DANIEL GREENFIELD: WEEKLY UPDATE PART 2
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/
ROMNEY, GINGRICH, PERRY AND IMMIGRATION
One reason I never spent much time taking Perry to task on immigration is that none of the candidates were very good on it. And that’s true of the recent list of Republican presidents as well. Perry was worse than most but unfortunately none of them are much good on it.
Gingrich’s panel proposal seems to be loosely adapted from something similar in Switzerland. Bringing it up is a testament to his broad knowledge, but proposing it in the United States is just stupid. In Switzerland those panels are made up of natives, in the United States they would be made up of other immigrants from the same part of the world.
Gingrich, like so many Republicans is trying to develop a rationale for distinguishing between different types of illegal immigrants, which isn’t entirely unreasonable, but it’s also a dead end. And unwise.
Last Shabbat I listened to Linda Lingle, the former Republican governor of Hawaii, now running for Senate, talk about the issues and like Gingrich, she showed that she had thought about the issues and came up with some interesting proposals, which were hobbled by the same inability to understand the scope of the problem. (I shudder at the prescription of stamping a green card for every university engineering grad. I can’t think of a better formula for more car bombs in Times Square.)
It’s easy to propose these kinds of solutions when you ignore the scope of the problem and what its long term implications are. There’s a certain similar thought pattern in the War on Terror and immigration. The speaker begins from the position of, “We can’t deport them all” or “We can’t fight them all” and then tries to arrive at a way of distinguishing moderates from extremists or good risks from bad risks. That’s fine as far as it goes, but it misses the bigger picture.
At the Restoration Weekend, I listened to a panel debate featuring Robert Spencer who discussed the dangers of shifting the meaning in order to win over the moderates. I would highlight the danger that when the meaning is shifted then we forget what the problem is.
What is the problem with illegal immigration? Disrespect for the law is one factor, but the bottom line is that illegal immigration is a demographic threat that places undue stress on southwestern states and on the national economy. That’s the fundamental thing to keep in mind.
Guest workers stay on and become citizens. Which isn’t a problem if we want the United States to become Mexico. Mexico isn’t a bad place despite all its problems. There are much worse places in the world. But it also has a broken political culture, massive drug and gang violence and a whole bunch of other things that will change this country significantly. And large scale immigration will do that beyond our ability to control it. Importing Muslim immigrants in sufficient number means importing everything wrong with the Muslim world along with some ethnic foods. The same goes for illegal immigration from Mexico. The bottom line is do we want to live in Mexico? Do we want to live in Cairo? Because if things keep going the way they are, we will. Just ask a European.
We’re a nation built on immigrants, but on a balance of immigrants set around a Western European core. Change that core and you fundamentally change the nation. On a similar note, Lawrence Auster’s response to the trouble with Muslim democracy.
The modern West cannot face this truth about Islam, because it would mean that not all cultures, peoples, and religions are equally capable of self-government. And that discovery would mean in turn (a) that not all peoples and cultures are equal, period, and (b) that a universal liberal order embracing all mankind is not possible.
And a corollary to that is that even when Third world governments fail, we must go on believing that they can succeed to be able to go on believing in that universal order.
AND NOW THE ROUNDUP
American Digest has narrowed down the primary candidates to just one.
OccupyMiami is OccupyIslam, via Boker Tov Boulder. No wonder it has this whole, “Jews to the Ovens” clause.
Christian refugee? Forget about it! Religion of Peaceful Beheadings? Uncle Sam Wants You.
US policy regarding the refugee resettlement program would shock most Americans if they only knew. The UN picks who becomes US refugees. Christians are being refused refugee status and face persecution and many times certain death for their religious beliefs under the sharia, while whole Muslim communities are entering the US by the tens of thousands per month despite the fact that they face no religious persecution.
Nothing to be thankful for in the Eurozone
A reminder that there are alternatives to the PA. Muslim tribal elders and leaders have governed their own clans and areas well enough and adding a layer of terrorist politicians on top paid for by the US hasn’t made things any better. Restoring tribal authority makes more sense than anything else so far.
Finally a rather dark piece of satire from Latma, which like most of their Israeli stuff is well done. It helps to have some familiarity with the Israeli reality to get this one.
Enjoy the Thanksgiving weekend.
Comments are closed.
