Posted on 09/16/2003 3:11:23 PM PDT by Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
I clearly said that it was the pace of change that bothered me. You can't replace a country's traditional majority in two generations and expect to have the same country anymore. I don't want that to happen. I could accept 10 generations, but not two. I think mine is the majority's viewpoint right now, and I think this is something that we will end up choosing democratically and representationally. It may be that the courts get involved, as well. Your rose colored view of the situation is increasingly isolated.
"...reduced H1B visas..." = Socialized industry.
Name it what you like, it's part of a whole class of problems that can't be solved by assuming the global economic environment is an equal playing field or that we can just let it equalize naturally without seriously impacting our own economic and industrial strength. Those things translate to military strength in the long run, by the way. Permanent manufacturing job loss, professional job loss, and exporting those jobs to foreign countries debilitates our longterm viability. The world changed. We're not going to stay on top by pretending that none of these problems exist.
Again, Victor Davis Hanson has a much more practical point of view about these things than you have demonstrated. You hope things will turn out, but you're operating on theory. You disregard the massive cultural shifts that are happening all around us because things worked out well for you. You have integrated well, and you probably help others around you integrate. And yet there are problems, deep problems, that you can't solve so you just ignore them.
I think your biggest mistake is to ignore the sheer size of the populations in question and their exponential growth. The two factors driving the pressure on our borders are our wealth (natural resources, open spaces, economy) and population growth and economic shifts. The whole world's population is shifting into the cities, and once a human being accepts urbanization, the natural next step is to want to find the best city with the best employment opportunities. Of course that would include every American city. Well, six billion people (and growing) can just stay home. We have what we need here for ourselves, thank you very much.
This Nation was founded and grew based on Western ideals and values, not on anyone's skin tone.
I don't "hope things turn out", I have studied (yet you failed to even entertain the notion that I may have) this for many years. This issue of immigrants destroying our culture is as old as the Republic itself. From Ben Franklin and the Germans, to the Irish riots, to the anti-Catholic frenzy that followed the Italian migration, to the claim that the nation would be destroyed by giving blacks all rights and priviledges of citizenship...it's an old story.
Either our system can survive (as I know it will) or we may as well die, because your suggestions (and your "expert's" suggestions) do far more to bring down the Nation, than the advent of immigrants ever has, because you seek to change the basic premise of this system, a system that has always believed that from many comes one...America.
"...reduced H1B visas..." = Socialized industry."
No, it's only one thing. The government telling industry that they can no longer seek the best employee for the job they need filled. Industry goes elsewhere where there are no such restrictions so that they can continue to be competitive.
"You hope things will turn out, but you're operating on theory."
Actually, he's operating on theory, and I am operating on historically proven facts. He can ONLY operate on theory, because everything he predicts has never happened in the US, and I operate on fact because everything he's predicted has been predicted before, but has never come to pass.
BTW, the only ethnich shift in the US is that Hispanics are now the largest minority...far from changing the ethnicity of America in general. There have always been Hispanics in the US, there are just more now than before, but they are still Americans.
Your problem, and your "expert's" problem, is that you will continue to view my children, born in this country, as Hispanics, somehow different because of your imposed ethnic valuation, and fail to see that they are simply, and truly just...Americans.
"The two factors driving the pressure on our borders are our wealth (natural resources, open spaces, economy) and population growth and economic shifts."
You never bothered reading the link I supplied you with, did you?
I think culture is a lot more important than skin tone.
it's an old story.
And it continues.
Industry goes elsewhere where there are no such restrictions so that they can continue to be competitive.
If industry had to pay Americans competitively, things might be very different. What people choose to do in their careers, and how much effort they go about preparing for that has a lot to do with economic incentive. If you hire people from a foreign country at 1/3 or 1/2 of what you pay Americans because they'll do it, is that economic incentive for your own people to compete? I don't think so. Hanson makes this point very well: the idea of competition as the policy lynchpin is flawed. He further argues that a steady stream of desperate workers is a form of industrial welfare. I agree.
You never bothered reading the link I supplied you with, did you?
Of course I did. I addressed it already. We've emphasized equality for women, freedom for them to pursue their own goals, and they have done so. Level population growth has found its way to all industrialized countries. It's actually a sign of health and prosperity. That ours is negative has to do with a lot of issues involving our economic expectations. We've had periods of economic decline here, or one type of instabilty or another since I can remember. It's hard to plan a family when layoffs come around every five to 10 years. But from what I can tell, people are coming back to the realization that they want to have kids anyway.
In any case, I don't think we're going to convince each other. I don't believe that the invisible hand works internationally, and yet you do. You don't believe that rapid ethnic change is risky, I do. It's very simple: I will be voting for politicians who agree with me, limiting immigration.
That's where your argument falls apart.
Here's the best way that I can point out the fallacy of that argument.
If a man migrates to the United Staes from France into the US, his American-born children are simply Americans. If a man migrates into the United States from Cuba, his American-born children are Hispanics or Cuban-Americans...I know that for a fact, I am fighting that fight right now.
It's not the ethnic change that's going to be the downfall of America, but rather our unwillingness to simply look at everyone that's a citizen as just an American.
