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

Topics/Categories Filter?
2000 Election 2016 Election Academia Affirmative Action Africa Alt Right American Media Black Crime Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Creationism Diversity Donald Trump Economics England European Right Feminism Foreign Policy France Government Spending History Homosexuality Human Biodiversity Humor Ideology Illegal Immigration Immigration IQ Iraq War Ireland Islam Mathematics Middle East Miscellaneous North Korea Political Correctness Race/Crime Race/Ethnicity Racism Religion Republicans Review Russia Science Terrorism The Straggler 2004 Election 2008 Election American Left American Military American Renaissance Amnesty Ann Coulter Anti-Semitism Antiracism Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians Australia Barack Obama Bill Clinton Black Lives Matter Brexit Cambodia Charlottesville Chelsea Clinton Chinese Christianity Civil War Communism Consciousness Conservatism Corruption Crime DACA Discrimination Education Elian Gonzalez EU Eugenics Europe Eurozone Evolution George W. Bush George Zimmerman Germany Global Warming Hbd Hillary Clinton Hollywood Human Evolution Human Genome Iran Iraq Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Italy Japan Jared Taylor Jews Judicial System Libya Margaret Thatcher Mencken Meritocracy Michael Bloomberg Multiculturalism Muslims Nationalism Neocons New York City Nicholas Wade Northern Ireland Pat Buchanan Philosophy Public Schools Quantum Mechanics Race Race/IQ Ron Paul Rudyard Kipling Slavery Space Program Supreme Court Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan The Economist Tibet Turkey White Nationalists World War I
Nothing found
 TeasersJohn Derbyshire Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Merit-Based Immigration Another Cheap Labor Racket, DACA Fuss Just ANNOYING
🔊 Listen RSS

As I go to pixel, the congresscritters are still fighting over whether to close down the federal government in the name of 800,000 illegal aliens. I’ll leave you to find out the result in tomorrow morning’s news.

As I noted last week, the standard of debate over immigration is higher than it used to be—better for sure than it was in the previous recent attempts at immigration legislation in 2006, 2007, and 2013. I’d like to think that we here at have had something to do with that.

But the so-called Gang of Six bill, the attempted Senate solution, was still advertised brightly as “bipartisan.” Uh-oh.

The “six” in “Gang of Six” are six senators, three Republicans and three Democrats. To be precise they are Republican Senators Lindsey Graham (SC), Jeff Flake (AZ), Cory Gardner (CO), and Democratic Senators Dick Durbin (IL), Michael Bennet (CO) and Robert Menendez (NJ). [New Gang of Six ‘Bipartisan Deal’ on DACA Amnesty Is Not Serious, By Jessica Vaughan, CNS, January 15, 2018] As is my habit I shall just read off to you the NumbersUSA grades for those senators on immigration votes in the Senate, 2015-2018: F-minus, C-minus, D-minus, F, F-minus, F. The median grade there is F.

What did it propose to do, this Gang of Six bill? Executive summary: It offered the same bait-and-switch as the old Gang of Eight Rubio-Schumer effort five years ago. Permanent residency leading to citizenship for Dreamers, temporary—and we know what “temporary” means in an immigration context, don’t we?—temporary status for their parents, promises of improvements to border security …

Jessica Vaughan at the Center for Immigration Studies summarized the aim of the bill in the CNS story cited above: “maximum amnesty, minimum border security and no cuts to legal immigration,”

The Gang of Six bill claimed to end the Diversity Visa lottery, but when you read the fine print it didn’t reduce numbers, nor even the diversity idea. Instead of a lottery, half the visas were to go to those same countries, the ones thought to bring in maximum diversity, but now on a merit basis, while the other half were to go to the Temporary Protected Status aliens.

Merit-based immigration is in fact the new fad. The proposed House solution incorporated it, too. This was not the Gang of Six Senate bill; this was a different thing, properly the Securing America’s Future Act of 2018. It also had six proposers: Bob Goodlatte (VA), Mike McCaul (TX), Raul Labrador (ID), Martha McSally (AZ), Jim Sensenbrenner (WI), and John Carter (TX). Here are their NumbersUSA grades on recent immigration votes: A, B-plus, A-plus, D, B, B, for a median grade B to B-plus.

As you’d expect, this House bill was more realistic. It really ended the Diversity Visa lottery but distributes those 55,000 lottery visas to the skilled employment-based visa category.

Well, 55,000 people with skills is better than 55,000 people with blind luck…I guess.

Merit-based immigration, at any rate below the Nobel Prize level, is still just a cheap labor racket, though.

We have all the skilled people we need. The U.S. population passed the 200-million mark late in November 1968, a few months before we landed men on the Moon. If we could land men on the Moon with just 200 million people here, what can’t we do with 320 million?

Here’s black patriot Booker T. Washington speaking in Atlanta, September 18th, 1895:

To those of the white race who look to the incoming of those of foreign birth and strange tongue and habits for the prosperity of the South, were I permitted I would repeat what I say to my own race, “Cast down your bucket where you are.”

