Teetering Tensions on the Mexico Border

Status
Not open for further replies.
It seems to me that the best way to eliminate illegal immigration is to make all immigration legal. I agree with Thomas Jefferson that it is a "natural right, which all men have of relinquishing the country, in which birth, or other accident may have thrown them" and that they may seek "subsistance and happiness wheresoever they may be able."
 
The argument that I'm synthesizing is that the U.S. is too small to support the influx.

I could be wrong though.
 
Hmmm?

Dunno. I'm kind of in agreement with you on principle. But I don't live in a border state so it isn't really my argument.

That's the the tenor of the arguments that I've heard against it.

I'm in favor of finding a way that'll benefit everyone. This is America after all, we can do anything we put a mind to.
 
sources

The American Cause
www.theamericancause.org
The American Cause is a foundation founded and run by commentator and nativist firebrand Patrick Buchanan, a three-time presidential contender who may have done more than almost any other individual to popularize white supremacist and Christian nationalist ideas in America.

Founded in 1993 to promote "national sovereignty, economic patriotism, limited government and individual freedom," the organization is actually an echo chamber for Buchanan, who has long been disdainful of non-white immigration. In one 1984 column, Buchanan wrote that the issue of immigration has "almost nothing to do with economics, almost everything to do with race and ethnicity. If British subjects, fleeing a depression, were pouring into this country through Canada, there would be few alarms. The central objection to the present flood of illegals is they are not English-speaking white people from Western Europe; they are Spanish-speaking brown and black people from Mexico, Latin America and the Caribbean."

Buchanan argues that democracy can only work in societies populated by a single ethnic or racial group and culture. His recent book The Death of the West bemoans the rise in non-white, non-Christian immigrants, and uses information from the racist New Century Foundation* to spread claims that blacks have an inherently more criminal nature than whites. He is also given to conspiracy theories about the New World Order, secular humanist plots and powerful Jewish elites. Buchanan's latest project is a magazine, The American Conservative.


American Enterprise Institute
www.aei.org

Founded in 1943, the Washington, D.C.-based American Enterprise Institute (AEI) is one of the most influential conservative think tanks in America. While its roots are in pro-business values, AEI in recent years has sponsored scholars whose views are seen by many as bigoted or even racist.

For example, Dinesh D'Souza, the author of The End of Racism, holds an Olin Foundation research fellowship at AEI. D'Souza has suggested that civil rights activists actually help perpetuate racial tensions and division in the United States, and has even called for the repeal of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. After his book was published, black conservatives Robert Woodson and Glenn Loury denounced it — Woodson released a statement saying it "fans the flames of racial animosity" — and broke their own ties with AEI.

Another AEI-sponsored scholar, Charles Murray, is more controversial. Murray, who has a Bradley Foundation research fellowship at AEI, is the co-author of The Bell Curve, a book that argues that blacks and Latinos are genetically inferior to whites and that most social welfare and affirmative action programs are doomed to failure as a result. The book, described as a reheated "stale stew of racial eugenics" by historian Godfrey Hodgson, cites the work of some 16 researchers financed by the racist Pioneer Fund*.


American Immigration Control Foundation*
www.aicfoundation.com

The American Immigration Control Foundation, founded in 1983, has been headed since 1990 by John Vinson, a conspiracy-oriented Christian nationalist. Vinson wrote the AICF-published Immigration and Nation: A Biblical View, in which he claims that it is against God's will to weaken the "divinely unique" character of every nation.

In the case of America, Vinson makes clear in the booklet, that character belongs to English-speaking white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. In fact, Vinson attacks Catholics who came to America in the 19th century, claiming that because they did not understand God's plan, they foolishly supported a strong federal government and high taxes.

He says that assimilating "the races of the world" is "an impossible task," and argues that current immigration patterns may "destroy our nationhood." Vinson also attacks the "spiritual Balkanization" he says immigration of non-Christians promotes.

Closely tied to AICF is the lobbying group Americans for Immigration Control*, publisher of the newsletter Immigration Watch and distributor of an array of anti-immigrant books including the grotesquely racist French novel, The Camp of the Saints.