Why are my kids something other than just "American", but my neighbor's kids not?
I am Caucasian, full-blooded Spaniard, that makes my ancestry as European as his.
So, if there is in fact a risk of "rapid ethnic change" in the U.S., it's going to be a result of exclusion, which is what you promote.
Just let people be Americans, unhyphenated, and they will surprise you.
"To maintain the 2000 ratio between the working-age population (people between the ages of 20 and 64) and the older population (people ages 65 and older), the United States would need roughly 95 million more working-age persons in 2025, in addition to those already expected at current levels of immigration. In other words, if the entire working-age population of Mexico were to move to the United States in 2025, there still would not be enough people to restore the old-age dependency ratio of 2000."
"But from what I can tell, people are coming back to the realization that they want to have kids anyway."
Birth and fertility rates in the U.S. are the lowest in history, it seems that you are engaging in some wishful thinking yourself.
To solve a problem, you must first identify it, not simply complain about the physical manifestations of that problem.
That's right.
Wrong every other time, and wrong now.
Maybe not, but it certainly has been a pleasure debating you on this subject, and being able to do so with decorum and intelligence.
There is a profound truth in that statement. But don't you acknowledge that with six billion people outside our gates, a large percentage of whom would want to get in if they could, that it is reasonable for us to set limits? Aren't we just arguing where those limits should be set?
I am Caucasian, full-blooded Spaniard, that makes my ancestry as European as his.
I wouldn't even mind if you were a Cuban of African descent, or if you were a Filipino. I don't mind where immigrants originate, so long as they are not Islamic, and even in the case of Islamic people, I have some willingness to accept immigrants who can forswear allegiance to Islamic nationalism. And I agree that their children are 100% American, including the Muslims. I also think once they have their naturalization, that they are Americans as well. But I still think there is a limit to how much we can adapt to the newcomers.
Why are my kids something other than just "American", but my neighbor's kids not?
I never said they weren't. There's one thing I really want you to understand, and that is once people come here, I demand that they be treated with respect as human beings, and legal immigrants' children are just as American as anyone else. But as one who wants to set reasonable limits on how much change is triggered by immigration, that makes it even more important for me to see limits enforced. No matter what happens as a result of immigration, we have to deal with that. The only thing we can control is how many people arrive here every year. It makes an excellent argument to be careful with those numbers.
If a man migrates into the United States from Cuba, his American-born children are Hispanics or Cuban-Americans...I know that for a fact, I am fighting that fight right now.
I agree with you 100%. Your kids are Americans, and if you are naturalized, so are you! Any prejudice you or they face is racist bigotry, and should be fought tooth and nail. But if you are trying to ignore the irrational anger Anglos feel about their culture being Latinized, I think you're failing to understand the reasons behind that. Anglos would love to see Latin culture emerge and accentuate ours, much the way Chinese, German, Italian, Japanese, and Korean have. But right now, the population growth among Latinos suggests that we could be all speaking Spanish within 100 years from now. And when Latin culture begins taking over whole areas of Texas, Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, and California, Anglos may feel resentment. It's part of this "rapid change" I'm discussing. It seems that a Latino who is concerned about assimilating his own people should also be concerned about the existing population, and how they feel about the process.
I think what Anglo Americans and what assimilated Latinos who agree with us want is for Latin culture to take a back seat to the core traditions of this country. For example, if I were of German descent, I wouldn't speak German every day. I wouldn't put up pictures of the Frederick the Great in my house, or put the German flag outside my door. I might put it inside my door but that's different. Of course there are exceptions, and nothing I'm saying suggests that anyone shouldn't put a Mexican flag up in solidarity with Mexico. But here in California, it's everywhere you look. It's a sort of weird nationalism, resurging out of the depths of our past dealings with our neighbors to the south.
The bottom line is that you can rarely tell who is a German American, but often you can sure tell who is a Latino American. And I'm not talking about racial traits.
So, if there is in fact a risk of "rapid ethnic change" in the U.S., it's going to be a result of exclusion, which is what you promote.
No, I don't want to deport legal immigrants or change the current racial or cultural balance. I don't consider myself a multicultural advocate, but I see a mix as inevitable in America's future. I only want to slow down the influx of racial and cultural changes so we can all adapt to it. Immigrants can help us do this by learning English and deciding that this is their new home, not the old place from which they've immigrated.
Just let people be Americans, unhyphenated, and they will surprise you.
I completely agree. However, if you insist that our future depends on immigration (and must because of current statistics), or that we should accept the transformation of our Anglo culture into a Latin culture, I would say that you yourself are advocating that we give up what is currently American and accept a forced change from Anglo-American to Latin-European/American-American culture. I also think you are giving up on our own ability to motivate family growth among existing Americans of all races and cultures.
[B]ut it certainly has been a pleasure debating you on this subject,
Likewise. You are a credit to the entire process of keeping immigration flowing. Your continual reminders to us here on FR to uphold the original intent of our founding fathers is priceless. I think your scholarship and reasoning are well above mine. My arguments tend to be intiutive rather than factual, as you've mentioned.