1895 Atlanta Compromise Speech

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, H1-B Visas, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

Friday finds me in an unusually buoyant mood about the immigration outlook—long term. But first, was the President’s much-denounced remark fair? Let’s investigate.

In Haiti‘s case the President’s remark was very apt. From the National Public Radio website, dated July 29th 2017: You Probably Don’t Want To Know About Haiti’s Sewage Problems (by Rebecca Hersher) describing the state of sanitation in Haiti in fascinating detail:

Port-au-Prince, Haiti, is one of the largest cities in the world without a central sewage system. There are no sewers connecting sinks, showers and toilets to hulking wastewater treatment plants. Most of the more than 3 million people in the metro area use outhouses, and much of that waste ends up in canals, ditches and other unsanitary dumping grounds where it can contaminate drinking water and spread disease.

When it rains, the canals overflow and flood poor neighborhoods.

Since the earthquake in 2010, international groups have spent millions of dollars on a plan to build eight open-air sewage treatment plants across Haiti. Seven years on, only one of the eight is operational.

That one is

below capacity and struggling to cover its operating costs. International money covered its construction, but domestic funding and customer fees are insufficient to cover long-term maintenance and payroll.

One other of the eight did open in 2012, funded by the government of Spain, but it was shut down eighteen months later, and remains closed. Plans for the others have been abandoned.

 Gabriel Toto, 35, has been working as a bayakou, or latrine cleaner, for a decade. On nights without a journalist watching, he generally works naked.A rainstorm on Good Friday last year filled the streets and alleys of one Port-au-Prince neighborhood with 3 feet of raw sewage. Seven people drowned in it. A guy interviewed for the NPR report got an infection that still hasn’t gone away

You get the picture. I’ve spared you the more graphic details; but if you sometimes think you have the worst job in the world, by all means go read that NPR report, which describes the work of the latrine-cleaning guys.

“Outhouse country”—my preferred euphemism for the President’s alleged remark— isn’t a bad description for a nation of eleven million people with one poorly-maintained sewage treatment plant struggling to stay in operation.

It’s the same in black Africa. Ghana, for instance, is one of the more stable and peaceful nations in West Africa, a self-governing independent nation for more than sixty years. Here’s a quote from a UNICEF report dated July 2016:

Ghana has a very low coverage for wastewater and faecal sludge treatment … The national average for sewerage coverage is as low as 4.5 percent. Tema is the only municipality with a comprehensive sewerage system. Accra [that’s the capital] has a sewerage system covering the State House and ministries area and parts of the Central Business District … The treatment facilities for both the Accra and Tema systems have broken down and [are] not in use.

UNICEF Assessment Of Waste Water Treatment Plants In Ghana By Civil Engineering Department, July, 2016, PDF

Open Sewage in GhanaThat’s Ghana, which as I said is a poster boy for development and progress in sub-Saharan Africa. (Pictured right–open sewage in a Ghanan village.) I just did some cursory checking on the situation in Nigeria, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. Check them yourself, if you have the stomach for it.

Outhouse countries? I’d say President Trump nailed it.

OK, so what about this White House meeting with congressfolk to talk immigration laws?

The initial meeting, on Tuesday, was televised—an unusual thing for a gathering of this kind. The general assumption was that the President wanted to show himself chairing a big event like this knowledgably and authoritatively, putting the lie to Michael Wolff’s book with its stories about how ignorant and indecisive he is.

Whether that was the reason for televising the thing, and whether, if it was, the ploy succeeded, is a matter of opinion. I watched Tucker Carlson and then Sean Hannity back-to-back Tuesday evening. Carlson was not happy. His brow furrows were so deep you could hide quarters in them. The President, he implied, had been totally rolled by the congressweasels. He’d given the cheap-labor and open-borders lobbies everything they want, in return for nothing at all.

Hannity on the other hand was upbeat. The President, he told us, was totally in control of the situation. He’d just been pretending to defer to reptiles like Diane Feinstein. Actually, he was playing four-dimensional chess.

My own take on the meeting was closer to Carlson than Hannity. The President seemed clumsy and ill-informed. The bit where he was about to hand the keys of the store to Feinstein until Kevin McCarthy stepped in and warned him not to, was seriously embarrassing.

The President, or his advisors, tried to repair the damage afterwards, putting out stern-sounding statements. But if the President’s performance on-camera was a sample of his negotiating skills, his next book should be titled The Art of the Kneel.

Who were they, these legislators in the room with Trump, the new DHS Secretary, and three White House staffers?

Well, there were 25 of them: 16 Senators, 9 Representatives. That’s nicely Pythagorean, for a hypoteneuse of five … sorry, sorry.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Haiti, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

Several readers have emailed in to congratulate me on having been mentioned in the New York Times. (Again: It happens about once per decade.)

The white supremacists on the far right have “yellow fever” — an Asian woman fetish. It’s a confusing mix.

