The Left often drones on about made-up problems such as “systemic racism” and “white-privilege,” which are wholly unsupported by any data anywhere; if they want to live in a place where whites are a minority — guess what? There are well over 100 countries in which any white person can become an instant minority! If you do not believe in a well-armed society, if you are in favor of forcing others to pay for your way of life, if you are in favor of open borders, if you no longer want to live with those pesky white folk, and if you’re not all that into rugged individualism and self-reliance — well, I think that’s wonderful, and that you need to get out.
When Jewish Iraq-war proponent, Bill Kristol, called the term “America First” both vulgar and depressing, that was quite revealing.520 If not America first, then what? Neoconservatives, Liberals, and virulent Left-wing organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League, who believe the term America First to be troublesome, worrying, and antisemitic, betray everything.521 Liberals, neocons, and a myriad of influential organizations, have played their hand. They have let us know in no uncertain terms precisely how they feel: putting America and her citizens first does not coincide with their beliefs and agendas. When the ADL came out to condemn the use of America First and its message, they let everybody know that they never cared about the best interest of the American people. They showed where their true allegiance lies. And it was resoundingly not with us. If the term America First upsets you, in any way, no matter how slightly, then I suggest you take your subversive views elsewhere.
Of course, I defend the rights of people to hold a negative view of America First. You want Mexico first? Fine. Head south, hombre! Israel first? No problem: shalom! Anyone can hold the view that America should not be put first — anywhere but in America. There are almost 200 other nations to choose from. Take your pick.
The problem is that men like myself don’t have anywhere else to go. People like us do not believe in a large, overreaching government. We do not believe that our great nation is up for grabs and free for the taking. We do not plan to hand in our weapons anytime soon. Nor do we think anybody has any right to our property or freedom. Around 240 years ago or so, a small group of men came to a similar conclusion, and for that belief they declared war on the largest Empire the world had ever seen. Liberals need to remember where the came from — or rather, the swamp they slithered from: for they are the loyalists to the state. They are the “persons inimical to the liberties of America.” They are the diametric opposition to freedom. And when their King was defeated, the Revolutionaries sent many of the loyalists packing. They didn’t have to go home to England, but they couldn’t stay here.
For us true Americans, us revolutionaries, transforming the foundation of America into something else is far more than succumbing to the false god of Liberal progress. It is an act of treason.
Immigrant Rights
According to Liberals, America’s most central value is to admit millions and millions of foreigners who will never share any of our values. And so they waste no time in talking about the “fundamental right” of these foreigners to immigrate.
This is nothing new. Liberals have the bad habit of confusing what they merely desire with inalienable rights. The Left struggles in vain to discern the difference between what a man wants to happen, and what is owed to him. Liberals consider food, housing, clothing, education through college, healthcare, abortions, birth control, and immigration, all “basic human rights.” This all sounds very nice, and sometimes I wish that I too lived in the delusional fairytale that Liberals occupy. The problem with the Liberal fantasy, of course, is that no one really has a right to anyone else’s property. But the Liberals, through lies, litigation, and legislation, have been able to stomp on our true rights in favor of their delusional ones for quite some time. But even if immigration caused zero burdens on the host inhabitants of a nation, zero financial cost, zero crime increase, and zero unwanted effects, even then it still would not become an automatic right.
A nation can be viewed as an extension of the people’s property, perhaps as an inheritance from our ancestors. And it is the right of our people to have a homeland, to keep our culture, to maintain our heritage, to protect our nation and descendants, and to prevent these things from being altered by foreign interlopers. If these people want to come here, they have to truly enrich us in some way.
But to say it again, per the Center for Immigration Studies, over 50 percent of immigrant households are using welfare. Even among immigrants that have been here for twenty or more years, the rate is still nearly 50 percent.522 How could it possibly be argued that these migrants have the fundamental right, not only to our lands, but to our hard earned tax dollars? What benefits are there from endless Mexican, South American, African and the Middle Eastern migrants? How many more halal carts does New York City actually need? Any potential good that may come from immigration needs to outweigh the costs in terms of crime, violence, and welfare use. But the positive benefits we receive are not even remotely close to matching the negatives.
Right after the Liberal banality that “we are a nation of immigrants” comes the more recent platitude that “no human being is illegal.” According to that principle, the world’s seven billion human beings are all just Americans waiting to arrive. So as long as any or all of those seven billion manage to wash up on our shores, they become legal. This is evident, since no human being is illegal. But the insanity of this proposition does not even require indication.
If Liberals truly believe that “no human is illegal,” I invite them to test that theory. Stop paying your property taxes, fail to renew your driver’s license, and cut off your car insurance — then get back to me on how that works out.
This country is not for everybody. It never was. In fact, prior to The New Deal, a considerable number of immigrants returned to their home country.523 Yet the destructive Left is absolutely hell-bent on giving away everything that our ancestors have struggled for. The American Revolution was not fought so that the entire Third World could flood our shores. The American Revolution was not fought so we could one day become an Islamic nation, or a majority Mexican nation. Neither Muslims nor Mexicans fought that American Revolution.