The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
www.bradleyfdn.org

The Bradley Foundation was created with $290 million from the 1985 sale of a Milwaukee electrical parts business started in 1903 by brothers Lynde and Harry Bradley. With a mission of "strengthening American democratic capitalism and the institutions, principles and values that sustain and nurture it," the foundation funds a wide range of activities, including the arts, health care and education. But it has also funded an array of right-wing organizations, including the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, the Free Congress Foundation and the Rockford Institute. The Free Congress Foundation has received more than $6 million, according to MediaTransparency.com.


Castle Rock Foundation
www.castlerockfoundation.org

The Castle Rock Foundation is controlled by members of the Coors family, whose fortune stems from the beer business. The foundation, whose board includes family members William K. (president), Peter H. (vice president), Jeffrey H. (treasurer), and Holland H. (trustee), has awarded grants to the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for the Study of Popular Culture and the far-right Free Congress Foundation.

The older Coors Foundation, which funded the Free Congress Foundation and similar groups for many years, no longer makes grants to ultraconservative groups.


Center for American Unity
www.cfau.org

Long-time anti-immigrant activist and author Peter Brimelow is the president of the Center for American Unity, a Virginia nonprofit foundation "dedicated to preserving our historical unity as Americans into the 21st Century." On the surface, the center is concerned with promoting English as a common language, but a bit of digging reveals concerns that non-white, Catholic, and Spanish-speaking immigrants are polluting America.

This is most obvious in the foundation's VDARE project, which is named after Virginia Dare, the first English child born in the New World in 1587. Brimelow says that he once planned to bestow Dare's name upon "the heroine of a projected fictional concluding chapter in Alien Nation [his anti-immigration book], about the flight of the last white family in Los Angeles."

Reviving a favorite theme of early nativists and the Ku Klux Klan, Brimelow attacks 19th-century Catholic immigrants for being supposedly subservient to popes and monarchs, and thus incompatible with democratic self-rule.

The VDARE Web site also contains an archive of columns by Sam Francis, the immigrant-bashing editor of the newspaper of the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens*. In his columns, Francis rails against the "emerging Hispanic majority," plugs conspiracy theories, and promotes white racial consciousness.

In April, VDARE took one more step toward the racist right, publishing an essay on its Web site by white supremacist Jared Taylor that dismisses "the fantasy of racial equality," claims the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "stripped Americans of the right to make free decisions," and says that "lacks, in particular, riot with little provocation," unlike the far more peaceable white race.


Center for the Study of Popular Culture
www.cspc.org

David Horowitz, a former leftist born again as a right-wing conservative, founded the Center for the Study of Popular Culture in 1989, and is also the editor of the Net publication FrontPageMagazine.com.

Although he makes much of his past working for civil rights for blacks and others, he more recently has blamed slavery on "black Africans ... abetted by dark-skinned Arabs" — a selective rewriting of history. He also claims that "there never was an anti-slavery movement until white Christians — Englishmen and Americans — created one." That, of course, is false. Critics note that Horowitz is ignoring everything from the slave revolt led by Spartacus against the Romans and Moses' rebellion against the Pharaoh to the role of American blacks in the abolition movement.

He has attacked minority "demands for special treatment" as "only necessary because some blacks can't seem to locate the ladder of opportunity within reach of others," rejecting the idea that they could be the victims of lingering racism.


Federation for American Immigration Reform
www.fairus.org

Founded in 1978 by Michigan activist John Tanton of U.S. Inc. (see below), the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) blames immigrants for a host of social problems including crime, poverty, disease, urban sprawl, traffic jams, school overcrowding, racial tensions and potential terrorism.

Between 1985 and 1994, FAIR accepted some $1.2 million from the racist Pioneer Fund*, until bad publicity apparently convinced its leaders to desist. Another Pioneer Fund grant recipient, Garrett Hardin, was for years a FAIR adviser and remains a "board member emeritus." Hardin has opposed sending food aid to Africa because, he argues, that only encourages overpopulation. "Tragically, flights of food that save lives increase fertility — which increases the mistreatment of the environment." He also told OMNI magazine, "Looking at history with an open mind, you'll see that infanticide has been used as an effective population control."

