Tag: immigration

Trump administration to bypass courts

Now that multiple US courts have revealed themselves to be less interested in the law than testing their powers against the executive branch, the God-Emperor is simply routing around them:

ON TUESDAY, THE Department of Homeland Security released a pair of memos laying out how the agency intends to implement President Donald Trump’s executive orders on domestic immigration enforcement. In addition to calling for a massive increase in the number of immigration agents and the deputizing of local and state law enforcement across the country — described in the documents as a “force multiplier”— the memos dramatically expand the range of people who can be deported without seeing a judge.

“I see now what the plan is,” Greg Siskind, a Tennessee-based immigration attorney and member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association board of governors, told The Intercept. “Their plan is basically to have everybody thrown out of the country without ever going to court.” Additional immigration attorneys and legal experts who spoke to The Intercept shared Siskind’s concerns, describing various elements of the DHS directives and the executive orders they reflect as “horrifying,” “stunning,” and “inhumane.”

“This is the broadest, most widespread change I have seen in doing this work for more than two decades,” Lee Gelernt, a veteran immigration attorney and deputy director of the ACLU’s national Immigrants’ Rights Project, told The Intercept. “After 9/11 we saw some extreme policies, but they were largely confined to particular areas around the relationship between immigration and national security. Here what we’re seeing are those types of policies but also much broader policies just dealing with immigration generally.”

“I expected bad based on Donald Trump’s campaign rhetoric,” added David Leopold, a Cleveland-based immigration attorney and past president of AILA. “Then when I read the executive order, I expected really bad … but I’m absolutely shocked at the mean-spiritedness of this.”

We’ll see how it works out in practice, but if the plan has these anti-American lawyers this upset, it looks to be a pretty good start. The pre-1965 demographic balance isn’t going to be restored overnight, and 80 million foreign residents aren’t going to be repatriated by the end of this year, but the journey of a thousand leagues begins with a single step.

Let the Soros-funded lawyers file their complaints with the amenable courts after Pedro and Wang-Meng are returned home to Guatemala and Vietnam. We’ll see how long their altruism lasts when there are real costs of time, money, and opportunity associated with it. It appears that portrait of Andrew Jackson hung in the White House after the inauguration was exactly what we suspected; it was provided as fair warning.

Of course, this plan isn’t mean-spirited at all. This is kindness. Mean-spirited is what is going to come if these necessary efforts to make the USA American again are somehow stymied. And it will only get worse, considerably worse, from there. Because the God-Emperor is not going to let America or Western civilization die under the feet of tens of millions of unnecessary and unwanted invaders.

It’s time to go home.

“America is not only for the whites, but it is for all. Who is the American? The American is you, me and that. When we go to America we will become Americans and there is no a race or nationalism called America and the Americans are those Africans, Indians, Chinese, and Europeans and whoever goes to America will become American…American is for all of us and the whole world had made and created America. All the people all over the world had made America and it shall accordingly be for all of us. I will never feel ashamed when I claim for my right in America and it will not be strange when I raise my voice in America.”
– Col. Moammar Gadhafi, 12 January 2005

Obviously Moammar was an American born in Libya, more American than any descendant of the Pilgrims who doesn’t believe that America is a Judeo-Christian Proposition Melting Pot of Immigrants.

Who we are not

Ross Douthat offers an older historical fiction in exchange for a newer, more obviously false one:

The problem with this rhetorical line is that it implicitly undercuts itself. If close to half of America voted for Republicans in the Obama years and support Trump today, then clearly something besides the pieties of cosmopolitan liberalism is very much a part of who we are.

This self-undermining flaw makes the trope a useful way to grasp the dilemmas facing Trump’s opponents. In seeking to reject Trump’s chauvinist vision, they end up excluding too much of what a unifying counternarrative would require.

