Our rulers make a new people for America

Summary: Elections and revolutions allow a people to select new rulers. Massive immigration allows America’s rulers to make a new people. It is happening in America today. Here is how our rulers hope to benefit. It is obvious, but you will not see it in the news.

Sign - No Wall - No Illegal - dreamstime_93880341
ID 93880341 © Pamela Brick | Dreamstime.

I posted this eleven years ago, describing how our elites are using immigration to given themselves a new people. It was prescient. Since then they have opened the borders and run one of the most intensive and sustained propaganda campaigns in American history. Both have proven immensely successful, more so than most public policy initiatives. The borders are besieged, the courts flooded with applicants for asylum, the government overloaded with illegals to hold, the percent foreign-born back to its level in 1910 – and support for immigration at its highest since 1999. That last item is no surprise. Propaganda works in America!

Why has boosting immigration been such a high priority for our elites? For an answer I recommend reading these two brilliant papers by Fredo Arias-King at the Center for Immigration Studies. He brings an unusually broad perspective to this answer. Now a businessman in Mexico City, he served as an aide in relations with the US to the Vicente Fox presidential campaign and the National Action Party of Mexico. A Harvard MBA and MA in Russian Studies, he is also the founding editor of the U.S.-Russian academic quarterly Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization.

Most of this is obvious, but crimethink – so seldom appearing in our media. Republicans have thwarted Trump’s weak efforts to throttle back immigration. If the Democrats win in 2020, the borders will be opened even further. Here are some of the reasons why.

Excerpt from “Politics by Other Means

The ‘Why’ of Immigration to the United States” (December 2003).

… In these talks with {50 US} congressmen, this author encountered an unexpectedly large amount of sympathy for the proposal to extend amnesty to existing undocumented immigrants, and to even increase immigration from Mexico. …This enthusiasm cut across party lines and across the “conservative-liberal” divide, though the underlying arguments by the congressmen seemed to vary. …

Immigrants are wonderful peons.

Several congressmen mentioned how happy they were with their Hispanic constituents. The more usual compliments included: “They are grateful for whatever you give them;” “they never give me problems, I love going to their barrio;” “they are loyal;” “they are a gentle people;” and “they make ideal constituents.” Referring to the mostly white population of his district, one congressman apologized for his “redneck” constituents who “don’t understand” the importance of increased immigration. Another congressman spoke of the consequences immigration would eventually have for his competing party, in that it would “disappear, once and for all.”

Bureaucracies and police states fare better in Latin America (the source of most immigration to the United States). Many Latin Americans tend to fall prey to bonds of patronage and vertical relations and tend to question less the power or ill-gotten wealth of their politicians. They are perceived as admiring crude displays of authority and often applaud executive fiat. One Mexican intellectual wrote that the ruling party governed “with society’s consent,” whereas another called it “voluntary servitude.” A Mexican president opined that corruption is ingrained in Mexican culture

The cultural traits that explain the alleged relative failure of liberal democracy and economic prosperity in Latin America, plus the general sense of social atomization and disorder, are discussed by such thinkers and scholars as the Nobel laureate Octavio Paz, Santiago Ramírez, Lawrence Harrison, and George Grayson. These cultural traits – such as level of susceptibility to demagogic or authoritarian appeals, view of others’ property, relation to honesty and the law, dependence on hierarchies – affect country performance in ways that are only beginning to be explored and understood. For example, the U.S. Constitution was carbon-copied by virtually all the Latin American countries in the early 1800s, but did not work the same way. Eventually it gave way to strong executives and feudalism (caudillismo). Scholars are beginning to argue that perhaps culture determines institutions, and not the other way around.

Whereas Latin Americans are not easy to govern, they have proven easy to rule over. Robert Putnam, who studied the relative economic and political underdevelopment of southern Italy as compared to the north, wrote that in hierarchical and corrupt societies, “political participation is triggered by personal dependency or private greed, not by collective purpose.” He finds a “striking” parallel between the socio-political cultures of the Southern Italians and that of the Latin Americans. {Source}

With the increasing Latinization of the United States, the traditional horizontal, egalitarian, and civil-society relations could gradually be replaced with vertical, authoritarian, and patron-client relations. …

Over two millennia before them, Aristotle stated that tyrants seek to expand their power by tampering with their populations in three ways: making or keeping them ignorant; dividing them and encouraging conflict between them; and impoverishing them. {In Book V of his Politics.} Some studies claim that the current immigration policy is achieving these three objectives in the United States.