FAIR has run ads that attacked then-Sen. Spencer Abraham (R.-Mich.), an Arab American, for supporting more visas for those with high-technology skills. The ads said Abraham's proposal would make it easier for Middle Eastern terrorists to strike, sparking widespread condemnation of what was seen as a race-based attack. On FAIR's board of advisors is Pat Choate, who helped white nationalist Patrick Buchanan take over the Reform Party prior to Buchanan's run for president in 2000.


Free Congress Foundation
www.freecongress.org

In 1974, ultra-conservative political strategist Paul Weyrich and beer magnate Joseph Coors co-founded the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress, which evolved into the Free Congress Foundation (FCF). This came after the Heritage Foundation they had earlier helped start moved too far into the mainstream for Weyrich's taste. FCF received funding from the Coors and later the Castle Rock foundation (see above), but even more so from far-right foundations controlled by Richard Mellon Scaife and his family.

In 1987, Weyrich commissioned Cultural Conservatism: Toward a New National Agenda, which became the script for what has become known as the "culture wars." Four years later, FCF staffers William Lind and William Marshner edited Cultural Conservatism: Theory and Practice.

Rejecting right-wing libertarianism as materialistic, "cultural conservatism" saw itself as based on Judeo-Christian ethics and at first concentrated its fire on gays and feminists, depicting them as sinners. But FCF soon expanded into conspiracy theories about sinister plots, themes reflected in two FCF-sponsored books, The Homosexual Agenda and Gays, AIDS and You.

Race surfaced in 1999, when Lind wrote that, "The real damage to race relations in the South came not from slavery, but from Reconstruction, which would not have occurred if the South had won." Had that happened, Lind added, "at least part of North America would still stand for Western culture, Christianity and an appreciation of the differences between ladies and gentlemen." Instead, when the South lost, the "official American state ideology" became the federally imposed "cultural Marxism of Political Correctness." In a speech to a Holocaust denial outfit last year, Lind blamed "cultural Marxism" on a tiny group of German Jews.

Most remarkable of all, one of Weyrich's long-time advisers on European-American issues has been Laszlo Pasztor Sr. The aging Pasztor, an ardent foe of communism, was active with the Hungarian Arrow Cross in the 1940s, when it was collaborating with the Nazis. Pasztor says he did not participate in the anti-Semitic violence promoted by the Arrow Cross Party. Pasztor currently has office space in Washington, D.C., provided by the Coalitions for America, a group chaired by Weyrich and located in the same building as the Free Congress Foundation, and described by it as its "sister organization."


Institute for the Study of Man


The Washington, D.C.-based Institute for the Study of Man has long been headed by Roger Pearson, one of the most virulent race scientists operating today. For some three decades, Pearson has been pushing discredited pseudo-anthropological claims about racial Aryanism that are similar to those of the German Nazis. In 1996, Pearson wrote, "If a nation with a more advanced, more specialised, or in any way superior set of genes mingles with, instead of exterminating, an inferior tribe, then it commits racial suicide, and destroys the work of thousands of years of biological isolation and natural selection."

He claims that the demise of ancient Greece was the result of a "decline in Nordic blood," adding that "Nordic decay was heralded in by ideas of 'enlightenment' and individualism." Pearson has used pseudonyms to make some of his most unvarnished remarks.

According to The Funding of Scientific Racism, a 2002 book by scholar William Tucker, Pearson has claimed that Nordics are "the very peak of evolutionary progress," far removed from "the ape-like appearance of our original ancestors" who were more like "Negroes and monkeys."

Pearson also publishes the Journal of Indo-European Studies, which focuses on the roots of "Aryan"-based languages, and the Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies. Wayne Lutton — who previously wrote for the racist American Mercury and the Holocaust-denying Journal of Historical Review — also has been a frequent contributor to the latter Pearson journal.

Pearson co-edits a third journal, the eugenicist Mankind Quarterly, with Richard Lynn, who like Pearson's institute has been financed by the racist Pioneer Fund*. Lynn's work, including a study on "Positive Correlations between Head Size and IQ," is cited in The Bell Curve.

"What is called for here is not genocide, the killing off of the population of incompetent cultures," Lynn wrote in 1972. "But we do need to think realistically in terms of the 'phasing out' of such peoples. ... To think otherwise is mere sentimentality."