Andrew Anglin, the founder of the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, once posted a video of himself with a Filipina he called “my jailbait girlfriend,” the young couple flirting as they sauntered through a megamall in the Philippines. Richard Spencer, a white nationalist, has dated a series of Asian-American women, according to one of his ex-girlfriends. (Mr. Spencer insists that it was before he embraced white nationalism.)

The right-wing agitator Mike Cernovich, the writer John Derbyshire and an alt-right figure named Kyle Chapman (so notorious for swinging a lead-filled stick at Trump opponents at a protest in Berkeley, Calif., that he is now a meme) are all married to women of Asian descent. As a commenter wrote on an alt-right forum, “exclusively” dating Asian women is practically a “white-nationalist rite of passage.” [The Alt-Right’s Asian Fetish by Audrea Lim; New York Times, January 6, 2018.]

Uh-huh. I beat this topic to death six years ago here on Jared Taylor then posted a thoughtful counter-piece. I haven’t changed my opinions in any way, so I can’t think of anything else to say on the topic itself. Probably Jared feels the same.

I would, though — casting modesty to the winds — invite readers who have the time and patience to do so, to compare Ms. Lim’s piece to mine and Jared’s. We — Jared and myself — are judicious, literate, numerate, and well-referenced. Ms. Lim [Email her] just whines. She is illiterate and innumerate.

Illiterate: A preference is not a fetish. Words have dictionary meanings and should be used with those meanings when not framed in familiar rhetorical figures.

Innumerate: The incidence of Alt-Right white males bonding with East Asian females is either lower than the corresponding incidence among white males in general, or equal to it, or higher than it. Since the Alt-Right includes many race purists, the null hypothesis should be that the first incidence is lower than the second; otherwise there’s something odd going on, perhaps even a fetish.

The truth of the matter could be established by careful empirical inquiry. Absent the results of such an inquiry, Ms. Lim’s main charge has no epistemic weight. After reading her piece you are no wiser about anything, other than the writer’s own mood.

She writes that:

None of us can escape the truth that the fun-house was built to justify systematic exploitation of everyone in this country who isn’t white.

Exploitation, right; like being given space to vent one’s feelings, wo wo wo feelings, in the op-ed pages of the nation’s premier broadsheet newspaper.

If Ms. Lim feels she is exploited in the U.S.A. for her non-whiteness, the solution is simple: She should bugger off back to China. No exploitation there!

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Alt Right, American Media, Asians 
🔊 Listen RSS

Big political news this week was the new book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House by Michael Wolff, who comes with the epithet “veteran journalist.” Wikileaks has pirated the PDF.

Wolff quotes many, many people across the past few months telling him how dysfunctional Trump’s White House is, and how stupid and obnoxious the President himself is. It covers the 2016 election, too, with similarly negative quotes from insiders about what a Chinese fire drill the Trump campaign was.

A lot of the most colorful quotes come from strategist Steve Bannon, who joined Trump’s campaign in August of the election year, and was dropped from the White House staff in August this year.

What should we make of all this? Bear in mind that I’m the guy who once wrote a column titled “Journalists are scum.”

I don’t doubt that Trump can be obnoxious. He’s a native New Yorker—Whaddaya want, jackass?

He’s also rich and successful. All rich and successful people are sometimes tempted to the point of view that the rest of us are losers who don’t know squat. How often they yield to that temptation is a matter of individual personality.

My own experience of rich and successful people is sadly limited; such as it is, though, it leads me to believe that a rich and successful person who never looks down on his un-rich, un-successful fellow humans as clueless losers, is a rare critter indeed, who probably belongs on the calendar of saints.

And obnoxiosity at the Trump level is a generous obnoxiosity, tolerant of obnoxiosity in peers. Trump’s world is one of dueling obnoxiosities: not necessarily personal, just business.

Quote from the New York Post:

Following reports that [Ivanka Trump’s husband Jared] Kushner had tried to set up a private communication channel with the Kremlin, Bannon called Ivanka a “f–king liar,” in front of the President.

Trump responded only by telling her “I told you this is a tough town, baby” according to Wolff’s book.

Et Tu, Bannon, By Ruth Brown, January 7, 2018

That sounds true to me—very Trumpish, even though it goes against the grain of other things we’ve heard, and that Michael Wolff says, about the President’s partiality to his children.

That his children are, in their general sensibilities, metropolitan liberals seems to be one of the main points of contention between Trump and Bannon. In the matter of not suffering fools gladly, Bannon is easily Trump’s match; but un-like Trump he regards all metropolitan liberals, without qualification or favor, as fools.

Inevitably one finds oneself taking sides here: Trumpite or Bannonite. I’m going to declare myself, with a major qualification, a Bannonite. I like Bannon’s strong nationalism and his skepticism of traditional postwar American conservatism, with its missionary globalism and its fantasies about private-enterprise healthcare provision.

That’s not to endorse the guy, who has played his hand badly. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that “Steve Bannon” rhymes and scans with “loose cannon.”

I’d add the same qualification to my support for Trump, though. The President does sometimes come across as coarse and ignorant.