The American political and bureaucratic class that, in effect, has actively tolerated the immigration phenomenon perhaps sees this one as a way to free itself of the Madisonian constraints. Patronage, gratitude, servility, reciprocity, and acquiescence in corruption and under-performance will, in their minds, gradually replace the Jeffersonian yeoman. The increasing cultural diversity in the United States provides an element of divida et impera for the political class. …

Immigrants are profitable for special interests.

Though the economic benefit of current immigration to U.S. society is still in dispute, few argue that there are tangible economic benefits accruing at least to certain, discernible groupings in society. Therefore, the externalities argument in economics can apply here – when the groups deriving the benefits of a particular activity do not bear the full costs of that activity, and therefore will pursue that activity even if the total costs are greater than the total benefits. The costs are spread evenly throughout society.

Companies and large farmers that lobby for immigrant labor also are responding to a rational economic stimulus. The immigrants provide revenue for the farmer and the companies. But in the scenario where the overall social costs of that immigrant exceed the revenues the immigrant produces for the farmer, it would not diminish the farmer’s interest in importing the immigrant. The same with the churches, civil rights advocates, educators, and other groups that actively encourage immigration, since “someone else” pays for their benevolence whereas they reap the benefit, whether it be monetary or intangible. …

Excerpt from “Immigration and Usurpation

“Elites, Power, and the People’s Will“ (July 2006).

While Democratic legislators we spoke with welcomed the Latino vote, they seemed more interested in those immigrants and their offspring as a tool to increase the role of the government in society and the economy. Several of them tended to see Latin American immigrants and even Latino constituents as both more dependent on and accepting of active government programs and the political class guaranteeing those programs, a point they emphasized more than the voting per se. Moreover, they saw Latinos as more loyal and “dependable” in supporting a patron-client system and in building reliable patronage networks to circumvent the exigencies of political life as devised by the Founding Fathers and expected daily by the average American.

Republican lawmakers we spoke with knew that naturalized Latin American immigrants and their offspring vote mostly for the Democratic Party, but still most of them (all except five) were unambiguously in favor of amnesty and of continued mass immigration (at least from Mexico). This seemed paradoxical, and explaining their motivations was more challenging. However, while acknowledging that they may not now receive their votes, they believed that these immigrants are more malleable than the existing American: That with enough care, convincing, and “teaching,” they could be converted, be grateful, and become dependent on them. Republicans seemed to idealize the patron-client relation with Hispanics as much as their Democratic competitors did. Curiously, three out of the five lawmakers that declared their opposition to amnesty and increased immigration (all Republicans), were from border states.

Also curiously, the Republican enthusiasm for increased immigration also was not so much about voting in the end, even with “converted” Latinos. Instead, these legislators seemingly believed that they could weaken the restraining and frustrating straightjacket devised by the Founding Fathers and abetted by American norms. In that idealized “new” United States, political uncertainty, demanding constituents, difficult elections, and accountability in general would “go away” after tinkering with the People, who have given lawmakers their privileges but who, like a Sword of Damocles, can also “unfairly” take them away. Hispanics would acquiesce and assist in the “natural progress” of these legislators to remain in power and increase the scope of that power. In this sense, Republicans and Democrats were similar.

While I can recall many accolades for the Mexican immigrants and for Mexican-Americans (one white congressman even gave me a “high five” when recalling that Californian Hispanics were headed for majority status), I remember few instances when a legislator spoke well of his or her white constituents. One even called them “rednecks,” and apologized to us on their behalf for their incorrect attitude on immigration. Most of them seemed to advocate changing the ethnic composition of the United States as an end in itself.

{The essay ends by discussing how Americans might take action to reassert control over our borders through legal or extra-legal action}



“The Solution” by Bertolt Brecht

After the uprising of the 17th of June
The Secretary of the Writers’ Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?

The Census 2010 American Community Survey (pdf here) found that 25% of children in America a foreign born parent (19% with two, 6% with one). That number is much higher today. America’s future depends on how they assimilate to our society and polity.

I suspect we are nearing a tipping point, after which immigration cannot be slowed. Large numbers are overwhelming our ability to assimilate migrants. The ruling doctrine of multiculturalism keeps us from trying. The effects will be irreversible. With our high degree of inequality of wealth and income plus our low degree of social mobility, an even-larger underclass will be the result.

America will become another highly diverse, unstable, low-trust society. If so, bet on China – as the world’s only remaining homogeneous superpower – to replace us. The 2020 election might a milestone for America on its path to a new future.