The exclusion happens by omission, in the course of telling a story about America that’s powerful but incomplete. In this narrative, which has surged to the fore in response to Trump’s refugee and visa policies, we are a propositional nation bound together by ideas rather than any specific cultural traditions — a nation of immigrants drawn to Ellis Island, a nation of minorities claiming rights too long denied, a universal nation destined to welcome foreigners and defend liberty abroad.

This is obvious nonsense, as Douthat observes.

Given this story’s premises, saying that’s not who we are is a way of saying that all more particularist understandings of Americanism, all non-universalist forms of patriotic memory, need to be transcended. Thus our national religion isn’t anything specific, but we know it’s not-Protestant and not-Judeo-Christian. Our national culture is not-Anglo-Saxon, not-European; the prototypical American is not-white, not-male, not-heterosexual. We don’t know what the American future is, but we know it’s not-the-past.

But the real American past was particularist as well as universalist. Our founders built a new order atop specifically European intellectual traditions. Our immigrants joined a settler culture, Anglo-Saxon and Protestant, that demanded assimilation to its norms. Our crisis of the house divided was a Christian civil war. Our great national drama was a westward expansion that conquered a native population rather than coexisting with it.

Then for a variety of reasons — a necessary reckoning with white supremacism, a new and diverse wave of immigration, the pull of a more globalist ethos, the waning of institutional religion — that mid-century story stopped making as much sense. In its place emerged a left-wing narrative that stands in judgment on the racist-misogynist-robber baron past, and a mainstream liberal narrative that has room for Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Alexander Hamilton (as opposed to the slightly more Trumpish genuine article) and Emma Lazarus, but feels unsure about the rest.

Instead of presenting the truthful alternative, Douthat pushes the civic nationalist myth, complete with the 20th century “Judeo-Christian” lie, not once, not twice, but THREE times!

But meanwhile for a great many Americans the older narrative still feels like the real history. They still see themselves more as settlers than as immigrants, identifying with the Pilgrims and the Founders, with Lewis and Clark and Davy Crockett and Laura Ingalls Wilder. They still embrace the Iliadic mythos that grew up around the Civil War, prefer the melting pot to multiculturalism, assume a Judeo-Christian civil religion rather the “spiritual but not religious” version.

Trump’s ascent is, in part, an attempt to restore their story to pre-eminence. It’s a restoration attempt that can’t succeed, because the country has changed too much, and because that national narrative required correction. The myth of the “Lost Cause” had to die, the reality of racial wrongs required more acknowledgment, the Judeo-Christian center had to make room for a larger plurality of faiths.

But so far we haven’t found a way to correct the story while honoring its full sweep — including all the white-male-Protestant-European protagonists to whom, for all their sins, we owe so much of our inheritance.

Notice that Douthat retreats to an older false narrative, the 20th century civic nationalist narrative, in preference to the 21st century multicultural narrative. But both narratives are entirely and absolutely false. Both narratives are fiction.

America is not, and never was, any more “Judeo-Christian” than Israel is “Hindu-Judaic” or Japan is “Islamo-Shinto”. The melting pot is rhetoric that is every bit as false, and every bit as weaponized for the benefit of immigrants to the detriment of the native population, as the multiculturalist rhetoric.

The bottom line

The God-Emperor lays it down:

Here’s the bottom line. We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening. We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this. Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible. You look at what’s happening in Brussels. You look at what’s happening all over the world. Take a look at Nice. Take a look at Paris. We’ve allowed thousands and thousands of people into our country and there was no way to vet those people. There was no documentation. There was no nothing. So we’re going to keep our country safe.

And we all have heart, by the way. And what I want to do is build safe zones in Syria and other places so they can stay there and live safely until their cities and their country, that mess that I was left by Obama and everybody else — folks, we were left a mess like you wouldn’t believe, but we’re going to build safe zones.