What I’m saying is that Bannon is a better Trumpist than Trump. I like Trumpism more than I like either guy. I dream fondly of a well-mannered, well-read politician of the traditional gray and boring type—a Coolidge or an Eisenhower—who is a dogmatic and unwavering Trumpist.

I love the song, but I’m not crazy about either Trump or Bannon as singers. I want my politicians and their advisers to have the right ideas, but I also want them to be firm, cunning, and effective in making those ideas national policy and law. I want a gray, boring, politically skillful Trumpist.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump 
🔊 Listen RSS

Boy, they’re dragging out this DACA thing, aren’t they? Where are we up to this week?

As I’ve been reporting, there are two issues in play here: Funding the government, and resolving the DACA business—those 800,000 illegal aliens who were given temporary work permits, probably illegally, by Barack Obama … and who are not, by the way, to be confused with “Dreamers.” “Dreamers” are illegals who would have been beneficiaries of the DREAM Act, except that Congress has never been able to pass it. There would have been two million of them.

The two issues, DACA and funding the government, have two different deadlines for congressional action. For funding the government, Congress has to pass a law before midnight January 19th, two weeks from this last Friday. For DACA the deadline is March 5th, eight and a half weeks from Friday, when President Trump’s extension of Obama’s (probably unconstitutional) order expires.

That second one isn’t really a deadline inasmuch as if Congress does nothing, Obama’s order just expires, and beneficiaries of it become regular illegal aliens, subject to deportation and with no legal right to work.

That would actually be my preferred solution. The Open Borders lobbies are mighty in the land, though, including in Congress and the Main Stream Media, and they will go to the mat to prevent it from happening.

The President, too, seems to have convinced himself, or been convinced, that the DACA illegals have to be amnestied. So it’s not probable that March 5th will come and go with there having been nothing done on DACA.

It does seem that the immigration issue has at least been decoupled from the funding issue. Congress will pass another Continuing Resolution on or before January 19th without any reference to DACA. Congressional Democrats now have it clear in their minds that shutting down the federal government to help illegal aliens would not play well in the country.

Thwarting President Trump’s immigration reforms—a border wall, an end to chain migration and the “diversity visa lottery“—on behalf of illegals is another matter. Democrats and Open-Borders Republicans are now working hard on that.

Thursday this last week, the President met with some Republican senators for opening discussions on immigration legislation. I don’t have a full list of the senators he met with, but it included Senators John Cornyn of Texas (NumbersUSA Grade in this Congress: C-minus), Lindsey Graham of South Carolina (F-minus), James Lankford of Oklahoma (D), and Charles Grassley of Iowa (C-plus).

That’s a median grade of D-minus.

Next week the President is meeting with a bipartisan group of Senators to have further discussions on a DACA-plus-immigration-reforms bill. Since every single Democratic Senator is an F-minus, the median represented at next week’s talks should be down in the F’s. Let’s be optimistic and say F-plus.

These are the people deciding the future demographics of the U.S.A., the nation our children and grandchildren will live in. This is the key issue, the major issue for our country at this time—the issue that won Trump the Presidency. Polls show major public support for the President’s stated positions.

The decision-makers, though, are the Cs and Ds and F-minuses in the U.S. Senate, bought and paid for by the Cheap Labor lobbies and Ethnic-Grievance groups.

I’m going to repeat my prediction of two weeks ago. We shall end up, sometime before March 5th, with a bill giving amnesty to the DACA illegals in return for an end to the “diversity visa” lottery and a new paint scheme for the border posts.

In contrast, while we dicker around with legislation that panders to foreign scofflaws and tiny cosmetic changes to border procedures, serious countries enforce their laws.

Exhibit A: Israel. The President of that country, Benjamin Netanyahu, refers to illegal aliens as “infiltrators.” Which beats “undocumented immigrant”! Israel’s illegals mostly come from East Africa, Eritrea and Somalia. Five years ago, the numbers had reached 60,000, bringing with them the usual elevated levels of crime.

That’s when Israel put up a big beautiful wall across the Sinai Desert, cutting infiltration from Africa to zero. The Israelis followed up with campaigns of expulsion. When sending countries refused to take back infiltrators, Israel just bribed other African countries to take them.

Twenty thousand have now gone, forty thousand still to go. The twenty thousand seem to have been low-hanging fruit, the ones easiest to deport. Now it’s getting harder; so the Israelis are getting more determined.

The deal until recently was that illegals were offered $3,500 to go back to their own countries; or, if the home country was too dangerous, they’d be given a plane ticket to one of those bribed countries, said to include Uganda and Rwanda.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: DACA, Immigration, Israel 
🔊 Listen RSS

New Year blues

I’ve reached the point in life when lamenting the end of another year comes more naturally than celebrating the beginning of a new one.

How time flies! Another year gone already? After age seventy the passing scene more and more resembles the image one of Noël Coward’s characters supplied: it’s

like one of those montages you see in films where people jump from place to place very quickly and there are shots of pages flying off a calendar.