Ludwig von Mises Institute
www.mises.org

The Ludwig von Mises Institute, founded in 1982 by Llewellyn Rockwell Jr. and still headed by him, is a major center promoting libertarian political theory and the Austrian School of free market economics, pioneered by the late economist Ludwig von Mises. It publishes seven journals, has printed more than 100 books, and offers scholarships, prizes, conferences and a major library at its Auburn, Ala., offices.

It also promotes a type of Darwinian view of society in which elites are seen as natural and any intervention by the government on behalf of social justice is destructive. The institute seems nostalgic for the days when, "because of selective mating, marriage, and the laws of civil and genetic inheritance, positions of natural authority [were] likely to be passed on within a few noble families."

But the rule of these natural elites and intellectuals, writes institute scholar Hans-Hermann Hoppe, is being ruined by statist meddling such as "affirmative action and forced integration," which he said is "responsible for the almost complete destruction of private property rights, and the erosion of freedom of contract, association, and disassociation."

A key player in the institute for years was the late Murray Rothbard, who worked with Rockwell closely and co-edited a journal with him. The institute's Web site includes a cybershrine to Rothbard, a man who complained that the "Officially Oppressed" of American society (read, blacks, women and so on) were a "parasitic burden," forcing their "hapless Oppressors" to provide "an endless flow of benefits."

"The call of 'equality,'" he wrote, "is a siren song that can only mean the destruction of all that we cherish as being human." Rothbard blamed much of what he disliked on meddling women. In the mid-1800s, a "legion of Yankee women" who were "not fettered by the responsibilities" of household work "imposed" voting rights for women on the nation. Later, Jewish women, after raising funds from "top Jewish financiers," agitated for child labor laws, Rothbard adds with evident disgust. The "dominant tradition" of all these activist women, he suggests, is lesbianism.

Institute scholars also have promoted anti-immigrant views, positively reviewing Peter Brimelow's Alien Nation.


New Century Foundation*
www.amren.com

Jared Taylor, the man who heads the New Century Foundation and edits its allied magazine American Renaissance, is a white supremacist who celebrates the "clear conception of the United States as a nation ruled by and for whites." The foundation and magazine, based in Oakton, Va., tirelessly advance pseudo-scientific theories linking IQ to race and advocate eugenics — selective breeding to "improve" human genetic stock.

The foundation also puts on bi-annual conferences; the 2002 event was advertised like this: "In all parts of the world, whites are afraid to speak out in their own interests. The costs of 'diversity,' racial differences in IQ, the threat of non-white immigration — politicians and the media are afraid to discuss what these things mean for whites and their civilization."

Taylor also has noted approvingly that until 1967, "strong opposition to mixed marriage was enshrined in law" in 16 states. In "The Myth of Diversity," Taylor writes that "diversity" has led to civil rights claims by all kinds of groups he doesn't like. "Anyone who opposes the glorification of the alien, the subnormal, and the inferior can be denounced," he complains. "The metastasis of diversity is a fascinating story, but the disease began with race."

After 300 pages of attacking blacks and dismissing white racism, Taylor's 1992 book Paved With Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America notes that most Americans would not agree to use sterilization or forced abortion on those whom the society considers less fit. His solution? Make "welfare mothers" accept a "five-year implantable contraceptive."

Taylor is allied with Wayne Lutton, whom he thanks in his book and who is the editor of The Social Contract, a journal published by John Tanton's The Social Contract Press*. Taylor, Lutton and Richard Lynn are on the editorial board of The Occidental Quarterly, a journal where Sam Francis, top editor for the racist Council of Conservative Citizens*, serves as book review editor. The Occidental Quarterly's first issue featured a story by the late Keith Stimely, who was also an editor of the Journal of Historical Review, a notorious Holocaust denial publication.
 
The kick is

Im totally against illegal immigration and the guest worker program.
I dont need to be on a border state to feel the heat of illegal immigratoin.
I lost my job directly as a result of illegal immigrants.
Im on unemployemnt right now trying to find a job that paid my big salary of 14.50 an hour. Im a 13 year machinist and i cant get 14.50? And thats for setup and programming.
However i am not going to align myself with organsations that are directly, funded or founded my racists.
Let me repeat.
Go after the employers.
http://are.berkeley.edu/APMP/pubs/i9news/sanctions010903.html
Employer sanctions might have a greater impact on the citizenry if the INS enforced them, but right now, they are so uncommon and so random that one almost feels sorry for the employers that are caught.