To be sure, I’m not entirely against the idea of immigration to the United States or Europe. I just simply believe immigration should be safe, legal, and rare. There should be no welfare available to migrants for any reason. Nor should migrants have voting rights until some time has passed — say, four or five generations. Granting people who have no connection of culture or birth to the nation the power to change the nation’s laws is beyond irresponsible. The Left understands something very well that much of the Right still does not grasp: demographics are destiny. Each new invader makes the vote of the founding stock of our country that much more meaningless.
The Liberal view that all cultures are equal is appalling. They most emphatically are not. Nor are they necessarily compatible with each other. Sharia law, for instance, cannot be reconciled with the American Constitution, or with any of the European legal traditions. A 2015 Center for Security Policy poll of Muslim “Americans” found that over half of those surveyed, 51 percent, believe that in America, they should have the choice to be governed under Sharia, the law based upon the teachings of Islam.524 That doesn’t sound much like people wanting to assimilate to the American way.
Far more troubling is the fact that over 20 percent of all Muslims surveyed agreed that violence is a legitimate and just punishment for those who offend Islam. One-third of those surveyed believe that if there is a conflict between Sharia and the US Constitution, Sharia should be considered the supreme doctrine.525
The situation in Europe is even worse. In a Pew Research survey the question was asked; “Can Suicide Bombing of Civilian Targets to Defend Islam be Justified?” A shocking number of Muslims between the ages of eighteen to twenty-nine, which constitute a large portion of the recent migrants to Europe, answered that yes
, civilian targets of suicide bombings is justified to defend Islam: 35 percent in Great Britain, 42 percent in France, 22 percent in Germany, and 29 percent in Spain. In the USA? 26 percent. Over a quarter of all Muslims surveyed under thirty years of age believe violence against civilians can be justified. There is no possible logical rebuttal from the Left. These are not the values that we believe in. These numbers represent the same people that the mainstream media refers to as “refugees” on a daily basis. This is the tolerant religion of peace. The title of the research document from Pew, by the way: “Muslim Americans: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream.”526
If more than a quarter of young Muslims are willing to admit that they believe the deaths of infidels are justified for insulting Islam, how many more are totally ambivalent about this question? What percent of those surveyed simply lied? How many of those surveyed fall under the social acceptability bias, the well-known psychological phenomena by which undesirable, negative, or stigmatized responses are nearly always under-reported in surveys?
I attended a large university during undergrad; in nearly every class there were at least two Muslims students. Walking between classes I would pass several Muslims on the walkways. Per the admission of Muslims in America, this means that each and every day, I was in near proximity to a person that would happily see me executed for insulting him or his cult. That should be somewhat disconcerting.
Shouldn’t these questions regarding whether violence and suicide bombings are reasonable reactions to insulting Islam, have been asked before the US made these people citizens? Wasting billions to kill terrorists hiding in caves somewhere in the Middle East seems rather absurd in light of the fact that there are evidently potential terrorists among us. They are already here and apparently have been “properly vetted.” So well vetted, in fact, that they would not be troubled to see us dead for insulting their dogma.
It is already shocking that immigrants use welfare at nearly twice the rate of native born citizens. But from many countries like Somalia, first and second generation migrants are nearly entirely on welfare. There are at least ten nations, over 90 percent of whose first- and second-generation US migrants use welfare.527 Of the migrants from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, and Yemen, 91 percent receive food stamps, 73 percent Medicaid, and 68 percent cash welfare.528 This not even to mention half a dozen other program benefits as well. Each person we resettle into the United States costs tax payers $64,000 for his first five years in our country. That rate is estimated to be around twelve times what it would cost to help resettle the same people in their own country or region.529
Think about that: Western nations could help twelve times the amount of people that they presently do by simply resettling them in the Middle East or in Africa, rather than in Europe or America. But this was never about helping people from the Third World. This was about further redistribution of wealth, about creating borderless nations, about ensuring that the hostile elite the world over could create a permanent underclass over which they could rule with impunity. We are talking about a genocidal plot to eradicate the future of all white Europeans.
Over and over again while researching data for this book, I found myself staring at the facts in utter disbelief. I can only say, yet again, that this is madness. It is lunacy by any reasonable definition. But this is modern American policy as driven by the Left.
For a bit of comparison, in the US, 30 percent of native households are on some form of welfare. Asians use at the lowest rate at 21 percent, followed by whites at 23 percent, then blacks and Hispanics both at a 54 percent rate of use.530 Just as there is a discrepancy among native household use, the variance is even larger among migrants. Those coming from South Asia use welfare programs at the lowest rate, at 17 percent. European migrants use at a rate of 26 percent (which includes those not native to Europe), East Asians a rate of 32 percent, South Americans a rate of 41 percent, Africans a rate of 48 percent, Caribbeans a rate of 51 percent, and those from Central America and Mexico at a rate of 73 percent.531
These are legal immigrants, mind you. We are cutting programs for the mentally retarded, mentally ill, disabled, and homeless all over the nation, yet we have $64,000 free change to dedicate to each single African we bring into this country instead of helping our own? This is abhorrent and morally vile. And it’s up to us to end this insanity.