  1. The Democrats will open the borders & make a New America.
  2. Immigration is the key political battle of our time.

For More Information

See George Friedman’s (founder of Stratfor) prescient predictions about the American southwest in his 2009 book The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century. He describes where we’re going, facts too disturbing for most experts to say in public. This is a useful feature of such writing: since it is just guessing, we allow statements about the obvious that are politically or socially unacceptable (just as are, in a different way, statements by a court jester).

Ideas! For shopping ideas see my recommended books and films at Amazon.

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See about immigration, about William Lind’s work, and especially these…

  1. Essential readingSee the hidden history of immigration into America (it ruins the narrative).
  2. Important: Diversity is a grand experiment. We’re the lab rats.
  3. Trump wants to defend our borders. Democrats protest.
  4. The lies about immigration keeping the borders open.
  5. The smoke & fire of the new Sweden is our future.
  6. Prepare for mass migrants, the greatest challenge to America.
  7. The Left goes full open borders, changing America forever.
  8. Choose: open borders or the welfare State?
  9. William Lind explains how to defend against an invasion.

Two books about immigration, both well worth reading

Europe is our future. We can watch them to avoid their mistakes, if we act quickly.

Reflections on the Revolution In Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West by Christopher Caldwell (2009). See this post about it: About Europe’s historic experiment with open borders.

The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam by Douglass Murray (2017). See these posts with excerpts from the book: Martin van Creveld’s reaction to Europe’s rape epidemic. Warning of the “Strange Death of Europe”, and Strange perspectives on the challenges facing Europe.

Reflections on the Revolution In Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West
Available at Amazon.
Strange Death of Europe
Available at Amazon.


27 thoughts on “Our rulers make a new people for America”

  1. See France today, a vision of America’s future

    “France does not belong to the French! Everyone has a right to be here!”

    From the New York Post, 19 May 2019.

    “Video showed hundreds of illegal immigrants storming a French airport and occupying an entire terminal Sunday, demanding to meet with the country’s prime minister. Footage posted on Twitter shows roughly 500 migrants chanting in Terminal 2 of the Charles de Gaulle airport as about a dozen police officers in tactical gear look on.

    “‘France does not belong to the French! Everyone has a right to be here!’ one person can be heard yelling into a loudspeaker.

    “The protest was organized by the migrant support group La Chapelle Debout, which said their members call themselves ‘Black Vests.’ …In an official statement, the group asked to meet with Prime Minister Edouard Philippe over the country’s asylum policy as well as the leaders of Air France. They demanded that the airline ‘stop any financial, material, logistical or political participation in deportations.’ Later Sunday, an Air France delegation met with the group, a member told local newspaper Le Parisien.

    “A migrant who took part in the protest warned it wouldn’t be the last. ‘We have targeted Air France, and other actions will follow,’ he told the paper.

    “The protest shut down the terminal …”

  2. Comment from a reader, via email:

    Pretty frightening. The Democratic Party needs an ass-whippin.

    Mr. Trump will have to get rough with his opponents on this issue. It’s an election loser for them in any case.

    I also believe that before too long, in Europe, we will begin to see mass deportations. Then we’ll see what happens in the USA.

    1. Reply to Anonymous:

      (1) “It’s an election loser for them in any case.”

      Probably not. For a decade the media – films, TV, books, news – have bombarded us with pro-migrant propaganda. It has worked. Plus, the migrants = little children and mothers has worked very well. See the graph I cited:


      (2) “The Democratic Party needs an ass-whippin.”

      As these reports show, the Republican Party, as an organization, is just as strong supporter of open borders. Which is why Trump has had so little impact on immigration. They’re just quieter about it – since much of their base has different opinions (but not the vital donor class).

      (3) “I also believe that before too long, in Europe, we will begin to see mass deportations.”

      William Lind agrees (see his posts at TraditionalRight). I think you’re all dreaming. The numbers are far too large for that to happen without massive violence. These are strong people, many from failed states. They won’t go quietly, as the Jews did. Also, there is insufficient support in Europe for such harsh measures. The propaganda has worked there, also.

      (4) “Then we’ll see what happens in the USA.”

      Look at that graph. The trendlines are moving in the opposite direction – showing increasing support for open borders. As i’ve said so often, sometimes a people just decides to die.

  3. This is why Right-leaning Nationalist populists are rising to power across Europe. Since anti-immigration is one of their main platforms.

    1. info,

      Yes. But too late for much of Europe. Their homogeneity is gone. They now have large underclasses of people with radically different values and higher fertility levels. Even if they were to halt immigration, radical changes lie ahead.