For example: The last time movie actress Diana Rigg impinged on my consciousness, she was young and beautiful. Heck, I can recall having erotic fantasies about her.

Now, it’s true that I pay very little attention to show business. It was mildly shocking none the less to see Ms Rigg’s picture at MailOnline Christmas Day, a wrinkled old lady. Damn this demon Time!

Reflections of this kind are so commonplace, it’s impossible to say anything original about them. Poets have been lamenting the aerodynamics of time for two thousand years at least.

I can’t compete with all that talent, so I’ll leave this here as merely the registration of a New Year’s mood.

Lightless in the quarry

Continuing in the same gloomy key: For an overview of the whole show I have always thought King Vlad, in Speak, Memory, summed it up as well as it can be summed up:

The cradle rocks above an abyss, and common sense tells us that our existence is but a brief crack of light between two eternities of darkness. Although the two are identical twins, man, as a rule, views the prenatal abyss with more calm than the one he is heading for (at some forty-five hundred heartbeats an hour).

In Eastern traditions, where reincarnation is taken for granted, that “prenatal abyss” is populated with earlier lives, human or otherwise according to regional taste. Which I guess means it’s not an abyss at all in those traditions.

We in the West have mostly let our imaginations loose on that second eternity, ignoring the first. The only reference to “the prenatal abyss” that I know of in English poetry is this one by A.E. Housman.

Be still, my soul, be still; the arms you bear are brittle,

Earth and high heaven are fixt of old and founded strong.

Think rather, — call to thought, if now you grieve a little,

The days when we had rest, O soul, for they were long.

Men loved unkindness then, but lightless in the quarry

I slept and saw not; tears fell down, I did not mourn;

Sweat ran and blood sprang out and I was never sorry:

Then it was well with me, in days ere I was born.

Now, and I muse for why and never find the reason,

I pace the earth, and drink the air, and feel the sun.

Be still, be still, my soul; it is but for a season:

Let us endure an hour and see injustice done.

Ay, look: high heaven and earth ail from the prime foundation;

All thoughts to rive the heart are here, and all are vain:

Horror and scorn and hate and fear and indignation —

Oh why did I awake? when shall I sleep again?

For my favorite Housman story, see an earlier diary.

Gentlemen, the Queen!

Some of this regrettable mood is a secondary consequence — induced nostalgia — of having watched the first few episodes of The Crown, Netflix’s biopic of England’s current Queen.

The show is very fascinating to me because the years covered so far, 1947-55, were those of my own childhood (ages 2-10). For a child, public events are distant and disconnected, the more so back in those days because we had no TV or internet, only newspapers and radio. Seeing those events played out as a connected narrative by professional actors adds a whole new dimension to those faint, random childhood memories.

I have fragmentary recollections of, for example, the matter of Princess Margaret’s affair with Peter Townsend. [GREAT BRITAIN: The Princess & the Hero, Time,July 20, 1953 ]I remember seeing pictures of the couple (right) in my father’s Daily Mirror, and hearing my mother in conversation about it with neighbor wives (they were all fiercely pro-Margaret). The Crown makes a real human-interest story of it.

The producers have striven for a high level of authenticity in their sets, too. The clothes, the cars, the planes!, the haze of cigarette smoke in every room … it’s very well done.

I’ve spotted a few anomalies. The Queen would not, in 1953, have referred to “… my age and gender.” She would have said “sex,” unselfconsciously.

The dentition, too, is very 21st century. Most English people in the 1950s had terrible teeth. The Queen Mother, for example: I came within a few feet of her when she opened a new building at my school in 1956, and I remember thinking at the time that her teeth were not very good.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: History • Tags: Britain, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

It’s great that we now have an administration in Washington, at any rate a Justice Department, willing to round up and deport illegal aliens. But federal officers charged with doing so are opposed by a mighty army of lawyers, products of our CultMarxified law schools this past forty years. They also face a lot of local apathy and cuckery. Case study: here on Long Island, where I live, in the outer-outer suburbs of New York City.

My county, Suffolk County, has a million and a half people — 630 per square mile average, though of course concentrated in towns and villages. Close to twenty percent of that million and a half are Hispanic—a colossal increase across the 25 years we’ve lived here. The biggest single group: Salvadorans. [Which Immigrant Group on Long Island Is the Largest?, By Patrick Young, Esq, January 18, 2011] They started coming during the civil war in El Salvador during the 1980s. Lax enforcement, high fertility rates, and chain migration have done the rest.

Here’s a fact about El Salvador: On the latest numbers I can find, El Salvador ranks fourth in the world for intentional homicide. The rate is over 41 per hundred thousand.

To give you some benchmarks, with that 41 in mind, here are current homicide rates for some U.S. cities, also per 100,000 inhabitants:

  • Boston: 3
  • Washington DC: 8
  • Chicago 12
  • Detroit 20
  • and the winner is … St Louis at 29.