The Hart-Celler Act of 1965 needs repealed immediately, and the welfare needs cut off. Government tax money is meant to be used to protect its citizens and to protect their interests, not to be given haphazardly to those with no connection to the culture, no interest in contributing, and no desire to assimilate.
If we do not decide to take action and make the necessary decisions, the Left and their hordes will be deciding for us. England, France, Germany, Sweden, and even the US, are not serious countries anymore. If Charles Martel, Charlemagne, Richard the Lionhearted, or any of the US Founding Fathers were here, they would order all those responsible hanged.
We have given this whole multicultural thing the old college try. It has failed. Time to embrace something else. We must put the needs and well-being of our own people first, not those coming from places most of us cannot find on a map. If a nation cannot decide who to let in, from where, and in what numbers, it is not a nation at all. If a nation cannot protect its own borders without cries of racism and bigotry arising on every side, we are no longer dealing with a sovereign nation, but a piece of land that is up for grabs, and a population inviting other, strong peoples to conquer it.
We are not free until we have self-determination to preserve our cultures and homelands that our ancestors built for us.
Common Sense Border Control
The Left loves the idea of “common sense” gun control. How about taking the same approach to our crazy immigration policies? How about no welfare of any kind for at least thirty years after moving here? If you don’t pay into the system, why should you get the benefits? And no voting privileges should be granted to new immigrants, either. After all, we wouldn’t want “foreign interference” with our elections, would we?
In fact, what sense does it make to allow even a single migrant into the US until we have zero unemployment, zero national debt, and a clear and evident need of more people? Why, when native born Americans are out of work, would we bring in more people to compete against them for jobs? Why would we continue to spend nearly $300 billion per year on migrants, both legal and illegal, when we are already laboring under tremendous national debt and burdensome taxes? Keep in mind, that $300 billion did not start just last year. We have been plagued by mass migration for over half a century. Think of the world we could have built if we had used all of that money to better our own nation.
If you come to this country, you should be able to pay your own way, work, or have a sponsor. Enough of these handouts. America comprises 4.5 percent of the world’s population, and only about half of Americans pay taxes. You can’t reasonably ask 2 percent to 3 percent of the world population to pay for the remainder, without expecting some sort of breaking point to inevitably be reached.
When it comes right down to it, I do not even support so-called “high-skilled immigration.” It does nothing but undermine “high-skilled” US workers, driving wages down for native born citizens. The high-skilled, highly educated workers from other countries can be of great service to their own homelands, helping their own people build a better civilization. We will do just fine without them, as we did for over 200 years.
I once heard a professor say that immigration is a racist construct, because the only difference between a legal migrant and a “mis-documented citizen” is a “piece of paper.” Apart from the evident absurdity of this position, I found it troubling that this professor felt there should be no necessary “piece of paper” for immigrants. As an American citizen I cannot build a house, drive a car, get married, start a business, leave the country, come back into the country, or even work, without a �
�piece of paper.” The government expects me to get permission before nearly every action I take in life, yet Liberals feel that holding foreign people to the same standard is somehow racist and unethical. There is a certain characteristically Liberal hypocrisy in clamoring for ever stricter background checks for American citizens who want to exercise their firearm rights, while simultaneously claiming that the mere vetting of migrants to the United States is racist and bigoted.
Of course, immigrants coming to America will find themselves right at home with this Liberal contradiction. They have little to no grasp of what made this country great. They vote for the same sort of communist and totalitarian policies that caused them to leave their home country in the first place.
Liberals seem to believe that this is a problem of “education.” Imagine being so naïve that you think civilization and culture is something you can just up and teach people, or that migrants will somehow just “pick up” the our same values and morals and ways of life if they live long enough around us.
I happen to think almost precisely the contrary of that professor. A government that makes the conscious decision to open its borders is inherently illegitimate. The governments of Europe and the US are using the money that might spend to enforce our borders to fund the invasion of foreigners instead. At this point, there is no such thing as a legal migrant to the US or Europe. Legal migration is a globalist fiction. These are hostile invaders, illegitimate paperwork in hand, granted entry by illegitimate governments, permitted to live amongst us by illegitimate laws, who are colonizing our homelands and threatening our way of life.
An Open Mind with Closed Borders
“Open-mindedness” is one of the favored terms of especially older Liberals. But being open-minded does not mean blindly accepting every absurd ideology that comes your way, as Liberals do. People’s beliefs and ideologies are not somehow exempt from critical scrutiny. Liberals believe that every warped and perverse ideology is somehow entirely equal to every other. But being truly open minded means you have some sort of objective norm. Some sort of basic moral principles. Some gold standard against which everything else is measured. And when a new idea comes your way, you can evaluate it thoughtfully, consider its logical outcomes, critique the underlying principles as well as the application of the idea in the real world, and make a value judgment in consequence. Liberals call this act of critical thinking judgmental and bigoted.
Liberalism Unmasked Page 31