To end peaking illegal immigration, Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which provided an amnesty for illegal aliens and sanctions for employers who continued to hire them. While many have debated which of the two was most important, it's clear that Congress wished to wipe the illegal immigration slate clean and remove any commercial incentive for further illegal immigration. The act's sponsors promised, correctly, that only legislation including employer sanctions could deter illegal immigration. Since 1986, immigration lawyers have predicted that employer sanctions are set to become the next lucrative practice area. The INS disappoints them year after year.

In 2002, the INS fined 320 U.S. employers for hiring illegal aliens. The fines totaled $5.3 million, though only $2.6 million was collected. The INS was unable to collect a dime from 73 of those employers, some of which were fined as much as $77,000. The greatest assessment, $1 million, was made against a New York-based office cleaning company, which was able, perhaps not surprisingly, to write a check.
 
WASHINGTON – Mexican President Vicente Fox's renewed efforts to lobby for change in U.S. immigration policy may hurt his cause more than help it and could galvanize opposition in a divided American Congress, senior U.S. officials say.

The Mexican government is planning a multipronged effort in the United States on behalf of the millions of Mexicans working without proper documentation. Targets would include agricultural groups and Latino organizations. Mexico wants a system to regulate the flow of workers back and forth and to provide legal protections for those in the United States.

But some U.S. officials say that if the Mexican government inserts itself into what they call a highly sensitive domestic issue, it could complicate what already is a difficult task for President Bush.

One senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Mexico should "work with us and remember that this is a domestic issue. It's not a Mexico-specific bill. ... If it's seen as a unilateral demand from the Mexican side, I think there will be plenty of people, particularly on the Hill, who will not receive that particularly well."

The official added that the U.S. government has been talking to Mexico about "what would be sensible from our point of view."

A Mexican official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, acknowledged the sensitivities involved and said, "Mexico will take very careful steps" in its lobbying efforts. "We recognize that this is a very delicate matter."



Lobbying strategy


Mexican officials say they plan to spend "hundreds of thousands" of dollars to promote the issue through the country's 47 consulates in the United States, focusing on regions that government officials consider crucial to success.

The strategy is to "take the message to local and state governments, lobby from the bottom up," the official said. "This is not about interfering in U.S. domestic policy, but about being part of a debate on immigration, which we consider one of the most important items in the U.S.-Mexico bilateral agenda."

The official said Mexico would launch the lobbying effort early next year, perhaps coinciding with the planned visit of Mr. Fox to Washington in late February or March.

The senior U.S. official said the meeting is not yet on Mr. Bush's calendar and cautioned that "there's no time confirmed for this meeting. ... I'm not saying there won't be a meeting. I'm just saying they're a little ahead of the curve on this one. ... I think they're a little bit too anxious."

Immigration policy change is a key issue in Texas, the second most popular destination for illegal immigrants after California. The Urban Institute, a Washington research organization, estimates that Texas is home to 13 percent of the nation's illegal immigrant population of 10 million to 12 million.

Lobbying by foreign governments on U.S. soil is not new. After the Sept. 11 attacks and the revelation that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens, Saudi Arabia spent $17.6 million on public relations, advertising and lobbying in the United States to try to dispel the notion that the Saudi government was failing in its responsibilities to fight terrorism, Justice Department records show.

The migration issue ignites passion, especially among anti-immigration groups.

"Mexico's blatant foreign interference in U.S. domestic affairs" is the issue, said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington. The group favors reduced immigration.

"The Mexican consulates have gone from promoting trade and travel to Mexico to actively involving themselves in U.S. domestic affairs ... and the Bush administration has been irresponsible for not telling Mexico in a friendly but clear way that this is not acceptable," Mr. Krikorian said.

Under the plan advanced by the administration, illegal immigrants already in the country and foreign workers seeking to come to the United States could apply for renewable three-year work visas. The administration also would seek an unspecified increase in the number of "green cards" granting permanent residence.



