The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The New Patriotism: Americans Must be Grateful to Immigrants
🔊 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

David French explains why immigrants shouldn’t be as grateful to America as you lazy, overpaid, waste of space natives:

I believe every American should be grateful for American liberty and opportunity. But the average immigrant citizen did more to earn their place than the average natural-born citizen. … So who should be the most overwhelmed by gratitude? The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?

 
Hide 95 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. TGGP says: • Website

    It doesn’t sound like “the sacrifice of millions” is a reference to immigrants. Rather, it’s to Americans that came before us. And one would expect that Americans would show more gratitude toward prior generations, compared to immigrants with less solid roots here who might pack up and go elsewhere (as roughly half of Italian immigrants did during their great wave of immigration here). Perhaps the larger context in which he wrote that supports your headline, but you didn’t provide a link.

    • Troll: Thulean Friend
    • Replies: @Anon000
    If you didn’t find a link then you can assume it’s from his Twitter feed.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1150597731175587840

    https://mobile.twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1150597736212959232

    , @Cortes
    In his great book “Christ Stopped At Eboli”, his memoir of the period spent in internal exile in southern Italy, Carlo Levi tells the sad tale of one poor schmuck who believed Mussolini propaganda about the fabulous progress of Italy under fascism and returned from NYC. He can’t have been the only one.
  2. The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?

    It was always going to come to this. Conservative neutrality was untenable. If you are going to refuse to support the native majority, sooner or later you’re going to feel impelled to lash out and make them feel guilty for ever having expected you to do so in the first place.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Daniel H
    It was always going to come to this. Conservative neutrality was untenable. If you are going to refuse to support the native majority, sooner or later you’re going to feel impelled to lash out and make them feel guilty for ever having expected you to do so in the first place.

    Yep. To paraphrase what George W. Bush putatively said, "I never said I was a conservative."

    But this is good. I say to French, more, more, more. I want all of America to see what you and your neo-con gang over at your miserable little magazine are all about. Cucks.
    , @Mr McKenna
    OTOH, their logic implies that we get to kick the immigrants' kids out, because they didn't earn that.

    This could all work out, if only logic is respected.

    https://media1.giphy.com/media/3D1BwVd9UuWAM/giphy.gif?cid=790b76115d2c174f6d4d543367b83f09&rid=giphy.gif
    , @ATBOTL
    I grew up in the 80's hearing similar sentiments. The idea that immigrants are morally superior to natives has been common in America for a long time.
    , @midtown
    Agreed.
  3. Real galaxy brain take by David French. Remember when Bill Kristol was trying to push him to run for President? lol

  4. The article 1 of the cuck manifesto.

  5. 47 million Americans are immigrants. The majority of Americans are related, have a close friend, spouse, parent, or goes to church with an immigrant. Trumps shot himself in the foot this morning with his little tirade.

    If you do not fight against white supremacy you and you’re a traitor and should be deported.

    • Troll: Unladen Swallow
    • Replies: @Apollo
    Where would such white nationalists be deported to? I have a feeling that a significant majority of the world would quickly come to see such a place as quite pleasant and worthy of moving to.
    , @spirit of the fighing 69th
    Argument by assertion and an ad hominem attack, two logical fallacies expounded by Tiny Duck.
  6. @TGGP
    It doesn't sound like "the sacrifice of millions" is a reference to immigrants. Rather, it's to Americans that came before us. And one would expect that Americans would show more gratitude toward prior generations, compared to immigrants with less solid roots here who might pack up and go elsewhere (as roughly half of Italian immigrants did during their great wave of immigration here). Perhaps the larger context in which he wrote that supports your headline, but you didn't provide a link.
  7. Anonymous[344] • Disclaimer says:

    In theory the people immigrants should be most grateful to are the generations of dead whites who spent centuries building the nations they now flood into. It would be interesting to know what percentage of them actually have such gratitude. It may be more than we think, it’s just that such people don’t get media jobs(and probably don’t want them).

    It would be nice if more of them stuck up for dead whites now and then, since the descendants of those whites are now forbidden from doing so.

    • Agree: istevefan
    • Replies: @David In TN
    "In theory the people immigrants should be most grateful to are the generations of dead whites who spent centuries building the nations they now flood into."

    Who, of course, are NOT the people French refers to.
  8. Conservative neutrality was untenable.

    Right, Rosie. A vote for the libertarian, or a write-in vote, was a vote for Hillary. Full Stop. French, Goldberg, et. al., used to have some insightful things to say every once in a while. Now it’s all mental illness. I don’t care about them, but George Will’s treachery struck me pretty hard (well, he’s a columnist, so …. not very hard at all, but still). Will had great columns about union malfeasance and corruption in midwestern cities, but … oh well. At least Krauthammer had the decency to get cancer and die before he made a fool of himself, and ruined his reputation forever. French, Goldberg, Kristol and the lot never had a reputation to lose, really. Will did, and he pissed it away.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    Goldberg, Kristol and the lot never had a reputation to lose, really. Will did, and he pissed it away.
     
    Will lost whatever reputation he had back in 1981 with his hatchet job on Mel Bradford.
  9. So the American-born offspring of those immigrants who had to earn citizenship in the “real world” are ingrates too.

    Got it.

    Good to know, and quite useful.

  10. • LOL: Autochthon
    • Replies: @t
    Pervert Pete has realized that being a homo doesn't get him many wokeman points so he's going to claim he's not white because he part Maltese.
  11. French is not a conservative. He hates the idea of heritage and tradition. He is just a liberal who wants to slow down the rate of destruction. Plus, if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones, rather than importing one from Africa.

    Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have. My ancestors, who first came before the English Civil War, left me nothing but my citizenship and my heritage and my genes. No short timer is so connected.

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    Realistically, we need to denaturalize millions and deport them (looking at you, Omar) and clarify birthright citizenship for only those whose parents were citizens at time of birth.

    Also, any would be citizen that took one penny of government aid should be forever barred from citizenship….

    • Agree: William Badwhite
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones,
     
    "Even"?

    African-American children are overrepresented — they make up about 24 percent of the children waiting for adoption. (The African-American population in the U.S. is 13 percent).


    https://www.adoptioninstitute.org/news/the-bias-against-african-american-children-in-u-s-adoptions/
     
    , @Moses

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870.
     
    One ancestor of mine was a compatriot of General Lafayette during the Revolutionary War. Others came over in the great migrations of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

    Will I have to go back?

    , @Tired of Not Winning

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.
     
    I'd say roll back to pre-civil war, before the mass arrival of Catholics and Jews.
    , @megabar
    > Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have.

    I don't think that really matters, though it is perhaps a useful proxy measurement for what does.

    Have you ever known someone a long time, but you'd still feel awkward in an extended 1:1 conversation with them? Conversely, have you ever just met someone, yet find talking to them is effortless?

    It's not length of time spent here. It's how compatible -- truly compatible -- someone is with American ideals. I not talking about civic nationalism here, because I acknowledge that compatibility begins with genetics.

    The reason I admit that heritage may be a good proxy, is that people who came to the US very early on were more likely to have a genetic makeup that is compatible with American ideals.

    But note that this makeup does not prevent a people from flushing their society down the toilet, as the heritage English, Swedish, and Germans are doing.
    , @Paleo Liberal
    I would do things a little differently.

    Anyone whose ancestors were here when their land became part of the US would be a citizen.

    That includes all Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, Eskimos etc.

    Anyone who fought in a war, or was honorably discharged in peace time, or descendants of that person would be a citizen. That includes the CSA armed forces as well.

    Descendants of former American slaves would be citizens. We don’t know when their ancestors came, but they did help build the country.

    People who have performed some great service to the country would be citizens, as would their descendants.

    Note that under my plan, Obama would be a citizen (his mother came from an old family with both USA and CSA service) but Trump would not.

    Neither Ted Cruz not Kamala Harris would be citizens in my plan.
    , @Anon
    You're going to have a lot of noncitizen farmers then.
  12. It’s the childishness of this that kills me. Presumably this is a rebuke of Drumpf for having the temerity to suggest immigrant harridans berating the citizenry is unseemly. OK, but can we talk about what this is about? Nope, all Mr. French is going to do is emote about gratitude. Well yes, you snivelling cuck, I am grateful to have been born an American. They still have to go back.

  13. David French is on an ice floe and a penguin says to him, ‘why are you wearing a tuxedo?’

    David French turns to the penguin and says, ‘what makes you think I’m wearing a tuxedo?’

    • LOL: Clyde
  14. Anonymous[153] • Disclaimer says:

  15. • Replies: @Anonymous
    Many burglars, thieves, robbers etc show 'great grit and determination' in pursuing and planning their goals. But they can hardly be described as objects of admiration.
  16. David: I command you to give your entire estate to me, personally ****this is your conscience speaking, through the physical body of the gorgeous and irresistible Ilhan Omar**** because your descendants and kin did nothing to earn your earthly bounty.