Murder map: Deadliest U.S. cities, CBS, 2017

So El Salvador, not much of which is urban, is more than twice as homicidal as Detroit.

That’s what we’ve been importing into Suffolk County in battalions and regiments this past forty years.

(And I should say that you can get some seriously different figures by going to different sources. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, for example, gives a 2015 figure of nearly 109 for El Salvador, ranking the country world homicide leader. My figure of 41, from the List25 website, is towards the low end of estimates I found.)

Every one of those estimates, though, has El Salvador in the top five nations by homicide rate.

If you were to implement a rational immigration policy, with well-informed analysts sitting around a table deciding which nations we should be really careful about taking immigrants from, there’d be a row of big bold asterisks next to El Salvador.

There are some counter-arguments you can make here. First off, while looking up those city homicide stats, I checked the figure for Suffolk County. It’s 0.9. That’s high—higher than the rate for Germany or Italy, and three times the rate for Hong Kong or Japan.

Still, set against St Louis or Chicago, we’re pretty non-homicidal out here on the island. So what’s to worry about?

And then, still playing devil’s advocate here, those multitudes of Salvadorans coming to my county were escaping from that astronomical homicide rate back home. They were looking for a peaceful life.

To both points I’d refer you to Jonathan Blitzer’s piece in the current issue of The New Yorker. Title: The Teens Trapped Between a Gang and the Law. Subtitle: “On Long Island, unaccompanied minors are caught between the violence of MS-13 and the fear of deportation.”

Sample quote:

In September, 2016, Nisa Mickens and Kayla Cuevas, aged fifteen and sixteen, were found dead in Brentwood, killed with machetes and baseball bats and mutilated beyond recognition. Thirteen members of MS-13 … were charged in their deaths. Between the beginning of 2016 and May, 2017, authorities in Suffolk County attributed seventeen killings to MS-13, and the county’s police department identified at least eighty-nine gang members who were undocumented immigrants.

So while a 0.9 homicide rate is pretty nice, without MS-13 hacking teenage girls to death we’d be even safer, perhaps down to German or Italian levels.

And if all our Salvadoran illegals are gentle peace-loving types striving to escape from the gangs back home, what are these MS-13 killers doing here?

Of course most of the Salvadorans are non-homicidal. So are most Salvadorans back in El Salvador. So are most people anywhere. If you import a great mass of people from one place, though, you’ll get a slice of that place’s culture. Salvadoran culture is homicidal.

It’s the non-homicidal element that propagandists like the New Yorker writer want you to know about, of course. Blitzer [Email him] starts us off with a long sob story about a Salvadoran lass, Juliana, whose father was killed by MS-13.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: El Salvador, Hispanic Crime, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

‘Twas the week before Christmas / And all through the nation / We’re waiting for government / To control immigration.

It’s been a year of a Republican President with a Republican Congress, and nothing’s been done.

Well, not quite nothing. I’m reading good things about interior enforcement; Trump’s travel bans were a step forward towards immigration sanity; the reform proposal President Trump sent to Congress in October was worthy enough in its own limited way.

And this new head of USCIS, the Citizenship and Immigration Services component of Homeland Security, name of Lee Francis Cissna, looks like a really good pick. Cissna was only confirmed October 5th but Radio Derb has already made two favorable references to him. How much more evidence could you want that this guy is a good egg?

(If you do want more, read the December 20th coverage at Breitbart of Director Cissna, the week before, hammering abuses of the B visas for visitors. He actually understands the B-visa scam.)

Those are consolation prizes, though. Where’s the strong action? More to the point, where’s the legislation?

According to the GovTrack website, the President has signed just three immigration bills this year. Two of them were sponsored by Democrats, so you can be sure they make the situation worse in some manner, and you have to wonder why the President signed them.

The remaining measure, sponsored by Senator John Cornyn of Texas (a C-minus on the NumbersUSA immigration score card) glories in the title “Javier Vega, Jr. Memorial Act of 2017.” What does it do?

A bill to designate the checkpoint of the United States Border Patrol located on United States Highway 77 North in Sarita, Texas, as the “Javier Vega, Jr. Border Patrol Checkpoint.”

Hey: If you’re going to name things after people, you could certainly do worse than name one after Javier Vega, a Border Patrol officer who died while off-duty defending his family against illegal alien invaders.

Legislation-wise, though, and with no disrespect to Officer Vega, this is pitifully little to show for a year of total Republican control.

The fact of its being so little in fact tells us something about the current state of the Republican Party—something that stirs in my breast the determination never to vote Republican again—unless they get their snouts out of the trough and start moving on some real legislation to really tackle issues related to the National Question.

The depressing thing for immigration patriots and—wait for it—for demographic conservatives, the depressing thing is that there seems to be no sense of urgency.