      That is also true of America.

      1. It doesn’t have any good indications of being peaceful in the changes that lay ahead.

  4. I don’t know about Mexicans being passive, last year over 100 politicians were killed, it’s a failed state.

    1. Tom,

      “I don’t know about Mexicans being passive, last year over 100 politicians were killed,”

      Here is one of the stories about the 100+ politicians (plus many more party workers) killed during the campaign before the June 2018 election. Most were killed by organized crime networks.

      This shows, not refutes, the passivity of the Mexican people. The people are the ultimate force to maintain order in a nation. They have passively watched Mexico become a cesspool of crime and corruption.

      We have had breakdowns of order in the US, most often in the “Wild West” – mostly ungoverned space (we were too cheap to govern it). Vigilantes arose (sometimes good, sometimes bad, usually effective). The Military Act of 1903 states it explicitly: the Unorganized Militia of the US is every able-bodied man of 17 to 45 years of age, not a member of the military.

      Mexico’s rulers have chosen a different path, keeping an unorganized and passive public. Tough times for Mexico, but quite enjoyable and profitable for them. Except, as it disintegrates, for those few brave leaders who challenge the cartels.

      Many lessons can be learned by America by watching our southern neighbors.

      1. “Mexico’s rulers have chosen a different path, keeping an unorganized and passive public. Tough times for Mexico, but quite enjoyable and profitable for them. Except, as it disintegrates, for those few brave leaders who challenge the cartels.”

        If those brave leaders can keep themselves and all their relatives alive which is far more likely if they are a warlord having their own militia or the government is able to protect them.

        Otherwise I think they would be killed or are already dead.

      2. info,

        Yes, that is why failing states tend to experience positive feedback making things worse. Reversing this, restoring order, is far more difficult.

        In western history, esp Anglo-American history, we get tough men who restore law & order rather than become warlords (rule by whim). Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Washington, Jackson Lincoln, etc. That’s either something great in our culture or extraordinary good luck.

  5. “The Solution” by Bertolt Brecht

    After the uprising of the 17th of June
    The Secretary of the Writers’ Union
    Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the government
    And could win it back only
    By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
    In that case for the government
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?

  6. Richard J. Johnson

    There is a tipping point…when the traditional American nation sees that they are doomed as a people unless they act immediately. In the more northern and western states, they will see that they have no recourse but to expel most of the recent immigrants, and this will probably mean a secession from the other areas of the country.

    1. Richard,

      “There is a tipping point…when the traditional American nation sees that they are doomed as a people unless they act immediately.”

      That point of irreversability passed years ago. One in four children have at least one foreign-born parent. Those related to migrants – or economically benefit from them – are large plurality. Add to them those who ideologically support migration, many because of its transformative effect on US society, and there is close to a majority.

      “In the more northern and western states, they will see that they have no recourse but to expel most of the recent immigrants,”

      Many of those are those with near-majorities of first to third generation migrants. There is no “they” with the capability you describe. Also, the trendlines are moving in the opposite direction.

      Also, already the numbers are far too large for that to happen without massive violence. Many of the migrants are strong people, many from failed states. They won’t go quietly, as the Jews did.

      “this will probably mean a secession from the other areas of the country.”

      This is America today. People too passive and apathetic to organize, but boasting about the Great Day in the Indefinite Future When They Will Rise Up and Smite Their Foes. Dreams are the opiate of modern Americans. Check back when anything actually happens.

  7. Pelosi and Schumer receive drug money from the Mexican and Columbian drug cartels. Pelosi’s father was in the mafia. That’s why she constantly opposes building the border wall. Trump had better be careful and hire his own security since the enemies of America have infiltrated the FBI and probably the Secret Service as well.

      1. FACT: Here is a highly informative link with hard evidence linking Pelosi’s blood family to the Baltimore Mob: Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi’s father, Thomas D’Alesandro Jr., was “Constant Companion” Of Notorious Mobster Benjamin Magliano:
        And Pelosi is related to Gov. Newsom!

      2. Guest,

        We don’t believe in the blood libel in America.

        The attorney Edward Joseph O’Hare was an associate of Al Capone, with whom he made millions. His son, Edward Henry “Butch” O’Hare, attended Western Military Academy – a military prep school. He wanted to attend Annapolis. But sons of major mobsters aren’t nominated to the US Service academies. So his father turned state’s evidence against Capone (for which he was later executed).

        Butch graduated from Annapolis and became a Navy pilot. He did quite well. Here is the citation for his Medal of Honor.

