Jews. I like Israel. I don’t think Israel should have open borders, but being lectured about the evils of tribalism from these nakedly tribal Jews is too much.

  175. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:

    You called it. Eat your spinach, bitch. Immigrants are a Gift and racist Trump is abusing them, the Ndw Yorker hysterically doubles down.

    His [Trump's] policy isn’t driven by economics, of course. As he more or less admitted earlier this year, with his derisive comments about immigrants from “shithole countries,” it is driven by racism and a desire to resist the emergence of a nonwhite majority in the United States—a transformation that is inevitable and necessary.

    In other words, the number of white people in America is declining. The new Census Bureau figures suggest that this is also true on the national level. In 2016 and 2017, the number of white, non-Hispanic Americans fell by forty-one thousand, according to the Journal report.

    So get over it already.

    with the native white population aging rapidly, the U.S. economy and fiscal system are in dire need of other groups to pick up the slack. Fortunately, there are eager candidates, including the roughly six million non-Americans who file immigration applications every year, and the thousands of parents and children currently languishing in detention centers operated by U.S. immigration authorities and the Department of Health and Human Services.

    Of course:

    This doesn’t justify a policy of open borders.

    But The New Yorker and WSJ know best.

    But it does mean that the United States needs a President who is willing to face the real challenges facing the country, and recognize the benefits of large-scale immigration.

    \
    That nonwhite majority in the United States—a transformation that is inevitable and necessary. And desirable????? Lets bring in the Hatians ASAP.

  176. black sea says:
    @DFH

    Dr. Fine lives up to her name.

    Does she make housecalls?

  177. Mr. Anon says:
    @Jefferson

    The pro-open borders crowd want us to live like sardines in a can.

    Urbanites don’t care if all the rest of us have to live as they do. Of course, they don’t realize that their lifestyles are supported by the rest of the country, and wouldn’t be possible if the rest of the country were just like their cities.

  178. If democracy is a system that guarantees the right of the governed to participate in the governing process

    Being kept out isn’t really being governed. Universities can deny any student admission and exclude them from the right to purchase course enrollment. That doesn’t mean the university is governing them and it doesn’t entitle the excluded students to participate in the governing process at the university.

  179. @Anon

    Well said.

    The bottom 80% cannot act horizontally because the immigration policy has effectively created a Tower of Babel. No shared language, no shared culture, no shared heritage. To the extent there is a shared culture, it is decadent and corrosive to free thought and moral struggle.

    If you only visit the Stanford, Harvard and Yale campuses, Diversity seems to be working just fine because, in general, the highly intelligent are better at strategic cooperation. Everyone on these campuses have been through a shared indoctrination program and have shared end goals.

    Effectively, the West is undergoing a massive Plantation of Ulster operation, where national identities are being subsumed by importing people who are loyal to The Crown (aka Globalism).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation_of_Ulster

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  180. @ben tillman

    That’s true but it doesn’t contradict my point. The Roundheads married up with their long-lost spiritual cousins in America. When Oliver Cromwell’s ideological children met and mixed with the tikkun olam kids, something black magical happened. That’s the back-story of Yankee-Judea.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @ben tillman
  181. @Rouetheday

    Oops, maybe I’m thinking TSA colors – I know RED is bad or something…

    Thanks for the correction of my attempted correction. I haven’t seen War Games in a few decades.

    cc: Federalist, simpleperson

  182. @Clifford Brown

    The bottom 80% cannot act horizontally because the immigration policy has effectively created a Tower of Babel.

    Nitpick, but wouldn’t the Tower of Babel technically be the opposite, a single shared people?

    “The whole earth was of one language and of one speech. It happened, as they traveled east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they lived there. They said one to another, “Come, let’s make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.” They had brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar. They said, “Come, let’s build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top reaches to the sky, and let’s make ourselves a name, lest we be scattered abroad on the surface of the whole earth.””

    Genesis 11:1–4

    To which God punished them:

    “Yahweh came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men built. Yahweh said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is what they begin to do. Now nothing will be withheld from them, which they intend to do. Come, let’s go down, and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.” So Yahweh scattered them abroad from there on the surface of all the earth. They stopped building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there Yahweh confused the language of all the earth. From there, Yahweh scattered them abroad on the surface of all the earth.”

    Genesis 11:5–9

  183. anti-anti-Open Borders sentiment is now the conventional wisdom

    Yes, or as I call it, “stealth open-borders-ism,” which I despise and which turned me from an immigration dove into an immigration hawk.

  184. @Daniel Chieh

    Right, I meant that much like Yahweh’s response to the Tower of Babel in the OT, diversity acts as a means of social control. I misapplied the metaphor.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  185. syonredux says:
    @Cagey Beast

    That’s true

    No, it’s not.

  186. @Clifford Brown

    Clearly the elites need to practice more WWJD and less WWYD.

  187. Dr. Doom says:

    Here at the New Yorker, we will gladly pay you Tuesday for an Open Border Today.

    Tuesday is Soylent Green Day.

  188. @Jason Liu

    This is why I’m adamant that democracy is the primary cause of western society’s problems. For some on the right, that’s too abstract a connection to make. Now you’re hearing it straight from the horse’s mouth.

    That doesn’t follow. She’s talking about the opposite of democracy.

  189. @Cagey Beast

    That’s true but it doesn’t contradict my point. The Roundheads married up with their long-lost spiritual cousins in America.

    And lived extremely illiberally! The Puritans did not bring liberalism to this country.

    • Agree: syonredux
  190. @syonredux

    Tikkun olam , back then, was about observing every jot and tittle of Jewish law.

    Tikkun olam was closely connected to the messianistic fervor of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  191. RudyM says:

    Like the child detention camps it opposes, Portland’s ICE blockade has grown into a tent city.

    The occupation of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters on the South Waterfront has over six days expanded from a scattering of chairs to a village of more than 80 tents, four portable toilets, six couches, a commissary and a medic’s office.

    The protest now closely resembles the Occupy Portland camps that seized two downtown parks in 2011. Once again, a Portland mayor has sanctioned the takeover—but this time, the target is a federal agency, and the goal is to directly impede its work.

    Mayor Ted Wheeler has pledged to not intervene with Occupy ICE, saying he considers the work of federal immigration agents “un-American” and doesn’t want Portland police to aid ICE’s operations.

    . . . .

    On Friday night, as demonstrators practiced de-escalation techniques for hostile situations and broke challah to celebrate Shabbat, cooks in the tent kitchen provided cheese sandwiches, vegan lentil stew and fruit salad.

    http://www.wweek.com/news/2018/06/23/after-six-days-portlands-ice-blockade-is-a-city-of-more-than-80-tents/

  192. syonredux says:
    @ben tillman

    Tikkun olam , back then, was about observing every jot and tittle of Jewish law.

    Tikkun olam was closely connected to the messianistic fervor of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

    Well, yeah. By observing every jot and tittle of the Law, the coming of the Messiah can be hastened. Indeed, traditional Jewish belief held that even one perfect Sabbath alone could appreciable shorten the time of his arrival….

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @ben tillman
  193. syonredux says:
    @syonredux

    “Tikkun olam , back then, was about observing every jot and tittle of Jewish law.

    Tikkun olam was closely connected to the messianistic fervor of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.”

    Well, yeah. By observing every jot and tittle of the Law, the coming of the Messiah can be hastened. Indeed, traditional Jewish belief held that even one perfect Sabbath alone could appreciably* shorten the time of his arrival….

    *Corrected a typo

  194. @Daniel Chieh

    The Tower of Babel is an apposite allusion.

    The confusion is the product of the tower’s name.

    That is, we associate ‘babel’ with the outcome of the story, i.e. the chaos of mutual incomprehensibility, but the tower itself wasn’t built with that outcome in mind. The tower was the ur-utopian project, i.e. an attempt to re-create the world on human terms, rather than on God’s. The building of the tower was driven by overweening human pride.

    Current multiculturalism drinks deeply from that same cup, i.e. leftist true believers assume, in their own pride, that they can re-engineer the very nations and peoples of the world, and build their own utopia. They’re building the tower, and they believe they can ‘fix’, or just ignore, the babel.

  195. @syonredux

    Okay, I’ll let you have the last word.

  196. JackOH says:

    “Current multiculturalism drinks deeply from that same cup, i.e. leftist true believers assume, in their own pride, that they can re-engineer the very nations and peoples of the world . . .”.

    You got it, LRC. Pride or pridefulness is exactly what I’m seeing at work among the leftish academics and hangers-on, such as librarians, journalists, activist bureaucrats, and what-not. I’ve listened to their blather up close, and they truly believe people can’t or won’t see through their schemes. They confuse our present political impotence with blindness.

  197. @Jefferson

    What percentage of the American billionaires on the Forbes 400 list got wealthy because their ancestors owned African slaves? Like ZERO.

    Some fortunes in New England and other northeast states were built in part because their ancestors sold African slaves– to the planters down South.

    I don’t know if any of these are on the Forbes 400, but Brown and other universities and colleges are being taken to task for being founded on blood money.

  198. New Yorker:

    Only those who show they “get” the cartoons in the New Yorker
    should be allowed permanent resident status.

    That’s a fair standard, and not at all antiïmmigrant. Can we all coöperate in getting this enacted, and reënacted, and reïnforced? Perhaps we can coördinate a fleet of self-driving Citroëns sporting bumper stickers?

    Or am I being naïve?

  199. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    You can’t fool all the White people all the time!

    The sad thing is that you can. Or at least you can fool the overwhelming majority of white people all of the time, and that’s enough. Fooling white people is like taking candy from a baby.

  200. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Wilkey

    Jews may be disproportionately for open borders, for all I know, but the psychosis has spread far and wide.

    The big problem is not Jews, it’s Christians. Christians are much worse for two reasons. Firstly, Christians are a lot more numerous than Jews (in the US at least). Secondly, Christians are much much dumber. Jews on the whole are smart enough to know that the SJW stuff is nonsense and they only support it because they think it serves their interests. White Christians are stupid enough to actually believe the SJW stuff.

    Jews will support open borders, but only when it suits their interests. White Christians will support open borders even when it destroys their own societies. You just can’t do anything with people that dumb.

  201. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Jefferson

    I wonder what percentage of female FBI agents were only hired because of affirmative action?

    Probably most. The whole idea of having women in law enforcement is ludicrous. You need small numbers of women to deal with female victims, to conduct searches of female suspects, etc, but women should never be out on the streets as cops or any kind of law enforcement. It’s just silly. It can only happen in Clown World.

    If you want to save society the first step is to eradicate feminism.

  202. dfordoom says: • Website
    @newrouter

    OCCUPY MASHA GESSEN’S APARTMENT NOW!!11!!

    Every human being on the planet has a basic human right to live in Masha Gessen’s apartment. If you disagree with that you must be some kind of Nazi. We know Masha is no Nazi so we know that Masha will throw open her doors right now. She’s probably already done so.

    If you lock your apartment door, you’re a Nazi. If you even have a lock on your door you’re a Nazi.

  203. Yak-15 says:
    @MarkinLA

    I completely agree but some here really ride off the rails and this helps keep out movement verboten to all but the most curious.

  204. Rosie says:
    @Tono Bungay

    In my view, the libertarians are at least coherent, even if wacky and utopian and dangerous, whereas the liberal position is patently incoherent.

    It’s not incoherent at all. Greedy employers want libertarianism at the border and socialism in the interior of the country, because then they get to pay below substitence wages and externalize the cost of their maintenance to the taxpayer. You’re certainly right that the left-liberal position is philosophically incoherent, but that doesn’t matter when you control the media and can’t be taken to task for it.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.