Government can be a mighty engine when there’s a crisis to be dealt with. I recall the pride and satisfaction I felt in 1982, watching Margaret Thatcher’s government reacting to Argentina’s invasion of the Falkland Islands on April 2nd that year: Sample quote from Wikipedia:

On its return to Southampton from a world cruise on 7 April, the ocean liner SS Canberra was requisitioned and set sail two days later with 3 Commando Brigade aboard. The ocean liner Queen Elizabeth 2 was also requisitioned and left Southampton on 12 May with 5th Infantry Brigade on board.

I recall pictures of military engineering crews working through the night under floodlights, welding helicopter landing pads to the QE2 deck.

That’s how you do things when they need doing. Having won the Presidency on a promise to secure our southern border, Trump could have got the job done by summer. Israel’s 400-mile security fence around the West Bank was built in a comparable span of time, and the U.S.A. has far more resources than Israel. Heck, we could just have hired the Israelis in on contract to build our wall. Alternatively, we could hire the firm that the President is hiring to build a wall around his golf resort in County Clare, Ireland.

Instead we just get these occasional picayune news stories about “prototypes” for the wall. We’re trying out this, we’re trying out that … but, quote, “any meaningful construction is still at least 10 months away, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials said.”

That was in late October. Ten months on would be August 2018; and this is a government official talking, so you can take that ten months with a grain of salt.

Most likely we’ll be heading into the midterms—two years on from Trump’s election victory—with no wall at all.

Imagine going in to the midterms with a great big beautiful wall, paid for by a tax on remittances from Mexicans living in the States. Imagine the satisfaction of those of us who voted for Trump in 2016, and the enthusiasm that satisfaction would translate into—enthusiasm to vote for midterm candidates Trump supports.

Instead, what did we get? A tax bill. As best I can figure from the news reports, the Derbs will be better off by some sum of money between two and four hundred dollars a year.

I don’t care.

My recurring theme this past few weeks has been the linkage between, on the one hand the constitutional obligation of Congress to approve federal spending, and on the other, the determination on the part of congressional Democrats that the 800,000 illegal aliens who’ve benefited from Barack Obama’s un-constitutional DACA order be given Amnesty.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Immigration, Terrorism 
🔊 Listen RSS

I loathe and fear the Cultural Revolution we’re undergoing. Friends of mine were caught up in its prototype, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution that consumed China fifty years ago. I’ve sat listening to their stories. What I see happening here today is all too similar.

I don’t want to be accused of hyperbole, though. Similar does not of course mean identical. I doubt what’s happening here will turn as homicidal as the Chinese model. To suggest that would be to do a dishonor to the millions who suffered and died in Mao Tse-tung’s terror.

One of Steve Sailer’s commenters called this present manifestation “the nerf gun cultural revolution.” I think that captures the schoolyard quality of the thing, the infantilism, the lack of corpse-piles.

Today’s cultural revolution is not entirely non-homicidal, mind. The pull-back of policing following the Ferguson and Baltimore hysterias has led to more murders.

And along with homicide you have to consider suicide. A frequent result of the persecutions in China was that the person being persecuted would kill himself. The writer Lao She is only the most famous example.

Well, Wednesday this week Kentucky State Representative Dan Johnson shot himself after a woman accused him of molesting her five years ago. I’m guessing we’ll see more suicides before sanity is restored.

That of course relates to the sexual-harassment witch-hunts, currently the Red Guards’ most active front — the Pervnado, to use the word that seems now to have definitely established itself.

A striking and depressing feature of the Pervnado panic: the cowardice of employers. We seem to be at the point where any joker can call up a media company — a TV or radio network, a movie studio, a magazine — tell some tale about a male employee putting his hand on her thigh two or three presidents ago, and the guy is outside on the sidewalk holding a pink slip faster than a dose of salts through a widder-woman.

Poster boys here: Garrison Keillor of Prairie Home Companion fame and the spin-off show on National Public Radio, and Ryan Lizza of New Yorker magazine. Both were dropped with astonishing speed while sound vibrations from the voices of their unknown accusers were still traveling through the air.

In neither case was there the least pretense of due process. It’s true that employment, except under some carefully-written contract, is not a legal or constitutional right. It’s also true that I, as a freedom of association absolutist, cheerfully support the right of employers to hire and fire at will, for any reason or none.

For long-time employees like Keillor and Lizza, though, whose work must have brought in significant revenues to their employers, surely there are civilized courtesies to be observed. Perhaps in these cases the lack of visible courtesy — no, make that “the gross visible dis-courtesy” — was softened with a golden handshake under the table, I don’t know.

The case of Garrison Keillor is by far the creepier of the two. I don’t mean that he is creepy, though for all I know he might be. I never cared for Keillor’s stuff myself, although my wife liked his radio program. What’s creepy — really, disturbingly creepy, way creepier to my way of thinking than any conceivable interaction between a guy’s hand and a gal’s thigh — is the way his host organization, Minnesota Public Radio, has made him an unperson.

David Vossbrink at the San Francisco Mercury-News had a good piece on this December 4th. Quote:

Garrison Keillor has been disappeared into the Memory Hole. If you look for his biography or the archived shows from a half century of “A Prairie Home Companion” on the website of Minnesota Public Radio since his fall from grace, you’ll now find only this: “Sorry, but there’s no page here.”