        “For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in aerial combat, at grave risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty, as section leader and pilot of Fighting Squadron 3 on 20 February 1942. Having lost the assistance of his teammates, Lt. O’Hare interposed his plane between his ship and an advancing enemy formation of nine attacking twin-engined heavy bombers. Without hesitation, alone and unaided, he repeatedly attacked this enemy formation, at close range in the face of intense combined machine-gun and cannon fire. Despite his concentrated opposition, Lt. O’Hare, by his gallant and courageous action, his extremely skillful marksmanship in making the most of every shot of his limited amount of ammunition, shot down five enemy bombers and severely damaged a sixth before they reached the bomb release point. As a result of his gallant action one of the most daring, if not the most daring, single action in the history of combat aviation he undoubtedly saved his carrier from serious damage.”

        He went on to become the commander of the Enterprise’s air group (CAG). On the night of November 26, 1943, O’Hare volunteered to lead the first-ever Navy nighttime fighter attack from an aircraft carrier to intercept a large force of enemy torpedo bombers. He was shot down on this, his last flight.

  8. American taxpayers are currently financially ENSLAVED by Democrats who voted to give free food, free education (illegals receive PREFERENCE over our own kids for college), free housing (Bank of America and Citibank even give home loans to illegals requiring less documentation than from citizens), free medical at every ER/hospital/clinic (which directly affects quality of care, length of stay, physical therapy received and transfer to a convalescent center after surgery if your bill is not being paid by the U.S. govt – unlike an illegal), and $750/month play money for doing nothing at all except live 8 to a place and sit on their butts breeding more dependents like them. Even our DISABLED are taxed to support these able-bodied illegal criminals. There is no reason why they shouldn’t be deported.

    I want you to put in a 10-hr work day, then take a disabled friend, who lives in pain 24/7, to the ER and sit there waiting for TWENTY HOURS as illegals tie up time, doctors, and resources for nothing more ‘urgent’ than a cold because they get it all for FREE! I have witnessed this on a weekly basis for the last 30 years.

    We know the goal of illegals – RECONQUISTA. That’s why they deliberately breed faster than maggots in manure – and at our expense.

    Even the communist Chinese are sending pregnant women to fly into our country and stay in group homes till they spew forth a kid – who automatically becomes an American citizen, and then they start inviting all their family and friends to enter to infiltrate our country with communism. Commie Dems WANT a communist takeover in our country.

      1. It demonstrates the level of corruption the influx of illegals has caused. More illegal students means we need more teachers and more schools and more money which means the teachers unions have more dues and more money to contribute and on it goes. The Democrats know what they are doing and the Republicans are just looking for cheap labor for their big donors. They are both destroying the country in the process and really don’t care.

      2. Fxconde,

        “more schools and more money which means the teachers unions have more dues and more money to contribute and on it goes”

        Blind partisan hatred. That’s the least of the effects of more migrants. Microscopic compared to the larger effects.

        “They are both destroying the country in the process and really don’t care.”

        I’ve been saying that for 10 years. Only now do I get even a few comments agreeing. Being prescient isn’t good for traffic.

  9. I have spent much of my life around Hispanics, beginning with the many illegals my step-father hired as hands on his South Texas ranch. When I was growing up, alone among my peers, I had more brown friends than white. I have far more experience with Hispanics, at least those on the low end of the socioeconomic system, than any twenty randomly chosen white persons. What follows is the distillation of more than fifty years of experience.

    While these folks have many good points, they are, in general, in my opinion, not a good fit for our Western, liberal, democratic culture. They are, overall, low-performing, low ambition people. They are not particularly bright. They do not value education. Schools where Hispanics predominate universally perform poorly. They care little for the environment, or for the rights of women or minorities. The idea of animals rights is utterly incomprehensible. They despise gays and trans people. They hate Blacks. They instinctively distrust outsiders. A friend of mine, a cop, said that domestic violence is so common among them it is jokingly called “Mexican foreplay.” They tend passive and fatalistic. They have little respect for rules. Alcohol is poison to them. Wherever they gather in large numbers, there is noise, disorder, and crime, mostly petty but relentless. Machismo is a real thing with Hispanics. The alpha types will test you, and if they sense weakness will pounce. Sudden violence is common. Increasingly, they are resentful and militantly nationalistic. They have little interest in civic involvement beyond noisy assertions of ethnic pride. Few seem to have any interest in traditional American values.