Help from Mexico


Another senior Bush administration official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said that while Mexico's lobbying has "merit – they have a big stake in this, too – it may also hurt them if it's not done properly and carefully. But what I think the real issue here is that Mexico needs to answer the most important question: present us a vision, a strategy on how it plans to stem the future flow of illegal immigration. We want the Mexicans to help us determine who's coming in, where they're coming from and how it plans to control those waves in the future."

Resolving those questions, the official said, would bolster chances for passage of reform legislation in what the official described as a "more Republican, but also a far more conservative and rebellious Congress."

The official reiterated that Mr. Bush has made immigration a priority of his second term and said that changing immigration laws will "require leadership and much political capital. This will be a tar issue. It will be messy."
 
It seems to me that the best way to eliminate illegal immigration is to make all immigration legal.

One assumes you intend for the migration to be bi-lateral. It would be interesting to see how Mexico would be changed if it permitted American citizens--not just former Mexican nationals--free access to its political and economic structures.
 
Any solution to illegal immigration is going to be difficult. Politicians are not going to rock the boat, and risk losing voters and financial support. X amount of people are raising cain about this. Y amount of people aren't. Y is greater than X, so why bother?
 
just wondering

Why_me:

Why go after the employers? Are they not enlightened in looking beyond such trivialities as race, ethnicity, language, national origin, culture, and social and political values? It would appear the employers you wish to "go after" and who have opted not to employ you are just good Americans who understand the primal value for any free society is money, first, last, and always?

I believe there is an ongoing debate, here and in society at large, about the nature of the cultural values that underpin our American Republic and ensure its future prosperity and survival. If it is only about economic "liquidity," most of us are going to be unemployed sooner or later given current wage disparities in the world and the promiscuous transfer of technology.
 
Polls have shown anywhere from two-thirds to 80 per cent of Americans want something done to restrict or stop immigration, particularly illegal immigration.

What all of this is leading to, however, is a tumultuous debate about "numbers" versus economic wherewithal. If someone with no serious stake in American society--I'm talking about education, training, income, and assets--is entitled to the same political say as people who keep America going economically, then we are truly setting the stage for not only a culture war but an economic war.
 
When the only tool you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail

If it is only about economic "liquidity," most of us are going to be unemployed sooner or later given current wage disparities in the world and the promiscuous transfer of technology.

The head of the nail :barf:
 
My point is that you are complaining about employers. Isn't it "conservative," maybe even "nationalist," to prefer American citizens to non-citizens? It certainly flies in the face of unfettered laissez faire capitalism, no?

You want employers to obey the law. Fine. But what then is the underlying basis for that law?
 
It certainly flies in the face of unfettered laissez faire capitalism, no?

It may be socialist thinking. But laissez faire capitalism is destroying my standard of living. At current wages im not going to be able to afford to buy a house.
Im only one serious illness away from never even having hope of my duaghter going to college.
When you combine workers wroking for less with the export of jobs in my current industry, you end up with a lose lose situation. I can get educated in another feild , like say....computers. Lololololol
Welcome IT workers to the world of outsourcing! I can go back to roofing. Im 41. So i can work until i am no longer physically able to do roofing,say ten years. Then i just have to wait 17 more so i can collect SS.
Of course i always have the option of working 2 or 3 jobs in the fast food industry.
What i will never do is align my self with xenophobes and racists. I have too much at stake trying to explain to my asian american daughter why it is ok to discriminate against her mother, or other nationalitys.
The national culture. Code words for christian white guys.
Another argument i hear is about immigrants destroying our national culture.
Are you afraid that there might be laws passed for forced display of pinatas?

My point is that you are complaining about employers. Isn't it "conservative," maybe even "nationalist," to prefer American citizens to non-citizens?

The founders (founder) of these anti immigration groups. Is a racist and believer in eugenics. He wants to live in a world where we breed humans for desired traits. Where i have heard that theory b4. third reich?
 
Polls have shown anywhere from two-thirds to 80 per cent of Americans want something done to restrict or stop immigration, particularly illegal immigration.

If these 2/3rds - 4/5ths want something done, why do they elect the Democrats or Republicans, who I assume aren't going to restrict or stop immigration?
 