Keillor and his entire body of work from “A Prairie Home Companion” and “Writer’s Almanac” have been effectively erased from the archives of MPR, along with the work of all the other storytellers, singers, poets and production staff who made the shows successful.

Am I right? Is that creepy, or what?

I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that New Yorker magazine is calling in all the old issues with a Ryan Lizza article in them so that some Winston Smith employee down there at One World Trade Center can cut them out and feed them down the memory hole.

Or perhaps they are following the lead of the USSR in 1954. In that year the publishers of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia had just put out a new volume with a gushing four-page article on secret-police chief Lavrenty Beria. While they were still distributing it to libraries and colleges, Beria unfortunately fell out of favor, was arrested and shot. The state publishing house sent out a four-page substitution with articles on Wilhelm Bergholtz, an 18th-century general, and the Bering Sea, along with instructions for pasting them over the Beria pages. Quote:

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Feminism, Political Correctness 
🔊 Listen RSS

What I call “Demographic conservatism”—the instinctive tendency to want to live among people who closely resemble yourself in appearance, manners, dress style, language, and religion, the package we call “culture,” except that race is a component too—is a major factor in what I’ve been calling the Cold Civil War between Goodwhites and Badwhites. The latest skirmish: the recent special election for Jeff Sessions’ Senate seat in Alabama. The Republican candidate, Roy Moore, lost by a whisker—one and a half percent.

My dismay is both rational and emotional.

  • I’m rationally dismayed because the U.S. Senate is now a tad less likely to pass patriotic immigration reform.

The Democrat, Doug Jones, is pretty much a nullity on the National Question. A site search on the “Doug Jones for Senate” website using the search string “immigr” got no hits.

Jones did respond to a questionnaire from NumbersUSA, but his responses were deeply uninformative.

I doubt there’s any deliberate cunning here. My guess is that Doug Jones has just never given ten seconds’ continuous thought to the National Question except as it concerns American blacks, who he believes are held back from full and equal participation in American society by irrational prejudice and discrimination.

Probably he thinks about other minorities—Hispanics, Muslims, homosexuals—through the same prism, to the degree he thinks about them at all.

My rational dismay is tempered somewhat by the reflection that the U.S. Senate is in any case not likely to pass true immigration reform.

Democratic Senators are lockstep for open borders. That’s not an exaggeration: The report grades for immigration reduction at the NumbersUSA website have every single Democrat in the U.S. Senate graded F-minus—every damn one.

The GOP presents more variety, but there are fourteen F-minuses there, too, along with one regular F, five Ds, and twenty-nine Cs. One of the Cs is Luther Strange, who’ll now be replaced by Doug Jones, a sure F-minus once he gets down to voting.

In case you lost track of the arithmetic there, that leaves just three Republican Senators unaccounted for. They break one A and two Bs. The A is Tom Cotton of Arkansas; the Bs are Ted Cruz of Texas and David Perdue of Georgia.

Chance of getting an immigration moratorium from this crowd, or legislation against Birthright Citizenship, or a proper entry-exit visa tracking system, or an end to co-operation with the United Nations bogus-refugee program, or a really secure southern border? Zero, zero, zero, zero, and zero—with or without Roy Moore.

  • My emotional dismay is that Roy Moore, with all his many flaws, is an instinctive and dogged counter-revolutionary.

I loathe and fear the cultural revolution that’s sweeping over our country. I’ll gladly vote, and encourage others to vote, for anyone who stands athwart this cultural revolution crying “Stop!”

And then there’s my lingering affection for the old, weird America—the America of honky-tonks and freak shows, of sleepy towns in the hollows and corn liquor stills in the woods, of Leadbelly and Junior Johnson, of carny barkers and hellfire preachers.

Yes, of course I know there were downsides. I already told you: This is emotion, not reason. Roy Moore, with all his downsides, reflects echoes of that old, weird America. I like that.

Enough about my preferences, though. Let’s do a little analysis here. What does Tuesday’s Alabama vote tell us?

Nothing new that I can see.

Blacks and ethnomasochist whites in college towns voted Democrat. Some other whites who couldn’t stomach either party’s candidate wrote in someone else. There weren’t many of those write-ins, but there were enough to swing the vote. If all 22,811 of them had voted for Moore, he would have won by more than two thousand votes.

So Roy Moore’s colorful personality was a factor in his defeat. So, as’s James Kirkpatrick pointed out, was GOP Establishment sabotage—and Moore’s lackadaisical approach to campaigning.

The exit polls show that black voters turned out in force and voted with exceptional solidarity. They went 96 percent for the Democrat. Black women went for him 98 percent.

Among whites the sex gap went the opposite way. White men went 72 percent for Roy Moore; white women only 63 percent.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Conservative Movement, Immigration, Roy Moore 
John Derbyshire
About John Derbyshire

John Derbyshire writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. His most recent book, published by com is FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle).His writings are archived at