  17. Link?

    Citizenship is an “accident of birth”? Wow! Not a sacred inheritance? Not an unbroken chain that connects people with a past and future? He rejects the preamble to the Constitution that says the US is for “ourselves and our posterity”?

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @Lot
    The idea is there are a bunch of souls waiting around to be embodied, sometime between conception and birth. It is a pure luck of the draw where you land. If your “father” had lasted another two seconds, your soul would have embodied elsewhere and you probably would have ended up in India or China.
    , @MEH 0910

    Link?
     
    https://twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1150597732719108097

    https://twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1150597736212959232
  18. Native born non-whites therefore did not earn their citizenship at all under this line of thinking.

    • Replies: @Moses

    Native born non-whites therefore did not earn their citizenship at all under this line of thinking.
     
    Exactly right.

    The only real Americans are non-Whites not born in America.

    It's Who We Are.

    It's what the Founders would have wanted.

  19. So French is one of those who say people born in the US won the lotto, and thus deserve no respect.

    OK, but what about the immigrants? Did they not win the lotto? There are 4 to 6 billion that want to come to America. But even a record setting 60 million immigrants since 1965, means barely one percent made it. Is this not winning the lotto?

    Heck, we even have a special class of visa holders, courtesy of the 1990 immigration act, called visa lotto winners.

    Or what about Mexicans? They won the lotto by being born in a nation which borders the richest nation on earth which just happens to have unguarded borders. Does anyone doubt the Chinese and Africans are jealous of Mexico’s easy proximity to the golden land?

    What about the woman, nine months pregnant, who illegally crosses the border and gives birth? Has she not won the lotto?

    Ditto for he H1 b visa holders. They all won the lotto. The list goes on.

    • Agree: GermanReader2
    • Replies: @Romanian
    60 million out of a lot more people,because you have to take into account the natural churn of population. In a land of X people,how many have lived there in a period of 50-60 years? 2X?
    , @kaganovitch
    What about the woman, nine months pregnant, who illegally crosses the border and gives birth? Has she not won the lotto?

    No, in Vichy French's scheme of things, she showed "grit and courage" in coming here, hence she is more deserving than citizens of the USA, who won the lotto. I assume he would think that the home invader who shows "grit and courage" by breaking into your home and holding you at gunpoint , is also more deserving of your worldly goods. Especially those goods you inherited. So spake Martin Luther French ; "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward lawless barbarism."
  20. The existence of citizens like David French is yet another example of how “citizenism” is untenable.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    The existence of David French just demonstrates that some people are craven. If citizenism were the reining ideology, David French would defend it.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    The existence of citizens like David French is yet another example of how “citizenism” is untenable.
     
    You engaged in it yourself, though, when you opposed laws explicitly barring blacks from firearms possession, going so far as to defend the Fourteenth Amendment.

    If anything is "citizenist", it's the Fourteenth.

    Ultimately, the Fourteenth itself is untenable.

  21. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    The existence of citizens like David French is yet another example of how “citizenism” is untenable.

    The existence of David French just demonstrates that some people are craven. If citizenism were the reining ideology, David French would defend it.

  22. @t
    https://twitter.com/ScottMGreer/status/1150473644117831681

    Pervert Pete has realized that being a homo doesn’t get him many wokeman points so he’s going to claim he’s not white because he part Maltese.

  23. OT: Ron Unz’s essay. Wow.

    • Replies: @Sam Malone
    Thanks for the link, or any reference to which of his essays you mean or the slightest hint what it's about and why we should check it out.
  24. @Gaius Gracchus
    French is not a conservative. He hates the idea of heritage and tradition. He is just a liberal who wants to slow down the rate of destruction. Plus, if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones, rather than importing one from Africa.

    Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have. My ancestors, who first came before the English Civil War, left me nothing but my citizenship and my heritage and my genes. No short timer is so connected.

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    Realistically, we need to denaturalize millions and deport them (looking at you, Omar) and clarify birthright citizenship for only those whose parents were citizens at time of birth.

    Also, any would be citizen that took one penny of government aid should be forever barred from citizenship....

    if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones,

    “Even”?

    African-American children are overrepresented — they make up about 24 percent of the children waiting for adoption. (The African-American population in the U.S. is 13 percent).

    https://www.adoptioninstitute.org/news/the-bias-against-african-american-children-in-u-s-adoptions/

  25. The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?

    Maybe if you thought of a country as a contract between generations rather than as an asset to be sold to the highest bidder for maximum shareholder profit you would actually not feel so unworthy of belonging to it. But what do know? I’m no leading “conservative”.

    It used to be that you earned the fruits of your fathers labor by being a good custodian of what they left you and bequeathing it your children. But I guess that’s nothing compared to the toil of taking an international flight, learning the most spoken language on earth, and reciting an oath.

    • Replies: @midtown
    I agree, although even a corporation is supposed to work in its shareholders' best interest, as Steve has mentioned many times. To extend the metaphor, the Board of Directors of the USA has gone rogue and needs to be fired in toto.
  26. So who should be the most overwhelmed by gratitude? The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?

    This person born to citizens is literally part of those millions of people, you fucking lunatic. The life of those millions is contained, in small part, in that person born here.

    • Replies: @istevefan
    And didn't those previous millions, who built this nation, do it in no small part for their posterity? And would they have put in the effort to build, or serve had they known in the future people like French would tell their posterity they had no more right to their legacy than the rest of the world?
  27. @Rosie

    The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?
     
    It was always going to come to this. Conservative neutrality was untenable. If you are going to refuse to support the native majority, sooner or later you're going to feel impelled to lash out and make them feel guilty for ever having expected you to do so in the first place.

    It was always going to come to this. Conservative neutrality was untenable. If you are going to refuse to support the native majority, sooner or later you’re going to feel impelled to lash out and make them feel guilty for ever having expected you to do so in the first place.

    Yep. To paraphrase what George W. Bush putatively said, “I never said I was a conservative.”

    But this is good. I say to French, more, more, more. I want all of America to see what you and your neo-con gang over at your miserable little magazine are all about. Cucks.

  28. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    The existence of citizens like David French is yet another example of how “citizenism” is untenable.

    The existence of citizens like David French is yet another example of how “citizenism” is untenable.

    You engaged in it yourself, though, when you opposed laws explicitly barring blacks from firearms possession, going so far as to defend the Fourteenth Amendment.

    If anything is “citizenist”, it’s the Fourteenth.

    Ultimately, the Fourteenth itself is untenable.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    That’s why I put “citizenist” in quotes: I’m referring to Steve’s coinage, which in relation to immigration, politics, and the march of time has a rapidly depleting half-life.

    We should keep equal ‘negative’ rights for all law-abiding adult US citizens, while recognizing there might be (violent) conflict between groups of citizens. The Fourteenth isn’t perfect (it has good and bad clauses), but it does incorporate the Bill of Rights throughout the nation, which is indispensable to ongoing SCOTUS jurisprudence.

    If you’re personally worried about blacks with guns, legal or illegal, I suggest you carry your own gun(s) and train.
  29. Bret Stephens’ “deport Americans” meme has spread at least to one additional node.

    I feel like suggesting to David French that he should consider what homosexual men call “bugchasing,” deliberate acquired HIV infection. It would be a much more personal and less socially-destructive way for him to embrace the third world than the routes he chooses.

    • Replies: @Jake
    Queer 'bugchasing' is about a desire to be punished for one's sins> And like almost all forms of that conscience-expressing, it wishes to see other's punished at least as much as oneself.

    'Bugchasing' is a desire to be severely punished, to die, but it is not based on anything close to proper penance and so becomes monstrous - it wishes to spread the contagion and the destruction that the holder deep down knows means he/she/it/they/ze deserves punishment. He wants you to pay for his sins too. If he must pay for his sins, then you also must die with him.

    All revolutionary impulses that begin to divert from common sense, all 'puritanizing,' derive from the same impulse as 'bugchasing.'
  30. Ugh. Cucks [spits in disgust]

  31. @Rosie

    The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?
     
    It was always going to come to this. Conservative neutrality was untenable. If you are going to refuse to support the native majority, sooner or later you're going to feel impelled to lash out and make them feel guilty for ever having expected you to do so in the first place.

    OTOH, their logic implies that we get to kick the immigrants’ kids out, because they didn’t earn that.

    This could all work out, if only logic is respected.

  32. @ben tillman

    So who should be the most overwhelmed by gratitude? The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?
     
    This person born to citizens is literally part of those millions of people, you fucking lunatic. The life of those millions is contained, in small part, in that person born here.

    And didn’t those previous millions, who built this nation, do it in no small part for their posterity? And would they have put in the effort to build, or serve had they known in the future people like French would tell their posterity they had no more right to their legacy than the rest of the world?