    Their culture is coarse and incurious, tribal, heavy on honor, light on civil discourse. As a boy I learned the hard way that if you fought one and lost, they never let you forget it. But if you won, it was even worse. Brothers and cousins and friends would come calling, and would attack you in revenge at their earliest opportunity, almost always en masse. If, god forbid, you hurt one of them seriously, even in a fair fight, you would never, ever see the end of it.

    I live in a city (Austin) generally regarded as a Whiteopia, but my part of it has always been heavily Hispanic, with a large and growing percentage of illegal migrants. There are neighborhoods five minutes from where I live where English isn’t even a second language, and where people who look like me are regarded with undisguised hostility.

    Over the last fifty years, without looking for trouble, I’ve been insulted, attacked, robbed, been yelled at, had things thrown at me, had knives drawn on me, had guns pointed at me, had shots fired at me, been threatened, been stalked, and then some. There have been so many incidents I cannot recall them all. Some almost defy belief.

    I am a middle-aged White male of semi-conservative appearance. I get called “sir” a lot. I go out of my way to be engaging and civil. While older Hispanics tend deferential, the younger ones often treat me with undisguised contempt. In talking with my peers, I find that this is a common experience.

    This is just scratching the surface. Throughout my life there has always been an edginess to Hispanic culture, but it has gotten dramatically worse in recent years. We are being flooded with lower-quality migrants, those who cannot make it there, so they come here, thinking they will be on Easy Street. They come here and instantly disappear into a vast, coast-to-coast underground, unknowable and impenetrable to anyone outside the fold. If one of them gets into serious trouble, he will flee, and in two days be a thousand miles away, untraceable.

    The Left foolishly thinks all groups are exactly alike, abundant evidence to the contrary notwithstanding, and the more newcomers the merrier. Kumbayah rainbow people’s paradise and all of that. When things inevitably go bad, they will, of course, blame racism and white privilege. The oligarchs of the right, safe in their gated communities, say nothing; they just want the cheap, exploitable labor to keep coming.

    I do not hate Hispanics. Far from it. I have counted many of them as friends and lovers. But I also understand them better than most. They are a certain way and we white people are another, very different, way. And in some important respects we are not particularly compatible. Were they coming in small numbers, as as was the case until maybe thirty years ago, we could handle this. But the trickle has turned into a flood, and we are being overwhelmed. And nobody is doing a goddam thing about it.

    In my part of the world there is a saying: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Well America decidedly wasn’t broke, but it has surely been fixed by massive third-world immigration. We are committing national suicide. If current trends continue unabated, a third-world future almost certainly awaits. Brazil of the North, if we’re lucky.

    I am a regular commenter on this website, previously always under my real name. But this time I have chosen to use a pseudonym to avoid the outpouring of hate that sometimes accompanies expressions of forbidden thoughts. Apologies.

    1. Feral Nerd,

      I lived in the San Francisco Bay area for 30 years, and watch the conversion of its poorer areas into Mexico North. Ditto for many rural towns in California. We’d visit them on Boy Scout treks. They’re high rent versions of Mexican towns.

      Expect much more of this, unless we wise up. Stop the inflow and work hard on acculturation of those here. It won’t be easy.

  10. The Man Who Laughs

    What I found most interesting about this post was the description of the attitude of GOP lawmakers. They remind me of the Underpants Gnomes from South Park. Step one is they collect underpants, step two is left blank, and step three is profit. The GOP has collected a lot of underpants, and they seem confident that there’s profit at the end of it. I think they’re going to find that once they’ve locked themselves out of power the donations are going to dry up.

    Maybe the real answer to this is that the people in charge just can’t admit to a mistake, ever. America’s strength, or part of it, was an ability and willingness to try to deal with past mistakes. Prohibition, for example. Or slavery. (Which got abolished, even if the slaveholders fought a long rearguard action afterwards) Nowadays we just keep digging the hole deeper, and not just on immigration

    1. The Man,

      That’s an important comment. Is our current contest of a kind that only one side can win? I suspect that depends on how we define the various teams – and see the eventual outcome.

      For example, the socialist Left might win – expanding their control from America’s cities to the nation. But they’re wrecking the cities they run, with almost certain financial turmoil (and some bankruptcies (ahead). Looking at their governance of California, which they are working to wreck, our elites might bet that a win by the Left would be brief. The 1% might then recover its full power, perhaps greater than before (as much of their opposition will have immolated themselves).

      And, as a bonus, the troublesome independent middle class will be broken. Win Win Win!

      Lots of scenarios out there.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to Top
%d bloggers like this: