The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
 TeasersiSteve Blog
/
Huddled Masses

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS

From today’s press conference given by Trump domestic policy advisor and speechwriter Stephen Miller with Jim Acosta, who looks kind of like George Clooney’s dad, but who is officially Diverse due to his precious Conquistador-American ancestry.

Screenshot 2017-08-02 14.46.35

OBEY GIANT

And from the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect:

Screenshot 2017-08-02 15.45.38

All your hiztory are belong to us

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Screenshot 2017-02-09 17.46.39

Obama is said to have bombed 5 of the 7 countries, with barely a peep.

It’s right there in the Negative First Amendment: “Invade the World, Invite the World!”

It’s who we are.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Czar’s Palace, Russia

From the NYT:

A Return to National Greatness

David Brooks FEB. 3, 2017

The Library of Congress’s main building is one of the most magnificent buildings in Washington, or in the country. It was built in a pivotal, tumultuous time. During the 23 years in the late 19th century that it took to design and build the structure, industrialization transformed America. More people immigrated to America than in the previous 250 years combined. …

In that story, America is placed at the vanguard of the great human march of progress. America is the grateful inheritor of other people’s gifts. It has a spiritual connection to all people in all places, but also an exceptional role. America culminates history. It advances a way of life and a democratic model that will provide people everywhere with dignity. The things Americans do are not for themselves only, but for all mankind.

This historical story was America’s true myth. … It gave America a mission in the world — to spread democracy and freedom.

Admittedly, John Quincy Adams, who knew all the Founding Fathers from Franklin onward, said on July 4, 1821:

Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause, by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.

She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself, beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. The frontlet upon her brows would no longer beam with the ineffable splendor of freedom and independence; but in its stead would soon be substituted an imperial diadem, flashing in false and tarnished lustre the murky radiance of dominion and power. She might become the dictatress of the world: she would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit. …

But JQA’s viciously Czarist rant is not who we are. JQA was America’s first minister to Russia, so, obviously, he was subverted there. Here’s photographic proof that JQA, long before Trump, was the original Siberian Candidate:

Screenshot 2017-02-03 17.14.08

In defense of JQA, however, he never had a chance to see Fiddler on the Roof to learn the True Meaning of America. But what’s Trump’s excuse?

It gave us an attitude of welcome and graciousness, to embrace the huddled masses yearning to breathe free and to give them the scope by which to realize their powers.

The Zeroth Amendment requires us to be Huddled Masochists. It’s who we are.

But now the myth has been battered. …

And so along come men like Donald Trump and Stephen Bannon with a countermyth. Their myth is an alien myth, frankly a Russian myth. It holds, as Russian reactionaries hold, that deep in the heartland are the pure folk who embody the pure soul of the country — who endure the suffering and make the bread. But the pure peasant soul is threatened.

This alien Russian myth was made up by the notorious Czar Thomas the Jefferson.

It is threatened by the cosmopolitan elites and by the corruption of foreign influence.

Similarly, Czar George the Washington wrote in his notoriously virulent Farewell Address, with help from Grand Duke Alexander the Hamilton:

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

Back to Brooks:

The true American myth is dynamic and universal — embracing strangers and seizing possibilities. The Russian myth that Trump and Bannon have injected into the national bloodstream is static and insular. It is about building walls, staying put. Their country is bound by its nostalgia, not its common future.

The odd thing is that the Trump-Bannon myth is winning. The policies that emanate from it are surprisingly popular. The refugee ban has a lot of support. Closing off trade is popular. Building the wall is a winning issue.

The Trump and Bannon anschluss has exposed the hollowness of our patriotism.

“Anschluss” … I thought Trump and Bannon were Russians, not Germans. It’s hard to keep up …

It has exposed how attenuated our vision of national greatness has become and how easy it was for Trump and Bannon to replace a youthful vision of American greatness with a reactionary, alien one.

We are in the midst of a great war of national identity. We thought we were in an ideological battle against radical Islam, but we are really fighting the national myths spread by Trump, Bannon, Putin, Le Pen and Farage.

We can argue about immigration and trade and foreign policy, but nothing will be right until we restore and revive the meaning of America. Are we still the purpose-driven experiment

As described in The Federalist Papers by founding father Rick Warren

Lincoln described

Most famously in his Gettysburg Address:

Four score and seven years ago our Proposition Generators brought forth on this continent, a new idea, conceived in immigration, and dedicated to the proposition that all imperialism is good:

Invade the World! Invite the World!

Brooks continue:

and Emma Lazarus

Founding Mother and authoress of the Zeroth Amendment in the Bill of Rights: “If anybody anywhere wants to move to America, you can’t stop them or even look at them funny because that would be racist, you racist.”

wrote about: assigned by providence to spread democracy and prosperity; to welcome the stranger; to be brother and sister to the whole human race; and to look after one another because we are all important in this common project?

Rare color photo of Abraham Lincoln delivering the Gettysburg Address (slightly retouched)

Or are we just another nation, hunkered down in a fearful world?

Do you ever get the impression that David Brooks sometimes draws his inspiration for his columns by reading the latest satires on iSteve and then crafting the Platonic Essence of whatever thinking I had just parodied?

 
🔊 Listen RSS

As we all know, the Statute of Liberty mandates non-discrimination against anybody anywhere who wants to move to America for reason, no questions asked. If they feel like coming, we have to let them in to not be racist.

It’s the law!

Still …

What we were promised:

What we get:

(Thanks to commenter Senator Brudlefly.)

 
🔊 Listen RSS

As you know, the French gave us the Statue of Liberty to celebrate immigration. Voltaire wrote the famous poem inscribed on it:

I disapprove of what you say,
But I will defend to the death
Your right to be punched in the head
If you say anything bad about immigration,
To encourage the others.

Now, France is enjoying the benefits of Statue of Libertyism, too.

Paris’s new Huddled Masses:

And the Huddled Masses’ Wretched Refuse:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Before graphic artist Shepard Fairey brought us HOPE:

Before Fairey brought us his open borders sexy hijab fetishist WE THE PEOPLE:

Fairey brought us OBEY GIANT, his career-making propaganda poster of wrestler Andre the Giant:

Today, in that tradition, Commenter Harry Baldwin gives us a poster summing up the commandments for our time from Emma Lazarus’s poem The New Colossus:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Obey Liberty 2

You have your orders, Huddled Masochists of America:

OBEY GIANT

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Screenshot 2017-01-28 13.29.59 You have your orders, Huddled Masochists:

OBEY GIANT

 
🔊 Listen RSS

New York Times op-ed columnist Roger Cohen writes in the NYT:

The Closing of Trump’s America
Roger Cohen JAN. 27, 2017

… I am lucky enough to live in Brooklyn Heights with a view out over the East River to lower Manhattan and the Statue of Liberty. So while watching President Donald Trump’s dark inaugural speech a week ago I was able at the same time to glance out at the torch that symbolizes American openness and generosity of spirit.

As Trump’s “AMERICA FIRST,” “AMERICA FIRST” echoed across my living room I thought of Emma Lazarus’ words inscribed on the pedestal of the statue:

“Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.”

Friedrich Trump, a penniless German immigrant, was one of those “huddled masses” back in 1885. Lucky he did not attempt to enter the America taking shape under his grandson.

Over time, but not without struggle, I believe the torch will prove stronger than Trump’s fear-filled jingoistic darkness. With the stranger comes renewal. America cannot be itself without it, and Americans will fight for their idea. It is, after all, how they became who they are.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

There are a number of plaques on the Statue of Liberty, such as this one commemorating the important role of Freemasons in the statue’s history, and another from the Boy Scouts. Most of these plaques have of course never been assumed by anyone to be the law of the land.

But one plaque bearing a poem by Emma Lazarus, added 17 years after the Goddess of Liberty’s opening, has been retconned into displacing the real meaning of the Statue of Liberty, making it into a Statue of Immigration. It’s remarkable how many people in positions of influence seem to think Emma Lazarus’s poem is the Zeroth Amendment to the Bill of Rights:

Screenshot 2017-01-25 19.09.40

Similarly, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright today thundered:

There is no fine print on the Statue of Liberty.

The President should consider dedicating a new plaque at the Statue of Liberty that is truer to its original purpose. One possibility would be excerpts from the once-immensely famous Independence Day oration by John Quincy Adams. Here are lengthier excerpts that could be drawn upon:

From The American Conservative:

On July 4, 1821, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams delivered an historic address on U.S. foreign policy. After reading the full text of the Declaration of Independence, he continued:

… From the day of this declaration, the people of North America were no longer the fragment of a distant empire, imploring justice and mercy from an inexorable master in another hemisphere. … They were a nation, asserting as of right, and maintaining by war, its own existence. A nation was born in a day. …

The Declaration of Independence pronounced the irrevocable decree of political separation, between the United States and their people on the one part, and the British king, government, and nation on the other. … But there was no anarchy.

From the day of the Declaration, the people of the North American union, and of its constituent states, were associated bodies of civilized men and Christians, in a state of nature, but not of anarchy. They were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of the gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledged as the rules of their conduct. They were bound by the principles which they themselves had proclaimed in the declaration. They were bound by all those tender and endearing sympathies, the absence of which, in the British government and nation, towards them, was the primary cause of the distressing conflict in which they had been precipitated by the headlong rashness and unfeeling insolence of their oppressors. They were bound by all the beneficent laws and institutions, which their forefathers had brought with them from their mother country, not as servitudes but as rights. They were bound by habits of hardy industry, by frugal and hospitable manners, by the general sentiments of social equality, by pure and virtuous morals; and lastly they were bound by the grappling-hooks of common suffering under the scourge of oppression. Where then, among such a people, were the materials for anarchy! Had there been among them no other law, they would have been a law unto themselves.

They had before them in their new position, besides the maintenance of the independence which they had declared, three great objects to attain; the first, to cement and prepare for perpetuity their common union and that of their posterity; the second, to erect and organize civil and municipal governments in their respective states: and the third, to form connections of friendship and of commerce with foreign nations. …

And now … inquire, what has America done for the benefit of mankind?

… She has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations, while asserting and maintaining her own. …

Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will recommend the general cause, by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.

She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself, beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. The frontlet upon her brows would no longer beam with the ineffable splendor of freedom and independence; but in its stead would soon be substituted an imperial diadem, flashing in false and tarnished lustre the murky radiance of dominion and power. She might become the dictatress of the world: she would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit. …

Her glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of mind. She has a spear and a shield; but the motto upon her shield is Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.

John Quincy Adams (1767-1848) was the sixth president of the United States (1825-1829).

It’s almost as if the Statue of Liberty weren’t really all about Invade the World, Invite the World.

(In reality, the Statue of Liberty is about Freemasonry.)

Or Trump could put up a screen playing this:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

 
🔊 Listen RSS

As we all know, the Zeroth Amendment to the Constitution, as carved on the Statue of Liberty, is that Americans don’t have the right to borders because that would discriminate against the civil right of every foreigner on Earth to immigrate here. For instance, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright ringingly reminded us of the Zeroth Amendment today:

Screenshot 2017-01-25 16.31.51

But that leads to the less-cited Omega Amendment:

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Lord Jeff Sessions comments:

Women’s March Endorses Zeroth Amendment:

“Rooted in the promise of America’s call for huddled masses yearning to breathe free, we believe in immigrant and refugee rights regardless of status or country of origin. It is our moral duty to keep families together and empower all aspiring Americans to fully participate in, and contribute to, our economy and society. We reject mass deportation, family detention, violations of due process and violence against queer and trans migrants. Immigration reform must establish a roadmap to citizenship, and provide equal opportunities and workplace protections for all. We recognize that the call to action to love our neighbor is not limited to the United States, because there is a global migration crisis. We believe migration is a human right and that no human being is illegal.”

When will leftists realize that everything they’ve been fighting for is jeopardized by mass third world immigration: good wages for low income workers, economic and social equality, environmental protections, rising living standards for African Americans etc. People like Cesar Chavez, Barbara Jordan, and Samuel Gompers all understood this. Will today’s leftists wake up before it’s too late, or have we already passed the point of no return?

Never?

The problem with immigration is it turns into a political doomsday machine, a juggernaut of ever-expanding special interest groups that make it ever harder to say rationally, okay, we’ve reached severely diminishing returns with mass immigration, so time for a timeout.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Screenshot 2016-09-21 22.48.41

As we all know, the Zeroth Amendment to the Bill of Rights, as carved on the Statue of Liberty, is that Americans don’t have the right to borders because that would discriminate against the civil rights of foreigners to immigrate here. The Zeroth Amendment precedes the First Amendment, by the way, so you don’t have the right to protest about it either.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Rhetorical momentum is a massive force for stupidity in our world. Diminishing returns set in rapidly on any policy, but the natural psychology is instead to Double Dumb Down on here-to-fore successful demagogic gambits.

For example, from the Los Angeles Times:

What’s the Alt-Right?

Thomas J. Main

Thomas J. Main is Professor at the School of Public and International Affairs, Baruch College, CUNY. He is writing a book on the Alt-Right and American politics.

Hillary Clinton attacked Donald Trump on Thursday for his cozy relationship with a new political movement, the Alternative Right, or Alt-Right. The Alt-Right rejects American democracy as did the American communists of the 1930s and the New Left of the 1960s. The main challenge to our way of life today now comes not from the radical left, but the Alt-Right. …

But it is the underlying ideology of the Alt-Right, rather than its controversial policy positions, that is truly sinister.

Those evil bastards don’t believe in the Zeroth Amendment to the Bill of Rights, as Founding Father Emma Lazarus carved on the Statue of Liberty in 1787.

Alt-Right thought is based on white nationalism and anti-Americanism.

It’s almost as if the American Revolution had been about Americans demanding “the rights of Englishmen.”

The Alt-Right holds, in essence, that all men are not created equal, and that as racial equality has displaced white dominance, America has declined and no longer merits the allegiance of its white citizens.

Alt-Right leaders, unlike Neo-Nazis or KKK supporters, are intellectually and rhetorically sophisticated. Jared Taylor, editor of the American Renaissance website, holds degrees from Yale and the Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Paris. …

In the letter, Taylor denies the notion that “the things you love about America…are rooted in certain principles.” Rather, “they are rooted in certain people.” That is, white people: “Germans, Swedes, Irishmen, and Hungarians could come and contribute to the America you love,” Taylor says. “Do you really believe that a future Afro-Hispanic-Caribbean-Asiatic America will be anything like the America your ancestors built?”

That’s pretty much the argument of Federalist Paper #2, but then you can’t get more anti-American than Federalist Paper #2.

White nationalism is more important than inalienable rights because “Even when they violate your principles, white people build good societies. Even when they abide by your principles, non-whites usually don’t.”

It’s almost as if Norway is a better place to live than Zimbabwe.

But to notice that would be wrong.

… The Alt-Right represents the first new philosophical competitor to liberalism, broadly defined, since the fall of Communism.

Is anyone listening to the Alt-Right? Yes: Key Alt-Right websites the American Renaissance and VDARE — named after Virginia Dare, “the first white child of English parentage born in America” — both received more web visits last November than Dissent and Ms. The National Policy Institute and its Radix Journal together had many more visits than the neoconservative policy journal National Affairs.

So the Alt-Right has an audience — and in Trump, it has a candidate. Trump’s rants about Mexican rapists charging across the southern border, his attacks on an American-born judge of Mexican descent, and his calls to ban Muslims from entering the country, are all in line with Alt-Right ideology. Accordingly, Alt-Right organizations made robocalls for Trump in the Iowa, New Hampshire and Utah primaries.

VDARE declared in July: “We are all Donald Trump Now.” And the website’s editor, Peter Brimelow, wrote on Wednesday: “Trump is the best presidential candidate on immigration that we’ve ever had. That’s not saying a lot, goodness knows — but it’s a YUGE advance.”

… All schools of American political thought — and especially mainstream conservatives — must reject this dangerous ideology.

One of the patterns you notice more and more these days is the descendants of Ellis Island huddled masses reasoning, “Boy those stupid WASPs shouldn’t have let us in way back then because, even though they are too stupid to have figured it out yet, we’ve taken over. But eventually they might figure it out … so we’d better punish them now so they can’t ever do anything about it in case they ultimately wake up. Hmmhhhmm … I know let’s rub their noses in diversity by letting in a hundred million or so Muslims! Yeah, then those idiot WASPs will finally notice they are being insulted and humiliated like they deserve. If that’s not enough to finally get their attention, we could let in two hundred million Muslims. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?”

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Here’s a video by Ami Horowitz showing Yale students signing a petition to repeal the First Amendment.

Obviously, put that baldly, most people wouldn’t go for it, at this point.

Still, it’s clear that large swathes of elites see Diversity / Immigration — the Zeroth Amendment — as trumping the First and Second Amendments. Americans can’t have the right to bear arms because Muslim immigrants are too hot-headed to be trusted; and Americans can’t have the right to freedom of speech because some American might mention out loud that Muslim immigrants might be too hot-headed to be trusted with guns, and then the Muslims will get even madder and really kill us.

If you ask them where the Zeroth Amendment is written down, you’ll hear frequent allusions to the “huddled masses” poem that’s on a plaque at the base of the Statue of Liberty. Seriously. It’s weird how many people think that plaque is in the Constitution.

So, as a symbolic gesture, let’s put the Bill of Rights on a plaque at the Statue of Liberty. After all, it’s the Statue of Liberty, not the Statue of Diversity *. And putting the First Ten Amendments at the Statue of Liberty would symbolically reassert that immigrants and the diverse must concede to put up with Americans’ traditional liberties, no matter how hot-headed they get when Americans express themselves freely.

The Bill of Rights is about twice as long as “The New Colossus,” so the new plaque would have to be about twice as big.

I can’t wait to hear Obama explain how the Bill of Rights is “un-American” and “not who we are.”

——————–

* There actually is one “Statue of Diversity” in the world. It’s in the middle of a traffic roundabout in a banlieue named Planoise in eastern France:

The official “Statue of Diversity”

 
🔊 Listen RSS

As we all know, there’s nothing more unthinkable than restricting the right of foreign Muslims to immigrate here because they or their descendants might go on the Internet someday and learn that Allah wants them to commit Jihad at the office Christmas party. You’d have to be a Republican frontrunner to doubt the absolute sanctity of the Zeroth Amendment: that everybody in the rest of the world has the presumption of a right to move here. Granted, exceptions could be made for migrants visibly wearing suicide bomb vests, but to, say, disproportionately pat down Muslim migrants based on the stereotype of Muslim terrorists would be a hideous violation of the Zeroth Amendment.

A U. of Chicago law professor says in Slate that the thing we can do is junk some of the First Amendment:

ISIS Gives Us No Choice but to Consider Limits on Speech

America faces unprecedented danger from the group’s online radicalization tactics.

By Eric Posner

It has become increasingly clear that terrorist groups such as ISIS can extend their reach to American territory via the Internet. Using their own websites, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other platforms, they lure young men and women to their mission—without having to risk the capture of foreign agents on U.S. soil. The Americans ensnared in ISIS’s net in turn radicalize others, send money to ISIS, and even carry out attacks.

Never before in our history have enemies outside the United States been able to propagate genuinely dangerous ideas on American territory in such an effective way—and by this I mean ideas that lead directly to terrorist attacks that kill people. The novelty of this threat calls for new thinking about limits on freedom of speech.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Christopher Caldwell semi-famously observed in 2009:

“One moves swiftly and imperceptibly from a world in which affirmative action can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too weak to a world in which it can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too strong.”