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    Let me tell you a story. My wife's father's father's father's father's father's father's father's father's father built the oldest still-occupied house in this country. His will was posted inside the house after his death, and it stated that the house was for his posterity and was never to be sold out of the family.

    I'll give you one guess as to the year the oldest son who had inherited it sold it to a stranger.

    Yep.

    1965.
  33. @Gaius Gracchus
    French is not a conservative. He hates the idea of heritage and tradition. He is just a liberal who wants to slow down the rate of destruction. Plus, if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones, rather than importing one from Africa.

    Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have. My ancestors, who first came before the English Civil War, left me nothing but my citizenship and my heritage and my genes. No short timer is so connected.

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    Realistically, we need to denaturalize millions and deport them (looking at you, Omar) and clarify birthright citizenship for only those whose parents were citizens at time of birth.

    Also, any would be citizen that took one penny of government aid should be forever barred from citizenship....

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870.

    One ancestor of mine was a compatriot of General Lafayette during the Revolutionary War. Others came over in the great migrations of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

    Will I have to go back?

    • Agree: Redneck farmer
  34. @Tusk
    Native born non-whites therefore did not earn their citizenship at all under this line of thinking.

    Native born non-whites therefore did not earn their citizenship at all under this line of thinking.

    Exactly right.

    The only real Americans are non-Whites not born in America.

    It’s Who We Are.

    It’s what the Founders would have wanted.

  35. I get really irritated at people like David French employing the planted axiom that living in America is some kind of self-evident blessing. This is the basis of all their lecturing and guilt-tripping: The assertion that I have inherited a good to which I have only a questionable title.

    My contention against such people is not that I have a right to the good, but that it is not really a good at all. Maybe for people like you, David French, America has been a cakewalk, but it hasn’t for me. Am I now expected to fall down in paroxysms of gratitude (or guilt, as the case may be) at the mere fact of having been born here?I don’t understand this kind of talk; I know not of the bounty of which you speak. I have never known the free, easy, and comfortable life, and I have watched my prospects for ever knowing such steadily erode unto the point of utter hopelessness. Had I not acquired a stoic sense of duty and a Christian resignation, I should think I would by now be quit unable to go on putting one foot in front of the other. Who in the hell are you to call me privileged?

    • Agree: Daniel H
    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
    French is privileged (is subject to a private law) [1] and feels guilty. He wants you to repent for him. Standard Puritan/New England.

    Note that real repentance (from a Latin word meaning "crawl" [2]) requires abjuring all gains from the repented sin [3].

    Standard New England behavior.

    Therefore, French must want you to remove his all gains from his privilege. Perhaps that is the only thing that will make him happy, although entering a penitentiary [4] might help be called for, as he obviously believes the sin is unusually severe.

    It would really be doing him a favor, and I'm surprised that his readership hasn't done him that favor long ago. His readership's persistent misunderstanding is long overdue for correction, and French isn't the only person being misunderstood in this way.

    Counterinsurgency


    1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/privilege
    2] 1660–70; < Latin rēpent- (stem of rēpēns), present participle of rēpere to crawl, creep; see -ent
    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/repent
    3] https://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html
    4] 1375–1425; late Middle English penitenciarie priest who administers penance, prison < Medieval Latin pēnitēntiārius of penance
  36. Anonymous[201] • Disclaimer says:

    …….. and just what exactly did that great philosopher of conservatism, Edmund Burke, had to say about the nation state being a ‘sacred compact’ between the long dead, the currently living and the countless generations yet to be born?

  37. Anonymous[201] • Disclaimer says:

    While he’s at it, David French might as well abolish the ‘institution’ of the family – and have all infants compulsorily removed from parents at birth to be raised by ‘the state’ in communal facilities.

    After all, why do your own biological children ‘deserve’ more attention, resources, love, care etc, than that family down the road?, aren’t those kids more deserving than your own pampered progeny due to the deprivation they face due to ‘accident of birth’?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    While he’s at it, David French might as well abolish the ‘institution’ of the family – and have all infants compulsorily removed from parents at birth to be raised by ‘the state’ in communal facilities.

    After all, why do your own biological children ‘deserve’ more attention, resources, love, care etc, than that family down the road?, aren’t those kids more deserving than your own pampered progeny due to the deprivation they face due to ‘accident of birth’?
     
    Indeed. That would seem to be the logic of modern "conservatism".
    , @ben tillman

    After all, why do your own biological children ‘deserve’ more attention, resources, love, care etc, than that family down the road?
     
    You've stopped a step short of where this path leads us. Why does his own person deserve more resources etc. than the family down the road?

    He is arguing against property. Everything is a commons to him. This crazed "principle" applies as well to his own person as it does to any broader grouping of humans.

  38. Anonymous[201] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/1150615342944796672?s=21

    Many burglars, thieves, robbers etc show ‘great grit and determination’ in pursuing and planning their goals. But they can hardly be described as objects of admiration.

  39. But the average immigrant citizen did more to earn their place than the average natural-born citizen. … So who should be the most overwhelmed by gratitude? The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship.

    By that logic the Wehrmacht was entitled to France, Poland and Russia. They certainly did more to “earn” the right to them than the French, Poles, or Russians ever did.

    What is the sum total of the amount of “work” it takes to “earn” citizenship? Somewhere on the order of a week or two worth of high school homework, i would guess. Presumably if it were all that difficult we wouldn’t have something on the order of 50 million immigrants living here. If it were all that risky to life and limb to get here most of them would never have tried.

    Now sure, it’s fair to say that most living Americans haven’t had to make much of a sacrifice in order to “earn” the right to live in the country our ancestors built. But a child is entitled to the love of his parents merely by virtue of being their child. They certainly never “earned” it. And most parents, barring certain unfortunate circumstances, will leave their wealth to their children, merely because they are their children. It is rare that a parent has to justify leaving their hard-earned wealth to their children instead of someone else.

    • Replies: @Tono Bungay
    That Wehrmacht line was very good, Wilkey. LOL, as they say. And it leads us to the important point: Questions of desert or of gratitude are beside the point. Ultimately, who possesses? Who is determined enough? As a wise man once wrote, it's not true that where there is a will there is a way. But where there is no will, there is no way.
  40. Why do I suspect the French family doesn’t have a lot of accomplishments in this country?

  41. @Wilkey
    But the average immigrant citizen did more to earn their place than the average natural-born citizen. … So who should be the most overwhelmed by gratitude? The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship.

    By that logic the Wehrmacht was entitled to France, Poland and Russia. They certainly did more to "earn" the right to them than the French, Poles, or Russians ever did.

    What is the sum total of the amount of "work" it takes to "earn" citizenship? Somewhere on the order of a week or two worth of high school homework, i would guess. Presumably if it were all that difficult we wouldn't have something on the order of 50 million immigrants living here. If it were all that risky to life and limb to get here most of them would never have tried.

    Now sure, it's fair to say that most living Americans haven't had to make much of a sacrifice in order to "earn" the right to live in the country our ancestors built. But a child is entitled to the love of his parents merely by virtue of being their child. They certainly never "earned" it. And most parents, barring certain unfortunate circumstances, will leave their wealth to their children, merely because they are their children. It is rare that a parent has to justify leaving their hard-earned wealth to their children instead of someone else.

    That Wehrmacht line was very good, Wilkey. LOL, as they say. And it leads us to the important point: Questions of desert or of gratitude are beside the point. Ultimately, who possesses? Who is determined enough? As a wise man once wrote, it’s not true that where there is a will there is a way. But where there is no will, there is no way.

  42. Lot says:
    @Massimo Heitor
    Link?

    Citizenship is an "accident of birth"? Wow! Not a sacred inheritance? Not an unbroken chain that connects people with a past and future? He rejects the preamble to the Constitution that says the US is for "ourselves and our posterity"?

    The idea is there are a bunch of souls waiting around to be embodied, sometime between conception and birth. It is a pure luck of the draw where you land. If your “father” had lasted another two seconds, your soul would have embodied elsewhere and you probably would have ended up in India or China.

  43. But the average immigrant citizen did more to earn their place than the average natural-born citizen.

    This is rich. I’ll have to remember this when I take up citizenship in my new home country. Aside from that, before even becoming a citizen, I can be just as brazen and point out that I pay more in taxes every year than ten of my native peers, so they should really kiss my ass. Wait … I am a White European Male by descent, so they may not take as kindly to this from me as they are insouciant to arrivals from the third world, who struggle harder to take what is rightfully ours by birth and work.

    I had an old European nationalist gent, at a party for one of the grand old dames of my wife’s family, remark to me that it was shameful that a foreigner like me was allowed to take a job from one of the more deserving locals. All I could say was, “Actually I’m doing the job of three locals and doing it in seven countries and four languages because they can’t. Oh, and I took one of your women too.”