One thing I'd like to tell more immigrants from countries with problems these days: you should be thinking about going back to your homeland and starting a revolution. Castro and his cronies need to be languishing in Gitmo. My father believes that the American Revolution is something to be exported like Maoism or Islam. I agree 100%. To the extent that you've assimilated well here, some of us will begin pressuring you to take up arms in your homeland and overthrow the oppressors of the human spirt.
But enough on that. Welcome to America. You are an American better than most. And your kids will hopefully grow up to keep the fire burning, even if mine forget the blood their great grandfather shed for their freedom. Yours will remember.
We have set limits, and until you acknowledge that fundamental truth, we will not get anywhere in this discussion.
Exactly. It all goes back to the Italian socialist Antonio Gramsci. He called on his fellow leftists to cease attempting to violently overthrow governments and to instead engage in "a long march through the cultural institutions" to change nations from the inside out. The greatest problem, from the left's perspective, is culture. A healthy culture gives people a moral frame of reference, a way of life, and even a social safety net which is apart from the control of government bureaucracy.
The leftists in America have had a particularly difficult time, since America's traditional culture is one of rugged individualism, family values, free markets, and limited government....all of which stand in the way of a Swedish-style cradle-to-grave welfare state.
The solution which the lefties have come up with is mass immigration and multiculturalism. It is a way to dilute and eventually destroy the unique set of cultural values adhered to by middle america which is a stumbling block on the road to socialist utopia. Essentially, they will "relativize" western culture, subject it to scorn and ridicule, and eventually do away with it altogether.
One of the flies in the ointment is the culture and ideology of the new immigrants. The libs more or less expect the immigrants to come here, vote democratic, and hook into the welfare state.
But the immigrants may have other ideas. The muslims may want to lock women away and stone homosexuals. The Hispanics may want a violent separatist movement in the Southwest.
The libs frankly didn't think about any of these problems because they were so blinded by their hatred of western civilization. Ironically, the nationalism of Hispanics in the SW and the terrorism of the muslims may be the midwife of a rebirth of nationalistic radicalism in middle america.
Ahem. But to understand "Western ideals and values", look at exactly where they _came from_, and look at the "skin tone" of _whom_ they came from. Largely white, European, Protestant. Mostly English with a smattering of French.
Like it or not, "ideals and values" -- at least the ones that were responsible for shaping the "West" and creating America -- were almost entirely _white_ ideals and values.
The truth is that culture is in large part a product of race. You may or may not _like_ it (I used to be one of those "Kumbaya" types myself), but look at the world and try to surmise otherwise.
By the way, I'm lately of the sentiment that it's growing too late to reverse the "cultural course" that America has taken. For fear of censorship and ostracization, no one seems willing to speak the truths of what is currently transpiring, letalone take decisive actions to reverse that course. We're going where we're going, for better or worse. We may be getting there must sooner than many think...
Unfortunately, I believe it's towards the worse.
Cheers!
- John
It's not how others look at you, it's how you look at yourself. Some blacks have risen above the labels others might have wanted to inflict on them --- Alan Keyes, Clarence Thomas for example. Others like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson not only accepted the labels, they thrive on having the labels. You can only be hyphenated if you allow yourself to be. The problem in California and many other places is that many of these people don't view themselves as American, they see themselves as some Mexican community in the USA --- an attitude being promoted by their president V. Fox and their would-be governor Bustamante. They don't want to be American --- much of this view can be seen in their music and the example of them spitting on and throwing beer bottles at Americans in soccer games. They don't like Americans.
Post Great Society immigration isn't the same as it immigration used to be ---- we really are attracting many of the moochers, people who couldn't make it in their own country and can't make it on their own here.
It's like you've said --- much of our views can be determined by where we live and what we see first hand. I also do see immigrants who are good people ----- even some illegals are good hard-working people and there are some who aren't accessing any government services. Their numbers are getting lost in the large numbers who are coming here for the handouts and to elect Marxists like Bustamante. They wouldn't even vote for a hispanic Reagan type if there were such a thing.
Even in a state like Texas which is more conservative, in many of the border counties, this number has become 50% welfare rates. They vote in democrats of course who promise to get them more handouts. I can see how they would back someone like Bustamante who plans to have the government take control of the utilities because that's the same system they have back home. Even the price of tortillas is set by the Mexican government. It's quite clear they didn't come here out of any love of the US Constitution when they support this kind of thing.
‘Recuperará México territorios perdidos’
Of course Cruz Bustamante is mentioned --- he's going to be the first Mexican governor of that country.
y llamó a la comunidad hispana a apoyar al vicegobernador de California, Cruz Bustamante, como primer gobernador mexicano en ese país.
Humberto Navarro, aseguró ayer que ‘‘vamos a recuperar lo que México perdió en 1848 en el 2048 gracias al crecimiento de la población de mexicanos en Estados Unidos’’
This isn't one of the MEChA web sites --- it's one of the main newspapers of Mexico. Same thing Vicente Fox pretty much has said --- only he said they want "the whole Enchilada" which I don't think would only be the Aztlan part.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.