It’s rather amusing to see the Swedes affecting to pretend not to know what Trump is talking about. First, it’s no business of theirs. Second, everyone understands that Trump isn’t only talking about large-scale terror attacks. He’s talking about everything from the fear that pervades the invaded societies of the West to the rapes and sexual assaults that are rife across Germany, Sweden, and the UK, that are taking place in every country that was foolish enough to allow alien migrants entry.

Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstrom appeared to respond to Trump on Saturday by posting on Twitter an excerpt of a speech in which she said democracy and diplomacy “require us to respect science, facts and the media.”

First, the idiot woman’s statement makes no sense. There is absolutely no connection between democracy and facts; the fact is that Sweden’s failed democracy is anti-democratic.Second, respect the media? Why on Earth would anyone do that? The media narrative is failing, and failing badly. Only 13 percent trust the very fake news of CNN. Fox News, which is hardly a bastion of insight or accuracy, is the most trusted channel on television, mostly because it doesn’t attack the God-Emperor at every possible opportunity. What sort of madman would prefer the insane governance of a Merkel or a Blair to the obvious sanity of Trump, however cruel the Muslims of Londonistan might find him to be?

Ultimately, to keep the country safe, mass repatriations and a 30 to 50-year immigration pause is necessary. The God-Emperor may be too civic nationalist to see that now, but if keeping the country safe is his objective, eventually he will figure it out. Demographics is destiny.

Equality is not “the rights of Englishmen”

An article on Alexander Hamilton’s opinion on immigration is revealing for what it shows about Jefferson and the false foundation he provides the civic nationalists for their pseudo-nationalism:

Although Alexander Hamilton was himself an immigrant, he was adamantly opposed to the open immigration policies that President Thomas Jefferson proposed in his first annual message to Congress in 1801. Although the incoming president had once opposed unlimited immigration, Jefferson now saw it as a way to secure the future political dominance of his own party over Hamilton’s Federalists.

Hamilton, like most Federalists, was concerned about French influence on American politics. Although the French Revolution had descended into terror and led to the rise of Napoleon, Jefferson and his Democratic-Republican Party persisted in their attachment to the French. Hamilton feared that Jefferson’s proposal for unlimited immigration would lead to the triumph of the radical principles of the French Revolution over those of the more moderate American Revolution.

Writing as “Lucius Crassus,” Hamilton argued: “The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias, and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education, and family.”

Invoking Jefferson’s own “Notes on Virginia,” Hamilton observed that “foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity, and to its particular customs and manners.” He argued that “it is unlikely that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism.”

He continued: “The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”

Hamilton concluded: “To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens, the moment they put foot in our country, as recommended in [Jefferson’s] message, would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty.”

As I have repeatedly noted, the openness of certain of the Founding Fathers to non-English immigration was not based on principle, and equality was very far from a core principle of the American Revolution, much less the “sacred” and primary principle that the civic nationalists falsely claim it to be.

Equality was not a core principle of the American Revolution at all, nor does the false and ahistorical conservative distinction between “equality of opportunity” and “equality of result” have anything to do with the famous rhetorical phrase that Jefferson inserted in the Declaration of Independence. The equality to which Jefferson refers is actually the “liberté, égalité, fraternité” of the French Revolution for which he subsequently showed such enthusiasm. Equality is a French concept, not an American one, and is not among the Rights of Englishmen.

Moreover, the Congress rejected Jefferson’s unprincipled and tactical call for open immigration, as it restricted naturalization to “free white men” and ” further directed the clerk of the court to record the entry of all aliens into the United States” in the Naturalization Law of 1802.

Genetic politics

It is futile to deny the impact of identity politics, given that both science and history are pointing towards the observable influence that genetics and demographics have at the macrosocietal level:

Here we identify very recent fine-scale population structure in North America from a network of over 500 million genetic (identity-by-descent, IBD) connections among 770,000 genotyped individuals of US origin. We detect densely connected clusters within the network and annotate these clusters using a database of over 20 million genealogical records. Recent population patterns captured by IBD clustering include immigrants such as Scandinavians and French Canadians; groups with continental admixture such as Puerto Ricans; settlers such as the Amish and Appalachians who experienced geographic or cultural isolation; and broad historical trends, including reduced north-south gene flow. Our results yield a detailed historical portrait of North America after European settlement and support substantial genetic heterogeneity in the United States beyond that uncovered by previous studies.