    Fortunately the others present were more horrified at his rude nationalism than my rude obnoxiousness, which is how assholes like David France get away with their own obnoxious sophistry. What most people object to is not foreign-born citizens, and not even so much to legal immigrants(though they probably should at least put up some resistance), but to the foreign-born migrants who self-select to become an unlawful resident of a developed country and take jobs from the lower skilled natives there or to go straight to enjoying all the social-welfare benefits that would go to native-born persons who were pushed out of lower-skill jobs taken up by the new arrivals, thus squeezing the local needy in two ways.

    Someone needs to tell David French he is a racist for not caring for America’s underclass, many of whom are brown-skinned, and his attitude and views are nothing less than waging war on the poor.

  44. French’s wife and adopted child (from Ethiopia) — what more do you need to know?

    • Replies: @C. Van Carter
    He was subjected to mean Twitter mocking about his black child during the 2016 campaign. I suspect he got a frisson from it and wants to provoke such a response again.
  45. @istevefan
    So French is one of those who say people born in the US won the lotto, and thus deserve no respect.

    OK, but what about the immigrants? Did they not win the lotto? There are 4 to 6 billion that want to come to America. But even a record setting 60 million immigrants since 1965, means barely one percent made it. Is this not winning the lotto?

    Heck, we even have a special class of visa holders, courtesy of the 1990 immigration act, called visa lotto winners.

    Or what about Mexicans? They won the lotto by being born in a nation which borders the richest nation on earth which just happens to have unguarded borders. Does anyone doubt the Chinese and Africans are jealous of Mexico's easy proximity to the golden land?

    What about the woman, nine months pregnant, who illegally crosses the border and gives birth? Has she not won the lotto?

    Ditto for he H1 b visa holders. They all won the lotto. The list goes on.

    60 million out of a lot more people,because you have to take into account the natural churn of population. In a land of X people,how many have lived there in a period of 50-60 years? 2X?

    • Replies: @istevefan
    You are correct, but at the time I did not want to complicate my comment too much. Going by your method makes the immigrants even bigger lotto winners than I originally guessed.
  46. On second thought, instead of just taking sides and swinging away, let’s examine French’s point calmly. Isn’t it true that maintaining an inheritance is always a challenge? that those who are born into wealth (or US citizenship or whatever) don’t always realize the value of what they possess or the force of will and effort it might take to hold on to it? Isn’t an awful lot of American culture just plain crap? The proof is in the pudding, and if the US and Europe are being flooded with people we’re not too excited about, doesn’t that suggest that we’re in some ways decadent? French is putting his money where his mouth is; he’s supporting and raising an African child and militating for a radical indifference to race and origin. What are we doing to counter that?

  47. @Intelligent Dasein
    I get really irritated at people like David French employing the planted axiom that living in America is some kind of self-evident blessing. This is the basis of all their lecturing and guilt-tripping: The assertion that I have inherited a good to which I have only a questionable title.

    My contention against such people is not that I have a right to the good, but that it is not really a good at all. Maybe for people like you, David French, America has been a cakewalk, but it hasn't for me. Am I now expected to fall down in paroxysms of gratitude (or guilt, as the case may be) at the mere fact of having been born here?I don't understand this kind of talk; I know not of the bounty of which you speak. I have never known the free, easy, and comfortable life, and I have watched my prospects for ever knowing such steadily erode unto the point of utter hopelessness. Had I not acquired a stoic sense of duty and a Christian resignation, I should think I would by now be quit unable to go on putting one foot in front of the other. Who in the hell are you to call me privileged?

    French is privileged (is subject to a private law) [1] and feels guilty. He wants you to repent for him. Standard Puritan/New England.

    Note that real repentance (from a Latin word meaning “crawl” [2]) requires abjuring all gains from the repented sin [3].

    Standard New England behavior.

    Therefore, French must want you to remove his all gains from his privilege. Perhaps that is the only thing that will make him happy, although entering a penitentiary [4] might help be called for, as he obviously believes the sin is unusually severe.

    It would really be doing him a favor, and I’m surprised that his readership hasn’t done him that favor long ago. His readership’s persistent misunderstanding is long overdue for correction, and French isn’t the only person being misunderstood in this way.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/privilege
    2] 1660–70; < Latin rēpent- (stem of rēpēns), present participle of rēpere to crawl, creep; see -ent
    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/repent
    3] https://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html
    4] 1375–1425; late Middle English penitenciarie priest who administers penance, prison < Medieval Latin pēnitēntiārius of penance

    • Replies: @Jake
    "French is privileged (is subject to a private law) [1] and feels guilty. He wants you to repent for him. Standard Puritan/New England.

    Note that real repentance (from a Latin word meaning “crawl” [2]) requires abjuring all gains from the repented sin [3].

    Standard New England behavior."

    Your points are very important. But first we must correct terms. It is not 'New England behavior' because it is not about a geography. It not about some variation of Magic Dirt or Tragic Dirt. That behavior springs from a culture, the founders of New England culture: Anglo-Saxon Puritans.

    It is WASP behavior that is central to WASP culture. And its source, beyond specific Germanic origin, is a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism.

    It is not restrictive to bloodline, any more than to geography. French grew up in KY and went to college in TN and lives in TN still. I doubt that French has any ancestry - certainly none larger than a dollop - that is New England Anglo-Saxon Puritan. His ancestry will be upper hill South Scots-Irish, understood broadly as it must be, which means it will be primarily, especially in cultural terms, Scots-Irish, but will feature some flourishes of French, Continental Germanic, Irish and Highland Catholic without the Church, even Shawnee or Cherokee. The actual English ancestry that David French has likely is well under 10% East Anglian (until the Victorian era, close to ethnically pure Anglo-Saxon and the heart of the rise of Puritanism) and at least 75% from the Celtic Fringe areas of north and west England (which were the strongholds of English opposition to the 'reforms' of Henry VIII and to all things Anglo-Saxon Puritan.

    And yet here is David French acting just like an Anglo-Saxon Puritan. The matter is not about genetic determinism; it is about cultural pollution. And David French was raised to be a good American who worships Abraham Lincoln and honors the Anglo-Saxon Puritans as the nation's Fathers, especially in terms of moral philosophy.

    Cultural assimilation works.

  48. Historically, America has been exceptional because of Americans. The immigrants can’t keep American exceptional, and, in fact, have not: see California.

    Counterinsurgency

  49. @TGGP
    It doesn't sound like "the sacrifice of millions" is a reference to immigrants. Rather, it's to Americans that came before us. And one would expect that Americans would show more gratitude toward prior generations, compared to immigrants with less solid roots here who might pack up and go elsewhere (as roughly half of Italian immigrants did during their great wave of immigration here). Perhaps the larger context in which he wrote that supports your headline, but you didn't provide a link.

    In his great book “Christ Stopped At Eboli”, his memoir of the period spent in internal exile in southern Italy, Carlo Levi tells the sad tale of one poor schmuck who believed Mussolini propaganda about the fabulous progress of Italy under fascism and returned from NYC. He can’t have been the only one.

  50. anon[181] • Disclaimer says:

    “But the average immigrant citizen did more to earn their place than the average natural-born citizen. … So who should be the most overwhelmed by gratitude?”

    I should be overwhelmed with gratitude because huge numbers of foreigners are voting against my group’s interests while simultaneously creating a toxic climate of racism directed at me and my group? No thanks. What a disgusting fraud Conservatism Inc. was – corrupt, greedy, disingenuous virtue signalling buffoons, all of them. #separatecountries

  51. @Reg Cæsar

    The existence of citizens like David French is yet another example of how “citizenism” is untenable.
     
    You engaged in it yourself, though, when you opposed laws explicitly barring blacks from firearms possession, going so far as to defend the Fourteenth Amendment.

    If anything is "citizenist", it's the Fourteenth.

    Ultimately, the Fourteenth itself is untenable.

    That’s why I put “citizenist” in quotes: I’m referring to Steve’s coinage, which in relation to immigration, politics, and the march of time has a rapidly depleting half-life.

    We should keep equal ‘negative’ rights for all law-abiding adult US citizens, while recognizing there might be (violent) conflict between groups of citizens. The Fourteenth isn’t perfect (it has good and bad clauses), but it does incorporate the Bill of Rights throughout the nation, which is indispensable to ongoing SCOTUS jurisprudence.

    If you’re personally worried about blacks with guns, legal or illegal, I suggest you carry your own gun(s) and train.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    If you’re personally worried about blacks with guns, legal or illegal, I suggest you carry your own gun(s) and train.
     
    I respect the RKBA of those blacks who respect mine-- which is, what, one or two percent of them?