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=181

The Strategy Emerges
Tanton's strategy was to fight his war on several fronts. FAIR relied heavily on arguments about diminishing resources and jobs.
In 1982, Tanton created U.S. Inc. to raise and channel funds to his anti-immigration network. The following year, he created his second major vehicle, U.S. English, which made a cultural argument — that the English language was in mortal danger of being made irrelevant.

And later, in 1985, FAIR would spin off yet another major Tanton organization — the Center for Immigration Studies, which presented itself as an impartial think tank and later even sought to distance itself from the organization that had birthed it.

Today, the Center regularly dispatches experts to testify on Capitol Hill, and last year it was awarded a six-figure research contract by the U.S. Census Bureau.

In the 1980s, U.S. Inc. provided millions of dollars to FAIR, U.S. English, the Center for Immigration Studies and several similar groups — the 21st Century Fund, Population-Environment Balance, and the Immigration Reform Law Institute, which is now a litigation arm of FAIR.

During the 1990s, Tanton's U.S. Inc. adopted a new tactic, creating programs called NumbersUSA, The Social Contract Press (which publishes The Camp of the Saints), and Pro English.

Although these units would often present themselves as independent, tax forms make it clear that they are merely programs of U.S. Inc.

Tanton's funding organization, U.S. Inc., also has recently given money to Barbara Coe's California Coalition for Immigration Reform and Glenn Spencer's American Patrol (also known as Voice of Citizens Together), two of the most virulently anti-Hispanic groups in Tanton's network.
 
If these 2/3rds - 4/5ths want something done, why do they elect the Democrats or Republicans, who I assume aren't going to restrict or stop immigration?

Good question. One reason is they've kept in the dark about what's going on. Another is that it takes a lot take to turn the ship around in a democracy. A third is that the assembled Powers That Be are doing their damnedest, so far, to turning a deaf ear to what the American citizenry wants.
 
Why_me:

I don't think we necessarily arrive at socialism, but we may arrive at a form of nationalism that is evolving as a defense against globalism.

I don't think talking about an American culture means just "Christian white guys." What it means is assimilation. America is about ideas, not about race or ethnicity. I refer you to Victor Davis Hanson's distinction between a multiracial America (which he's okay with) and a multicultural America (problematic).
 
Well I pointed it out in another thread

All but 2 of the FAIR board of directors is white.
Here is the famous tanton memo

Can homo contraceptivus compete with homo progenitiva?" Answering his own rhetorical question, Tanton wrote that "perhaps this is the first instance in which those with their pants up are going to get caught by those with their pants down!" According to Tanton, "In California 2030, the non-Hispanic Whites and Asians will own the property, have the good jobs and education, speak one language and be mostly Protestant and 'other.' The Blacks and Hispanics will have the poor jobs, will lack education, own little property, speak another language and will be mainly Catholic." Furthermore, Tanton raised concerns about the "educability" of Hispanics. (10) In 1988 the media published the Tanton memo, causing a number of former supporters of U.S. English to cut ties with Tanton, including Walter Cronkite. (7)(8)
 
Good question. One reason is they've kept in the dark about what's going on. Another is that it takes a lot take to turn the ship around in a democracy. A third is that the assembled Powers That Be are doing their damnedest, so far, to turning a deaf ear to what the American citizenry wants.

I don't think its the population being kept in the dark. I think it really is a numbers game. 50% of the population +- a few % vote. To get elected you only need a majority of these people. So give whatever this group of people want to get elected, and this majority of a minority don't seem to be motivated by immigration, or can be fobbed off with carrots. So it could be said that the Powers That Be are listening to their constituencies and giving them what they want.
 
Faithless:

Well, the next few years will tell. Bush has his point of view and will push his agenda. Some Republicans disagree with his thrust. Certainly, an increasing number of Americans are waking up to this issue--even Hillary Clinton has jumped on board.

It's not going away, that's for sure, and it's definitely set to come front and center.

Why_me:

This issue doesn't pivot around Tanton, as you surely realize. The coming divisions will be along values lines, not race.
 
What i will never do is align my self with xenophobes and racists

I do not think anyone would expect you to do so on this board however
discussing illegal immigration does not make one a racist if this were true
many non-whites in my area would be so. :banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top