In short, their giant sample and rich genealogical data allowed them to detect large patterns of shared ancestry in living Americans. And, as expected the American nations clearly emerge from the genetic data.

How did this pattern emerge? In short, this is ultimately the result of the four British folkways of Albion’s Seed. Here the genetic data show that they remain alive and well. Previously, in my post Genes, Climate, and Even More Maps of the American Nations, we saw that the founding British colonists came from distinct parts of the British Isles and settled in different parts of North America. The founding British stock are themselves visible in the genetic data, as we saw from fine-scale analysis of Britain

So what then do the clusters of Han et al mean? While the original colonial ancestry of the country has been overrun by subsequent migrants, the founding stock remain as a genetic undercurrent – a common genetic thread – within each American nation. This is especially true in the nations of the American South, where the colonial settlers received less subsequent migration and the original stock remains strong.

Neither conservatism nor progressivism can account for the patterns and trends being observed. This is why it is vital for the Alt-Right to resolutely resist the temptation to lock itself into an ideology that will ultimately doom it to the same sort of ludicrous denial that we so often see from communists, socialists, feminists, free traders, multiculturalists, Churchians, conservatives, neo-Nazis, and others whose political identity requires them to rely upon anti-scientific, anti-historical denial.

At least the immigrants are integrating

I don’t think this sort of integration is quite what the “save the poor refugees” idiots had in mind when they decided to permit Islamic immigration into Christendom:

For the first time in its history, Denmark has charged a woman with terrorism. The morbid debut involves a 16-year-old Danish girl, who converted to Islam and intended to blow up a historic Jewish school.

The girl was arrested in January 2016 for possessing explosives. Later it emerged that the explosive TATP (which is also known as acetone peroxide and was used in the November 2015 Paris attacks) was meant to be used in an attack against two schools in Denmark, Danish Radio reported. Due to the delicate nature of the case and the amount of sensitive information, much of the data in the so-called “Kundby case” (named after the village where the girl was arrested) has been withheld from the public. The court hearings are being held behind “double-locked” doors.

Last Friday, the Copenhagen Public Prosecutor’s Office announced that the 16-year-old girl has been charged with an attempted terror attack for her plans to bomb the private Jewish school Carolineskolen in Copenhagen together with her own school, Sydskolen in Fårevejle. The girl was reportedly far along with her preparations to make a bomb. She was also planning a test explosion, which constituted solid grounds for terrorism charges. The trial will begin in April, and the 16-year-old is facing a minimum four-year sentence….

In the same announcement issued by the Prosecutor’s Office, a 25-year-old man who had previously been arrested in connection with the case was released without any charges filed against him, despite having reportedly fought alongside extremists in Syria and being previously described as a “friend” of the girl.

This really shouldn’t surprise anyone who is familiar of the history of Islamic expansion. Either the country is eventually Islamicized, or the Muslims are driven out. As democracies, the countries of the West really should hold referendums presenting those two choices to the voters, because those are the only two options available.

Every. Single. Time.

In case you don’t think immigrants are ruthlessly self-serving and totally indifferent to the fate of the nation they pretend to be joining, even for multiple generations, just listen to this third-generation immigrant talk about the so-called benefits of immigration.

Neoconservative Bill Kristol says that white working class Americans should be replaced by immigrants because they have become “lazy,” “decadent” and “spoiled”.