    Neither "citizenism" nor "white nationalism" is useful as philosophies or even strategies. They are merely tactics. Each should be used at the appropriate time, with the other held in reserve.
  52. Who had to do the most work to get someplace in life? Who deserves more respect and status? The poor Numinous Negro who worked his way up through the ranks of The Gangster Disciples, forced to kill as well as steal and rape and sell drugs and black market guns, and who became leader of an organization doing millions o dollars of business? Or little Becky whose white trash family gave her endless privilege and who stayed in school and then became a nurse and did menial labor under all those Jewish and now Indian and Mohammedan doctors who suffered endlessly because they were not born white in America?

  53. @Thomas
    Bret Stephens' "deport Americans" meme has spread at least to one additional node.

    I feel like suggesting to David French that he should consider what homosexual men call "bugchasing," deliberate acquired HIV infection. It would be a much more personal and less socially-destructive way for him to embrace the third world than the routes he chooses.

    Queer ‘bugchasing’ is about a desire to be punished for one’s sins> And like almost all forms of that conscience-expressing, it wishes to see other’s punished at least as much as oneself.

    ‘Bugchasing’ is a desire to be severely punished, to die, but it is not based on anything close to proper penance and so becomes monstrous – it wishes to spread the contagion and the destruction that the holder deep down knows means he/she/it/they/ze deserves punishment. He wants you to pay for his sins too. If he must pay for his sins, then you also must die with him.

    All revolutionary impulses that begin to divert from common sense, all ‘puritanizing,’ derive from the same impulse as ‘bugchasing.’

  54. I would jump over 10 liberals to get to one cuckservative.

    • Replies: @Goddard
    That's brilliant soldiery!
  55. @Counterinsurgency
    French is privileged (is subject to a private law) [1] and feels guilty. He wants you to repent for him. Standard Puritan/New England.

    Note that real repentance (from a Latin word meaning "crawl" [2]) requires abjuring all gains from the repented sin [3].

    Standard New England behavior.

    Therefore, French must want you to remove his all gains from his privilege. Perhaps that is the only thing that will make him happy, although entering a penitentiary [4] might help be called for, as he obviously believes the sin is unusually severe.

    It would really be doing him a favor, and I'm surprised that his readership hasn't done him that favor long ago. His readership's persistent misunderstanding is long overdue for correction, and French isn't the only person being misunderstood in this way.

    Counterinsurgency


    1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/privilege
    2] 1660–70; < Latin rēpent- (stem of rēpēns), present participle of rēpere to crawl, creep; see -ent
    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/repent
    3] https://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html
    4] 1375–1425; late Middle English penitenciarie priest who administers penance, prison < Medieval Latin pēnitēntiārius of penance

    “French is privileged (is subject to a private law) [1] and feels guilty. He wants you to repent for him. Standard Puritan/New England.

    Note that real repentance (from a Latin word meaning “crawl” [2]) requires abjuring all gains from the repented sin [3].

    Standard New England behavior.”

    Your points are very important. But first we must correct terms. It is not ‘New England behavior’ because it is not about a geography. It not about some variation of Magic Dirt or Tragic Dirt. That behavior springs from a culture, the founders of New England culture: Anglo-Saxon Puritans.

    It is WASP behavior that is central to WASP culture. And its source, beyond specific Germanic origin, is a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism.

    It is not restrictive to bloodline, any more than to geography. French grew up in KY and went to college in TN and lives in TN still. I doubt that French has any ancestry – certainly none larger than a dollop – that is New England Anglo-Saxon Puritan. His ancestry will be upper hill South Scots-Irish, understood broadly as it must be, which means it will be primarily, especially in cultural terms, Scots-Irish, but will feature some flourishes of French, Continental Germanic, Irish and Highland Catholic without the Church, even Shawnee or Cherokee. The actual English ancestry that David French has likely is well under 10% East Anglian (until the Victorian era, close to ethnically pure Anglo-Saxon and the heart of the rise of Puritanism) and at least 75% from the Celtic Fringe areas of north and west England (which were the strongholds of English opposition to the ‘reforms’ of Henry VIII and to all things Anglo-Saxon Puritan.

    And yet here is David French acting just like an Anglo-Saxon Puritan. The matter is not about genetic determinism; it is about cultural pollution. And David French was raised to be a good American who worships Abraham Lincoln and honors the Anglo-Saxon Puritans as the nation’s Fathers, especially in terms of moral philosophy.

    Cultural assimilation works.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    When David French was Bill Kristol's Presidential Hope in 2016, there was a piece on him in the Columbia, TN paper, The Daily Herald. In it I learned French's maternal grandfather was the principal of my elementary school when I was in the first and second grade.

    This man, who we called "Mr. Black," very respectfully, didn't look like his grandson. Mr. Black was then in his early 40's, had a full head of hair, and a commanding presence. I recall interacting with him one day, age six or seven.

    By the way, nobody I talk to in Columbia, TN knows who David French is. In 2016 he lived in the Zion community of Maury County., an affluent place. My understanding is French and family have moved to a nearby county and a still more upscale neighborhood.
    , @Counterinsurgency
    In the original post, by "New England" was meant what Colin Woodward in _American Nations_ (http://www.colinwoodard.com/americannations.html) referes to as "Yankeedom". It's one of the primary sociological groups in the US, and is cohesive due to something called the "founder effect" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder_effect).
    One of my points is New England has, since its founding, wanted to reorganize the US, and has tried to do so three times: Pres VanBuren, the Civil War (and reconstruction) and the present Second Reconstruction.

    My problem is that talking about "Yankeedom" uses terminology that at best is largely unknown and at worst sounds trivial. I tend to use New England (even though upstate NY is part of Yankeedom) simply because people know what "New England" means.

    The "Founder Effect" can be confused with the "Magic Dirt" hypothesis. The difference is that "Magic Dirt (if it existed) would operate even if the previous group were completely moved away before any of the new group arrived, whereas "Founder Effect" would not.
    A strange consequence of that is that when Blacks showed up at White schools, the administration made it very clear that the administration favored Blacks in all interactions with Whites. This was enough to eliminate the Founder Effect (and supposedly the benefit to the Blacks) but wold not have affected Magic Dirt action. Therefore, the administration must have believed in Magic Dirt or, possibly, didn't care what happened to the Blacks or Whites either.

    Counterinsurgency
  56. @Anonymous
    In theory the people immigrants should be most grateful to are the generations of dead whites who spent centuries building the nations they now flood into. It would be interesting to know what percentage of them actually have such gratitude. It may be more than we think, it's just that such people don't get media jobs(and probably don't want them).

    It would be nice if more of them stuck up for dead whites now and then, since the descendants of those whites are now forbidden from doing so.

    “In theory the people immigrants should be most grateful to are the generations of dead whites who spent centuries building the nations they now flood into.”

    Who, of course, are NOT the people French refers to.

  57. @Ray Huffman
    I would jump over 10 liberals to get to one cuckservative.

    That’s brilliant soldiery!

  58. @Anonymous
    While he's at it, David French might as well abolish the 'institution' of the family - and have all infants compulsorily removed from parents at birth to be raised by 'the state' in communal facilities.

    After all, why do your own biological children 'deserve' more attention, resources, love, care etc, than that family down the road?, aren't those kids more deserving than your own pampered progeny due to the deprivation they face due to 'accident of birth'?

    While he’s at it, David French might as well abolish the ‘institution’ of the family – and have all infants compulsorily removed from parents at birth to be raised by ‘the state’ in communal facilities.

    After all, why do your own biological children ‘deserve’ more attention, resources, love, care etc, than that family down the road?, aren’t those kids more deserving than your own pampered progeny due to the deprivation they face due to ‘accident of birth’?

    Indeed. That would seem to be the logic of modern “conservatism”.

  59. anon[275] • Disclaimer says:

    Our parents worked hard to build this formerly great country. I’m sure they didn’t expect their children to be left in a world inundated by wage-depressing immigrants and all the social dysfunction they bring along with them – myriad racism charges, lowered social trust, endless tribalism, racial taunts, infighting, economic disparities, open borders, antifa. Far from natural born Americans being the result of an accident, their existence is purposeful. Their hard-working parents made this country what it is (or was), and their children are their legacy. You are no accident. This country was your inheritance, and it has been squandered by people who never had any loyalty to it.

    Who much cares that some foreigner moves here with the intent of making money for himself? Did these foreigners fight the wars, build the roads, make the laws, or put a man on the moon? No, our parents did those things. They were the ones who worked hard, not the ones moving here to exploit their past labor. Our ancestors built this country for us. And we are the ones maintaining it now. 97% of US fighter pilots are white males. Most of the best artists, musicians, directors, book authors, and civil servants are white, along with a disproportionate number of net taxpayers. How exactly does mass immigration benefit them? How is it good for us?

    This piece by David French once again demonstrates just how immoral, sanctimonious, and incompetent the truecons are and always were. What they crave above all else is social approval from the corporate media establishment (and the money that comes along with it). These people have even fewer principles than the radial left. At least they are motivated by something, as misguided as they are. The trucons exist only to be praised and then subsequently paid by the establishment. No wonder the liberals despised them (rightfully, in my opinion); no wonder they lost everything – they never wanted to conserve it in the first place! Buckley conservatism is an indefensible and immoral congame designed to fool readers into giving guys like David French status as spokesmen for the “conservatives”, which they parlay into hefty paychecks at Time or the National Review or myriad other controlled opposition outlets. Nothing more.

    This is seen in French’s long legacy of hypocrisy. Example (oft-cited): David French supports Israeli efforts to curb immigration over their border wall while hypocritically denying the Americans the same right. Why? Answer: because that’s what his paymasters tell him to write. The man has no principles. He’s a writer for hire. Nothing more.

    Conservatism Inc. is immoral and doesn’t deserve to exist. We should do everything in our power to pay back its adherents for what they’ve caused. We can start by supporting tax increases on the wealthy and anti-corporate polices: increase capital gains taxes, break up monopolies, increase corporate taxes, radically increase estate taxes, institute a 70% marginal income tax … Take from them just as they took from us. After all, how is it not moral to tax the rich under French’s logic? Maybe 60% of the wealth in this country is inherited, so it follows that most of the wealthy worked less hard for their money than natural born Americans and democrat party immigrants. They didn’t work for that money. That wealth is immoral and should be redistributed to those who work harder, just as French implies it should be.

    And as for the “overwhelmed with gratitude” comment, I say why? What exactly have these people done for working-class white republicans? Do they vote republican? No. They vote for a party that announces its opposition to republican polices; they will ban religious freedom and guns if they get a chance. Do they positively impact the quality of life for any middle-class republican? Almost certainly not. No, we live in a country were republican whites are blamed for every act of minority dysfunction, we are the targets of racial witch hunts, and we are assaulted in the media nearly every day – no social trust, no civic virtue … just nihilism and skyrocketing suicide rates, drug abuse, and anti-depressant usage. Much of that would not have been the case had the immigration laws of this country not been changed. We’d probably even have an affordable national healthcare system by now to go along with all the peace and quiet…but, noooo.

    In reality, when French says “overwhelmed with gratitude” he’s imagining the poor people he pays to babysit his kids, clean his house, and mow his law. He’s grateful he can find someone to make his life that much more pampered, that much more comfortable, so he’s puzzled why you aren’t grateful, too. Well, truecon. We aren’t grateful because we don’t have a well-paying sinecure at Time or the National Review. We have to do actual work for a living, not spend all day stroking the egos of the rich and justifying their many abuses with sophistry. We have to babysit our own kids, clean our own houses, mow our own laws (when we can afford any of that, which is less often than you’d might think). These people are shamelessly disconnected from the people they claim to represent. Shame on the libertarians for ever putting these people in charge of OUR movement. What a disgrace.

  60. Anon[439] • Disclaimer says:

    But the average immigrant citizen did more to earn their place than the average natural-born citizen. … So who should be the most overwhelmed by gratitude? The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?

    Blah, blah, blah, unending and ever-repetitive communist-Jew-media, anti-White garbage.

    The communist Neocon contingent is the most deserving of a very public prosecution, so as to make an example of those who would try to undermine one party with values that serve the other.

    But to address French’s comment:

    Because by Jew media standards, no one gains the inheritances of their ancestors except for Jews (and pretty much any non-White whose land Jews do not want at the moment).

    And somehow the Somali on migrant welfare “does actual work”, whereas the devastating losses that my family has suffered serving in this insane excuse for a nation’s wars and being the opposite of establishment over-privileged darlings (ie: not Jews, Somalis, etc) is us “enjoying the fruits of the sacrifices of millions entirely by the accident of birth”.

    I sincerely hate these Neocon fucks more than anyone else on the planet. I’m sure most of the conservative electorate feels the same.

  61. The notion that a native-born American must, or even can, “earn their place” is absurd. It’s no different than saying children have to earn their place in the family, or that grapes earn their place on the vine. It’s a complete mismatch between subject and predicate. I believe every triangle should have three sides. But the average rectangle does this more.

    I know that sometimes the vulgar appellations and language young guys on the dissident right use for the David Frenchs of the world are off-putting, but I earnestly struggle to describe his mindset without referring to cuckoldry. The man is a spiritual cuckold, completely occupied with getting praise and attention from progressive shitlibs. He’s a Mean Girls “conservative,” selling the very idea of posterity out so that he can get another dopamine hit from social media.

    The man is another two years in the culture war from imbibing urine at the Folsom Street Fair to teach us all a lesson about the true dignity of conservatism.

  62. @Romanian
    60 million out of a lot more people,because you have to take into account the natural churn of population. In a land of X people,how many have lived there in a period of 50-60 years? 2X?

    You are correct, but at the time I did not want to complicate my comment too much. Going by your method makes the immigrants even bigger lotto winners than I originally guessed.

  63. @Tiny Duck
    47 million Americans are immigrants. The majority of Americans are related, have a close friend, spouse, parent, or goes to church with an immigrant. Trumps shot himself in the foot this morning with his little tirade.

    If you do not fight against white supremacy you and you’re a traitor and should be deported.

    Where would such white nationalists be deported to? I have a feeling that a significant majority of the world would quickly come to see such a place as quite pleasant and worthy of moving to.

  64. @South Texas Guy

    Conservative neutrality was untenable.
     
    Right, Rosie. A vote for the libertarian, or a write-in vote, was a vote for Hillary. Full Stop. French, Goldberg, et. al., used to have some insightful things to say every once in a while. Now it's all mental illness. I don't care about them, but George Will's treachery struck me pretty hard (well, he's a columnist, so …. not very hard at all, but still). Will had great columns about union malfeasance and corruption in midwestern cities, but … oh well. At least Krauthammer had the decency to get cancer and die before he made a fool of himself, and ruined his reputation forever. French, Goldberg, Kristol and the lot never had a reputation to lose, really. Will did, and he pissed it away.

    Goldberg, Kristol and the lot never had a reputation to lose, really. Will did, and he pissed it away.

    Will lost whatever reputation he had back in 1981 with his hatchet job on Mel Bradford.

  65. Family is by accident of birth, but an Uber driver has to earn his role and pass a background check, or so I told my grandma when I declined her request for help.

  66. @eah
    French's wife and adopted child (from Ethiopia) -- what more do you need to know?

    https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/screenshot_2016-05-31_at_6-1.jpg

    He was subjected to mean Twitter mocking about his black child during the 2016 campaign. I suspect he got a frisson from it and wants to provoke such a response again.

    • Replies: @eah
    He was subjected to mean Twitter mocking about his black child during the 2016 campaign.

    Yes, I remember that -- I have no interest in mocking him over it -- but I wouldn't mind hearing him explain why he and his wife decided on an international adoption -- see, on YouTube can find many videos introducing American kids waiting for adoption -- these are nice kids, and some of the videos are almost heart-rending: they practically beg to be adopted -- the way I look at it, this is a "zero sum" activity: for every American couple that adopts a child from abroad, an American kid is not adopted.

    He's a standard issue beta cuckservative -- his views are like flotsam on the sea of political correctness.

    It's been a while since I visited your site -- but seeing your name reminded me of it -- for some reason I connect it to 'Modern Tribalist' -- I think because I was an active visitor of both around the same time.

    , @Argus Bacchus
    He got a bronze medal in the 2016 Virtue Signaling Olympics.

    In 2020, he's going for the gold.
  67. Aside from being Bill Kristol’s shabbos goy cat’s paw, it’s pretty clear where French is coming from. He’s using his Iraq service as a billy club with which to beat Americans who wanted no part of that war. I served, did you? Then shut your mouths, you lazy meth tweakers. But what was his service, exactly? He was a judge advocate, cleverly parlaying his Harvard law degree to pad his CV and secure a military pension while not exactly putting himself in any personal danger.

    Wikipedia says that judge advocates “provide legal assistance to soldiers, adjudicate claims against the Army, advise commands on targeting decisions and other aspects of operational law, and assist the command in administering military justice by preparing non-judicial punishment actions, administrative separation actions, and trying criminal cases at court-martial.”

    He was a pencil pusher. No bullets. No IEDs. And yet French’s media bios never say this, they just call him an Iraq War veteran and “winner of a Bronze Star.”

    He’s an Iraq War grifter, is what he is. And it infuriates him that so many Americans who he despises think that war was a neocon shitshow.

  68. @Massimo Heitor
    Link?

    Citizenship is an "accident of birth"? Wow! Not a sacred inheritance? Not an unbroken chain that connects people with a past and future? He rejects the preamble to the Constitution that says the US is for "ourselves and our posterity"?

    Link?

  69. eah says:
    @C. Van Carter
    He was subjected to mean Twitter mocking about his black child during the 2016 campaign. I suspect he got a frisson from it and wants to provoke such a response again.

    He was subjected to mean Twitter mocking about his black child during the 2016 campaign.

    Yes, I remember that — I have no interest in mocking him over it — but I wouldn’t mind hearing him explain why he and his wife decided on an international adoption — see, on YouTube can find many videos introducing American kids waiting for adoption — these are nice kids, and some of the videos are almost heart-rending: they practically beg to be adopted — the way I look at it, this is a “zero sum” activity: for every American couple that adopts a child from abroad, an American kid is not adopted.

    He’s a standard issue beta cuckservative — his views are like flotsam on the sea of political correctness.

    It’s been a while since I visited your site — but seeing your name reminded me of it — for some reason I connect it to ‘Modern Tribalist’ — I think because I was an active visitor of both around the same time.

  70. @Rosie

    The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?
     
    It was always going to come to this. Conservative neutrality was untenable. If you are going to refuse to support the native majority, sooner or later you're going to feel impelled to lash out and make them feel guilty for ever having expected you to do so in the first place.

    I grew up in the 80’s hearing similar sentiments. The idea that immigrants are morally superior to natives has been common in America for a long time.

  71. I rather suspect French would be singing another tune if it was his job on the line.

  72. @C. Van Carter
    He was subjected to mean Twitter mocking about his black child during the 2016 campaign. I suspect he got a frisson from it and wants to provoke such a response again.

    He got a bronze medal in the 2016 Virtue Signaling Olympics.

    In 2020, he’s going for the gold.

  73. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    That’s why I put “citizenist” in quotes: I’m referring to Steve’s coinage, which in relation to immigration, politics, and the march of time has a rapidly depleting half-life.

    We should keep equal ‘negative’ rights for all law-abiding adult US citizens, while recognizing there might be (violent) conflict between groups of citizens. The Fourteenth isn’t perfect (it has good and bad clauses), but it does incorporate the Bill of Rights throughout the nation, which is indispensable to ongoing SCOTUS jurisprudence.

    If you’re personally worried about blacks with guns, legal or illegal, I suggest you carry your own gun(s) and train.

    If you’re personally worried about blacks with guns, legal or illegal, I suggest you carry your own gun(s) and train.

    I respect the RKBA of those blacks who respect mine– which is, what, one or two percent of them?

    Neither “citizenism” nor “white nationalism” is useful as philosophies or even strategies. They are merely tactics. Each should be used at the appropriate time, with the other held in reserve.

  74. earn their place

    What a load. The average immigrant is cashing in just fine on their new place in the American workforce (or the American welfare rolls, whichever the case may be). For the legals, the ROI on their investment in studying for the 6th-grade level citizenship test is pretty high indeed.

    As for the illegals (or “undocumented immigrants” as they are now universally termed by the MSM), I guess hiring a coyote and scrounging up a forged Social Security card is what he means by “earning” their place.

  75. Simple logic: if you want to thank (or do anything else to) anyone, the choice is either to the aborigines or to the immigrants. In that category, there is no third choice.

    Don’t want to thank (or….. ) immigrants? Then you choose the Injuns. Period.

  76. “The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship . . .”

    Being an anchor baby is actual work.

  77. @Gaius Gracchus
    French is not a conservative. He hates the idea of heritage and tradition. He is just a liberal who wants to slow down the rate of destruction. Plus, if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones, rather than importing one from Africa.

    Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have. My ancestors, who first came before the English Civil War, left me nothing but my citizenship and my heritage and my genes. No short timer is so connected.

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    Realistically, we need to denaturalize millions and deport them (looking at you, Omar) and clarify birthright citizenship for only those whose parents were citizens at time of birth.

    Also, any would be citizen that took one penny of government aid should be forever barred from citizenship....

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    I’d say roll back to pre-civil war, before the mass arrival of Catholics and Jews.

  78. Wow, where to begin? And I thought Hebrews had bigger brains?

    Americans, whether native-born or naturalized immigrants, need to say thanks to countless (mostly White) Americans who lived here and created this country and put the systems in use centuries ago.

  79. @Daniel H
    OT: Ron Unz's essay. Wow.

    Thanks for the link, or any reference to which of his essays you mean or the slightest hint what it’s about and why we should check it out.

  80. Huh. David French ain’t even French.

    There.

  81. @istevefan
    So French is one of those who say people born in the US won the lotto, and thus deserve no respect.

    OK, but what about the immigrants? Did they not win the lotto? There are 4 to 6 billion that want to come to America. But even a record setting 60 million immigrants since 1965, means barely one percent made it. Is this not winning the lotto?

    Heck, we even have a special class of visa holders, courtesy of the 1990 immigration act, called visa lotto winners.

    Or what about Mexicans? They won the lotto by being born in a nation which borders the richest nation on earth which just happens to have unguarded borders. Does anyone doubt the Chinese and Africans are jealous of Mexico's easy proximity to the golden land?

    What about the woman, nine months pregnant, who illegally crosses the border and gives birth? Has she not won the lotto?

    Ditto for he H1 b visa holders. They all won the lotto. The list goes on.

    What about the woman, nine months pregnant, who illegally crosses the border and gives birth? Has she not won the lotto?

    No, in Vichy French’s scheme of things, she showed “grit and courage” in coming here, hence she is more deserving than citizens of the USA, who won the lotto. I assume he would think that the home invader who shows “grit and courage” by breaking into your home and holding you at gunpoint , is also more deserving of your worldly goods. Especially those goods you inherited. So spake Martin Luther French ; “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward lawless barbarism.”

  82. @Gaius Gracchus
    French is not a conservative. He hates the idea of heritage and tradition. He is just a liberal who wants to slow down the rate of destruction. Plus, if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones, rather than importing one from Africa.

    Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have. My ancestors, who first came before the English Civil War, left me nothing but my citizenship and my heritage and my genes. No short timer is so connected.

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    Realistically, we need to denaturalize millions and deport them (looking at you, Omar) and clarify birthright citizenship for only those whose parents were citizens at time of birth.

    Also, any would be citizen that took one penny of government aid should be forever barred from citizenship....

    > Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have.

    I don’t think that really matters, though it is perhaps a useful proxy measurement for what does.

    Have you ever known someone a long time, but you’d still feel awkward in an extended 1:1 conversation with them? Conversely, have you ever just met someone, yet find talking to them is effortless?

    It’s not length of time spent here. It’s how compatible — truly compatible — someone is with American ideals. I not talking about civic nationalism here, because I acknowledge that compatibility begins with genetics.

    The reason I admit that heritage may be a good proxy, is that people who came to the US very early on were more likely to have a genetic makeup that is compatible with American ideals.

    But note that this makeup does not prevent a people from flushing their society down the toilet, as the heritage English, Swedish, and Germans are doing.

  83. @Tiny Duck
    47 million Americans are immigrants. The majority of Americans are related, have a close friend, spouse, parent, or goes to church with an immigrant. Trumps shot himself in the foot this morning with his little tirade.

    If you do not fight against white supremacy you and you’re a traitor and should be deported.

    Argument by assertion and an ad hominem attack, two logical fallacies expounded by Tiny Duck.

  84. megabar: “But note that this makeup does not prevent a people from flushing their society down the toilet, as the heritage English, Swedish, and Germans are doing.”

    Or as the pre-1870 Americans did when they made negroes equal citizens and gave them the vote. Those pre-1870 white Christian Americans were more fanatic in their pursuit of racial equality than even today’s antifa, who haven’t begun murdering racists — yet. They embodied “American ideals”.

  85. @Jake
    "French is privileged (is subject to a private law) [1] and feels guilty. He wants you to repent for him. Standard Puritan/New England.

    Note that real repentance (from a Latin word meaning “crawl” [2]) requires abjuring all gains from the repented sin [3].

    Standard New England behavior."

    Your points are very important. But first we must correct terms. It is not 'New England behavior' because it is not about a geography. It not about some variation of Magic Dirt or Tragic Dirt. That behavior springs from a culture, the founders of New England culture: Anglo-Saxon Puritans.

    It is WASP behavior that is central to WASP culture. And its source, beyond specific Germanic origin, is a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism.

    It is not restrictive to bloodline, any more than to geography. French grew up in KY and went to college in TN and lives in TN still. I doubt that French has any ancestry - certainly none larger than a dollop - that is New England Anglo-Saxon Puritan. His ancestry will be upper hill South Scots-Irish, understood broadly as it must be, which means it will be primarily, especially in cultural terms, Scots-Irish, but will feature some flourishes of French, Continental Germanic, Irish and Highland Catholic without the Church, even Shawnee or Cherokee. The actual English ancestry that David French has likely is well under 10% East Anglian (until the Victorian era, close to ethnically pure Anglo-Saxon and the heart of the rise of Puritanism) and at least 75% from the Celtic Fringe areas of north and west England (which were the strongholds of English opposition to the 'reforms' of Henry VIII and to all things Anglo-Saxon Puritan.