Of course, that’s even truer for immigration, which has a massive political Ratchet Effect.

It’s been evident for some time that the the dominant ideological logic is trending toward making it inevitable that all 7 billion noncitizens on Earth be assumed to have civil rights to move to America.

Call it the Zeroth Amendment.

And the Zeroth Amendment is death to the First Amendment. Notice how much of the reaction to Donald Trump’s proposal that we call an immigration time-out for Muslims until we can figure out how better not to let in jihadis is to respond: We can’t even talk about that because that makes the Muslims who are already here even madder, and then they’ll really kill us! In fact, what we Americans need to do is to stop exercising our First Amendment rights when it comes to immigration. No American citizen should be allowed to object to any noncitizen immigrating here. After all, so many of their cousins are already here.

The new Leahy Amendment is another small step in that direction:

It is the sense of the Senate that the United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion, as such action would be contrary to the fundamental principles on which this Nation was founded.

Even when hundreds of millions of pious followers of a faith believe that waging jihad against Christians, Jews, and unbelievers is a sacred duty.

From Powerline:

Earlier today the Judiciary Committee passed the amendment on a 16-4 vote, with Senators Sessions, Cruz, Vitter and Tillis voting no. News accounts portray the vote as a symbolic repudiation of Donald Trump’s talk about excluding Muslim immigrants, and characterize the amendment as having little or no legal significance.

POSTED ON DECEMBER 10, 2015 BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN IMMIGRATION
ARE DEMOCRATS TRYING TO ESTABLISH A RIGHT TO IMMIGRATE TO US?
Foreigners have no right to emigrate to the United States. How many immigrants we want to take in, and who those immigrants should be, are issues decided by us in our sole discretion, through our political process. This has always been the law, and has always been the fact.

But there are ominous signs that the Democrats may be trying, surreptitiously, to effect a radical change in these basic principles of American sovereignty. Senator Pat Leahy proposed, in the Senate Judiciary Committee, an amendment to Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which provided as follows:

It is the sense of the Senate that the United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion, as such action would be contrary to the fundamental principles on which this Nation was founded.

Earlier today the Judiciary Committee passed the amendment on a 16-4 vote, with Senators Sessions, Cruz, Vitter and Tillis voting no. News accounts portray the vote as a symbolic repudiation of Donald Trump’s talk about excluding Muslim immigrants, and characterize the amendment as having little or no legal significance.

In fact, the amendment creates an extraordinarily dangerous precedent. If given legal effect, it would, for the first time, purport to create legally justiciable rights in foreign persons who want to enter the United States but are barred from doing so by our laws, or by a presidential proclamation under Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Jeff Sessions delivered a blistering denunciation of Leahy’s feel-good camel’s nose:

The adoption of the Leahy Amendment would constitute a transformation of our immigration system. In effect, it is a move toward the ratification of the idea that global migration is a “human right,” and a civil right, and that these so-called “immigrants’ rights” must be supreme to the rights of sovereign nations to determine who can and cannot enter their borders….

Fundamentally, foreign nationals living in foreign countries have no constitutional right to enter the United States. If they did, any alien denied entry could file suit to demand entry and claim damages for lost employment, lost welfare benefits, lost income…. The rules governing the selection of immigrants are, by definition, opposite the rules governing the treatment of citizens living or naturalized in the United States…. Our goal is to choose for admission those likeliest to succeed and flourish and, crucially, to support our Constitutional system of government and our values of pluralism and Republican governance.

In short, the whole point of an intelligent immigration system is to discriminate between beneficial and detrimental would-be immigrants. But intelligence is discrimination, so intelligence is racist.

In contrast, suicidal stupidity isn’t racist. So it’s better.

 
No Items Found
Steve Sailer
About Steve Sailer

Steve Sailer is a journalist, movie critic for Taki's Magazine, VDARE.com columnist, and founder of the Human Biodiversity discussion group for top scientists and public intellectuals.


PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?