“Look, to be totally honest, if things are so bad as you say with the white working class, don’t you want to get new Americans in?” asked Kristol. “You can make a case that America has been great because every — I think John Adams said this — basically if you are in free society, a capitalist society, after two or three generations of hard work everyone becomes kind of decadent, lazy, spoil. Then, luckily, you have these waves of people coming in from Italy, Ireland, Russia, and now Mexico, who really want to work hard and really want to succeed and really want their kids to live better lives than them and aren’t sort of clipping coupons or hoping that they can hang on and meanwhile grew up as spoiled kids and so forth. In that respect, I don’t know how this moment is that different from the early 20th century.”

No, Bill. They’re not “new Americans”. They are not Americans at all. And neither are you.

There is that vaunted “melting pot” assimilation of which we have heard so much about. Americans should deport Bill Kristol, then dig up the bodies of his father and his grandfather and deport them too.

Ever wonder why (((certain neocons))) are always idiotically banging on about going to war with Russia? Read The Melting Pot and you’ll know why. They’re filled with an irrational historical hatred and seeking retroactive revenge upon Tsar Amalek. Apparently even the 70 years of communist slaughter, suffering, and deprivation to which the Russian people were subject isn’t enough for them. Forget America. Forget Israel. Forget all the challenges that the modern world presently poses to Western civilization. What is really important is that Russia and Germany be destroyed!

They’re observably insane by any civilized standard. Thank God both the God-Emperor and his Strategikon clearly understand this and refuse to listen to them.

Kristol was apparently nervous about his comments being recorded despite making them at a public event. “I hope this thing isn’t being videotaped or ever shown anywhere. Whatever tiny, pathetic future I have is going to totally collapse,” said the founder of the Weekly Standard.

Fortunately, only 731,909 so-called conservatives were dumb enough to follow this disgusting creature’s lead and vote for Evan McMullin. Cellar-Kennedy. Kristol-McMullin. It’s almost as if there is a noticeable pattern there….

Immigration and transformation

I was reading Oman’s history of the Byzantine empire at the gym today, and this passage struck me as rather timely, in light of my reference to Lombardia during a Darkstream earlier this week:

The empire held undisputed possession of Italy for no more than fifteen years after the expulsion of the Ostrogoths in a.d. 553. Then a new enemy came in from the north, following the same path that had already served for the Visigoths of Alaric and the Ostrogoths of Theodoric. The new-comers were the race of the Lombards, who had hitherto dwelt in Hungary, on the Middle Danube, and had more frequently been found as friends than as foes of the Romans.

But their warlike and ambitious King Alboin, having subdued all his nearer neighbours, began to covet the fertile plains of Italy, where he saw the emperors keeping a very inadequate garrison, now that the Ostrogoths were finally driven away. In a.d. 568 Alboin and his hordes crossed the Alps, bringing with them wife and child, and flocks and herds, while their old land on the Danube was abandoned to the Avars. The Lombards took possession of the flat country in the north of Italy, as far as the line of the Po, with very little difficulty. The region, we are told, was almost uninhabited owing to the combined effects of the great plague and the Ostrogothic war.

In this once fertile and populous, but now deserted, lowland, the Lombards settled down in great numbers. There they have left their name as the permanent denomination of the plain of Lombardy. Only one city, the strong fortress of Pavia, held out against them for long; when it fell in 571, after a gallant defence of three years, Alboin made it his capital, instead of choosing one of the larger and more famous towns of Milan and Verona, the older centres of life in the land he had conquered.

Americans are not going to make Americans 3.0 of Mexicans and the other post-1965 immigrants any more than the Germans, Scandinavians, Irish, Italians, and Jews became Americans 2.0, or the English settlers became American Indians, aka Americans 1.0. In fact, given the adulteration of America 2.0, it would be as reasonable to refer to the much-anticipated Not-White Post-America as New Mexico II.

I was a little surprised by Sarah Hoyt’s recent take on the legitimacy of recent immigration into the United States, given our differences on what is, and is not, American, but provides an effective rhetorical point to demonstrate that post-1965 immigration is, and has been, wrong.