    And yet here is David French acting just like an Anglo-Saxon Puritan. The matter is not about genetic determinism; it is about cultural pollution. And David French was raised to be a good American who worships Abraham Lincoln and honors the Anglo-Saxon Puritans as the nation's Fathers, especially in terms of moral philosophy.

    Cultural assimilation works.

    When David French was Bill Kristol’s Presidential Hope in 2016, there was a piece on him in the Columbia, TN paper, The Daily Herald. In it I learned French’s maternal grandfather was the principal of my elementary school when I was in the first and second grade.

    This man, who we called “Mr. Black,” very respectfully, didn’t look like his grandson. Mr. Black was then in his early 40’s, had a full head of hair, and a commanding presence. I recall interacting with him one day, age six or seven.

    By the way, nobody I talk to in Columbia, TN knows who David French is. In 2016 he lived in the Zion community of Maury County., an affluent place. My understanding is French and family have moved to a nearby county and a still more upscale neighborhood.

  86. @Gaius Gracchus
    French is not a conservative. He hates the idea of heritage and tradition. He is just a liberal who wants to slow down the rate of destruction. Plus, if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones, rather than importing one from Africa.

    Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have. My ancestors, who first came before the English Civil War, left me nothing but my citizenship and my heritage and my genes. No short timer is so connected.

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    Realistically, we need to denaturalize millions and deport them (looking at you, Omar) and clarify birthright citizenship for only those whose parents were citizens at time of birth.

    Also, any would be citizen that took one penny of government aid should be forever barred from citizenship....

    I would do things a little differently.

    Anyone whose ancestors were here when their land became part of the US would be a citizen.

    That includes all Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, Eskimos etc.

    Anyone who fought in a war, or was honorably discharged in peace time, or descendants of that person would be a citizen. That includes the CSA armed forces as well.

    Descendants of former American slaves would be citizens. We don’t know when their ancestors came, but they did help build the country.

    People who have performed some great service to the country would be citizens, as would their descendants.

    Note that under my plan, Obama would be a citizen (his mother came from an old family with both USA and CSA service) but Trump would not.

    Neither Ted Cruz not Kamala Harris would be citizens in my plan.

  87. I need this PoS [that’s “Piece of Smollet!” in current parlance] David French to tell me I’m an ingrate? Good to know!

  88. @Jake
    "French is privileged (is subject to a private law) [1] and feels guilty. He wants you to repent for him. Standard Puritan/New England.

    Note that real repentance (from a Latin word meaning “crawl” [2]) requires abjuring all gains from the repented sin [3].

    Standard New England behavior."

    Your points are very important. But first we must correct terms. It is not 'New England behavior' because it is not about a geography. It not about some variation of Magic Dirt or Tragic Dirt. That behavior springs from a culture, the founders of New England culture: Anglo-Saxon Puritans.

    It is WASP behavior that is central to WASP culture. And its source, beyond specific Germanic origin, is a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism.

    It is not restrictive to bloodline, any more than to geography. French grew up in KY and went to college in TN and lives in TN still. I doubt that French has any ancestry - certainly none larger than a dollop - that is New England Anglo-Saxon Puritan. His ancestry will be upper hill South Scots-Irish, understood broadly as it must be, which means it will be primarily, especially in cultural terms, Scots-Irish, but will feature some flourishes of French, Continental Germanic, Irish and Highland Catholic without the Church, even Shawnee or Cherokee. The actual English ancestry that David French has likely is well under 10% East Anglian (until the Victorian era, close to ethnically pure Anglo-Saxon and the heart of the rise of Puritanism) and at least 75% from the Celtic Fringe areas of north and west England (which were the strongholds of English opposition to the 'reforms' of Henry VIII and to all things Anglo-Saxon Puritan.

    And yet here is David French acting just like an Anglo-Saxon Puritan. The matter is not about genetic determinism; it is about cultural pollution. And David French was raised to be a good American who worships Abraham Lincoln and honors the Anglo-Saxon Puritans as the nation's Fathers, especially in terms of moral philosophy.

    Cultural assimilation works.

    In the original post, by “New England” was meant what Colin Woodward in _American Nations_ (http://www.colinwoodard.com/americannations.html) referes to as “Yankeedom”. It’s one of the primary sociological groups in the US, and is cohesive due to something called the “founder effect” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder_effect).
    One of my points is New England has, since its founding, wanted to reorganize the US, and has tried to do so three times: Pres VanBuren, the Civil War (and reconstruction) and the present Second Reconstruction.

    My problem is that talking about “Yankeedom” uses terminology that at best is largely unknown and at worst sounds trivial. I tend to use New England (even though upstate NY is part of Yankeedom) simply because people know what “New England” means.

    The “Founder Effect” can be confused with the “Magic Dirt” hypothesis. The difference is that “Magic Dirt (if it existed) would operate even if the previous group were completely moved away before any of the new group arrived, whereas “Founder Effect” would not.
    A strange consequence of that is that when Blacks showed up at White schools, the administration made it very clear that the administration favored Blacks in all interactions with Whites. This was enough to eliminate the Founder Effect (and supposedly the benefit to the Blacks) but wold not have affected Magic Dirt action. Therefore, the administration must have believed in Magic Dirt or, possibly, didn’t care what happened to the Blacks or Whites either.

    Counterinsurgency

  89. @Rosie

    The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?
     
    It was always going to come to this. Conservative neutrality was untenable. If you are going to refuse to support the native majority, sooner or later you're going to feel impelled to lash out and make them feel guilty for ever having expected you to do so in the first place.

    Agreed.

  90. @Brobert

    The person who had to do actual work in the real world to earn citizenship or the person who enjoys the fruits of the sacrifice of millions entirely by accident of birth?
     
    Maybe if you thought of a country as a contract between generations rather than as an asset to be sold to the highest bidder for maximum shareholder profit you would actually not feel so unworthy of belonging to it. But what do know? I'm no leading "conservative".

    It used to be that you earned the fruits of your fathers labor by being a good custodian of what they left you and bequeathing it your children. But I guess that's nothing compared to the toil of taking an international flight, learning the most spoken language on earth, and reciting an oath.

    I agree, although even a corporation is supposed to work in its shareholders’ best interest, as Steve has mentioned many times. To extend the metaphor, the Board of Directors of the USA has gone rogue and needs to be fired in toto.

  91. The idea that anyone was born by accident is risible. You were born of your parents, whether the pregnancy was planned or not. Yoi’re parents hopefully nuture you, you inherit all sorts of things from them. We are not random souls made manifest randomly.

  92. @istevefan
    And didn't those previous millions, who built this nation, do it in no small part for their posterity? And would they have put in the effort to build, or serve had they known in the future people like French would tell their posterity they had no more right to their legacy than the rest of the world?

    Let me tell you a story. My wife’s father’s father’s father’s father’s father’s father’s father’s father’s father built the oldest still-occupied house in this country. His will was posted inside the house after his death, and it stated that the house was for his posterity and was never to be sold out of the family.

    I’ll give you one guess as to the year the oldest son who had inherited it sold it to a stranger.

    Yep.

    1965.

  93. @Anonymous
    While he's at it, David French might as well abolish the 'institution' of the family - and have all infants compulsorily removed from parents at birth to be raised by 'the state' in communal facilities.

    After all, why do your own biological children 'deserve' more attention, resources, love, care etc, than that family down the road?, aren't those kids more deserving than your own pampered progeny due to the deprivation they face due to 'accident of birth'?

    After all, why do your own biological children ‘deserve’ more attention, resources, love, care etc, than that family down the road?

    You’ve stopped a step short of where this path leads us. Why does his own person deserve more resources etc. than the family down the road?

    He is arguing against property. Everything is a commons to him. This crazed “principle” applies as well to his own person as it does to any broader grouping of humans.

  94. @Gaius Gracchus
    French is not a conservative. He hates the idea of heritage and tradition. He is just a liberal who wants to slow down the rate of destruction. Plus, if he wanted to adopt, there are many children in America, even black ones, rather than importing one from Africa.

    Heritage Americans, whose ancestors lived here before the Civil War, have a connection to this country that no immigrant will ever have. My ancestors, who first came before the English Civil War, left me nothing but my citizenship and my heritage and my genes. No short timer is so connected.

    I would prefer if we did a citizenship rollback to those whose ancestors arrived prior to 1870. The rest have too tenuous connection to the country. Or just limit voting and office holding to heritage Americans.

    Realistically, we need to denaturalize millions and deport them (looking at you, Omar) and clarify birthright citizenship for only those whose parents were citizens at time of birth.

    Also, any would be citizen that took one penny of government aid should be forever barred from citizenship....

    You’re going to have a lot of noncitizen farmers then.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?