Immigration is like a marriage, because in essence it is a marriage.  It is an individual throwing in his/her fate with a people.  It is a “and marry our fortunes together” it is a “Wherever thou goest I shall go.”  Your throwing your genetic inheritance in with those people.  You’re submerging yourself in a sea of them.

There is, at least in Portugal a tendency for emigrants to move to a new country and try to keep their kids from intermarrying/staying there.  One of the things we often heard from visiting relatives from other countries was “We have to return before he/she/they start dating.”  Nine times out of ten, it didn’t work.  In fact, I knew only one case in which it worked, which was a neighbor whose daughter seems to have been kept more or less under house arrest in South Africa, so that when they returned and she attended college with me, she was much older but completely drawers at socializing or dating.  She did eventually marry a Portuguese man and she lives in the village, but let me tell you, few parents would go to the extent of abusing their kids just to make sure they “return” to their place of origin.

So, immigration means melding your destiny and that of the people you join.

Now, as above, some immigrants don’t want that/aren’t aware of that.  These are mostly economic immigrants, and they’re often buoyed by the fond idea that they’ll return to their place of origin, with the kids, as soon as the kids hit puberty.  This is more likely/perhaps only likely for countries you can drive/walk to.  There’s something about crossing the ocean that makes that more difficult and Irish and Italians eventually stopped keeping track of whether their kids married in the community.

At any rate, some Mexican immigrants might intend to go back, and some might even do it.  And some of the kids of those might come back too after being dragged back to a “home” that was never theirs.  Keep that mind.

On the other hand many people getting married don’t intend to have it be forever.

Why do I keep bringing marriage up?  Because marriage is the best metaphor for immigration, and because, unlike in immigration, no one doubts that BOTH PARTS TO THE MARRIAGE have a say in it.  Or that when one part doesn’t have a say in it, it is wrong.

The American people were lied to by the architects of the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act. They never consented to the alteration of the demographic balance, and, in fact, they were told the precise opposite. Which means that the marriage was invalid from the start, and therefore, must be annulled.

Immigration is anti-America

Ann Coulter points out the absurdity of the recent Federal court rulings on the God-Emperor’s travel ban:

To review:

— When the president’s immigration policy is to promote international communism: The president wins.

— When the president’s immigration policy is to transform America into a different country: The president wins.

— But when the president’s immigration policy is to protect Americans: Some piss-ant judge announces that his authority exceeds that of the president.

This is exactly what I warned you about in Adios, America: The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole. Nothing Trump does will be met with such massive resistance as his immigration policies.

The left used to attack America by spying for Stalin, aiding our enemies, murdering cops and blowing up buildings. But, then liberals realized, it’s so much more effective to just do away with America altogether!

Teddy Kennedy gave them their chance with the 1965 immigration act. Since then, we’ve been taking in more than a million immigrants a year, 90 percent from comically primitive cultures. They like the welfare, but have very little interest in adopting the rest of our culture.

In many parts of the country, you’re already not living in America. Just a few more years, and the transformation will be complete. There will be a North American landmass known as “the United States,” but it won’t be our country.

It seems to me that the God-Emperor should simply declare the judge an enemy of America and unleash the drones. After all, Judge Robart is certainly a bigger threat to both the United States and Americans than any of the U.S. citizens that Obama ordered killed in drone strikes.

Most Europeans want Muslim ban

Not that you would know it from the opposition media coverage:

A majority of Europeans want a ban on immigration from Muslim-majority countries, a poll has revealed. An average of 55 per cent of people across the 10 European countries surveyed wanted to stop all future immigration from mainly Muslim countries.

The Chatham House study, conducted before US President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning immigration to the US from seven predominantly Muslim countries, found majorities in all but two of the ten states opposed immigration from mainly Muslim countries.

One can almost smell the Reconquista in the air….