'Transnationalists' Don't Take Immigration Reform Seriously

Real Clear Politics ^ | April 02, 2006 | John Leo

[kellynla]

In his 1995 book "The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy," the late Christopher Lasch argued that America's political and cultural elites had opened up a gap between themselves and ordinary Americans. "Many of them have ceased to think of themselves as Americans in any important sense, implicated in America's destiny for better or worse," he wrote. They are increasingly detached from their fellow citizens and drawn to an international culture, Lasch said, or what we would today call a transnational culture.

Consider the current immigration debate in this light. In the transnational view, patriotism, assimilation and cultural cohesion are obsolete concerns. Borders and the nation-state are on the way out. Transnational flows of populations are inevitable. Workers will move in response to markets, not old-fashioned national policies on immigration. Norms set by internationalists will gradually replace national laws and standards. The world is becoming a single place. Trying to impede this unifying process is folly.

The term "transnationals" specifically refers to those working in and around international organizations and multinational corporations. More broadly, it indicates a cosmopolitan elite with a declining allegiance to the place where they live and work, and a feeling that nationalism and patriotism are part of the past.

To some extent, their worldview cuts across Democratic-Republican and liberal-conservative lines, and reinforces the other concerns that prevent immigration control: the desire for cheap labor and Hispanic votes. Old-line one-worlders and enthusiastic supporters of the United Nations hear the siren call. So do many academics, judges and journalists who attend international conferences and tend to adopt a common consciousness and world outlook.

[kellynla]

"Lopsided majorities, which normally stay the hand of Congress, want the federal government to take charge and get tougher on illegal immigration. In last month's Quinnipiac University poll, 88 percent of all respondents said illegal immigration is a serious problem (57 percent "very serious," 31 percent "somewhat serious"). Among immigrants or their children and grandchildren, the figure was 83 percent. "Red state, blue state and purple state. Illegal immigration is a serious problem," said Maurice Carroll, the director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. If the majority really wants to win on this, all it has to do is raise the heat on Congress and defeat the amnesty-light non-reforms."

[John Filson]

The astonishing aspect of the immigration debate is that the elites think they can override the clear and huge resistance of the American people. As columnist Tony Blankley wrote last week, the Senate was prepared to "legislate into the teeth of the will of the American public."

It's the stuff revolutions are made of.

[Uncle Fud]

"legislate into the teeth of the will of the American public."

The two wings of the Perpetual Incumbency Party now believe that the system has been sufficiently rigged for their career security that they may so legislate without fear.

[nathanbedford]

... is to some people an inevitable and welcome stage in the decline of the nation-state. Besides, large-scale immigration helps to deconstruct the traditional historical narrative of the target nation, a traditional item on the multicultural agenda.

They are "ideological tools, championed by activist elites."

The large-scale movement of populations is often seen as an indicator of the coming world society. To transnationalists, it is a positive development that reveals the weakness of the nation-state and adds to that weakness. Loyalties and commitments are diffused. One transnational scholar writes, "Traditional notions like citizenship, political activity, entrepreneurship and culture are de-linked from specific places and spaces."

[John Filson]

How does it work? They promise pork -- and deliver. Americans sell their votes for federal handouts, and Congress sells their votes to transnational interests. America is for sale. It can be taken back, though. It was a small minority who believed in taking it back in 1775.

[brushcop]

"Many of them have ceased to think of themselves as Americans..."

Yeah, I don't think of them as Americans either. Easier to fight an enemy when he/she is not part of your country.

[TexasCajun]

Jorge is not listening!

[tom h]

The article is right on. One can survey the letters to the editor out here in God's country, San Diego, and see letters from non-Hispanics that say someday soon we will be citizens of the world instead of the USA. Then you can listen to leftists like Hillary and Kennedy and root out the same thoughts.

Traditional patriotic Americans ARE under attack. Rest assured. And now might be the critical time. We need to keep our heads on straight and not falter.

[John Filson]

Indeed.

[Frank T]

The sad part is, if the economy tanks like it did in the '30's, people will hand over even more control to the progressive establishment and their brain trust. Many people think the government can create jobs and commerce.

And if the economy keeps on keeping on, then what incentive is there to change this system?

[cgbg]

Immigration is the kind of issue that could create a new political party--since the existing parties clearly intend to try to bluff their way through this one.

All it would take is five key figures to bolt from both parties and create a new one. That would be risking their political futures, of course, but it could make one of them President some day with neither an R nor a D in front of their name.

[John Filson]

Many people think the government can create jobs and commerce.

Its policies can certainly harm them, though. This isn't all about economics, though. It's about America choosing to remain an English-speaking culture of liberty-loving, law-abiding citizens -- or not.

I think there is a strong, nationalist backbone of English-speaking Americans who are enraged by the current influx of Latinos and Muslims, and others who refuse to assimilate. Just because they aren't out of work, don't burn flags, or march in protest does not mean that they aren't considering the true implications of of the transnational elitims in our government today.

The economy need not fail for the country's nationalist backbone to lose its patience.

[Frank T]

At the very least, it paves the way for a legitimate third party canditate. If both parties are against reform which has broad national support (75%+), and which can attract voters from both traditional parties, the backlash opens up the door.

If by some mistake McPain gets the GOP nom for '08, I think it's reasonable that a conservative Republican renegade candidate can win the election.

[John Filson]

A renegade, or someone who looks like one.

[Sam the Sham]

It is happenning in Europe as Right-Populist parties challenge the multiculturalist elite consensus.

There is already a model for transnationalist elites. The old hereditary aristocracy of Europe. Nobles from one end of Europe to the other had their own culture distinct from the peoples they ruled. They had a common outlook and a shared class interest.

[Paul C. Jesup]

The sad part is, if the economy tanks like it did in the '30's, people will hand over even more control to the progressive establishment and their brain trust. Many people think the government can create jobs and commerce.

This is not the 1930's when the urban elites held all the power.

Also if the economy collapse, the welfare system would collapse and the groups (include a large percentage of illegal immigrants) that would get welfare would riot and loot in the large urban cities that they are the majority population in.

While the major urban cities burned, the smaller towns and cities would be fine because the armed citizens would shoot any people who try to riot and loot their property.

[Travis McGee]

"Building a North American Community," the official Council on Foreign Relations ten year project to erase America's borders.

If you want to know why many of our most powerful politicos and media moguls are dead set against building a fence, check the CFR membership roster. A fence is like Holy Water to the devil, to CFR members. A border fence is 180* counter to their goal of melting the USA into the NAC, with one common outer border around the USA, Canada and Mexico, with no "interior" controls at all on people or goods.

This is damned serious stuff folks. If you don't know who is in the CFR (both 'rats and "Davos Republicans) then you don't even know how the power game is really played.

[bboop]

I keep thinking of this phrase in the Declaration of Independence --

"That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ALTER OR TO ABOLISH IT, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such for, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

The government exists to guarantee our rights. It is therefore our servant.

The whole snotty-nosed bunch in the Senate need to go, if they do not work for us.

[oldbill]

"At the very least, it paves the way for a legitimate third party canditate."

Actually, there is a historical parallel here for this issue. The Whig Party started to slowly disintegrate in the 1850's because of its internal divisions on slavery. By 1856 enough morally motivated Americans were so disgusted that a new party was formed, the Republicans. Although doomed to failure as a third party in that election (remember President Fremont?) by 1860 people had enough and elected Abraham Lincoln.

Like the Whigs, the Republicans are abandoning the common sense wishes of the vast majority to please their special interests, the ones who write the big checks and invite them to the toney cocktail receptions. If they continue on their current vector (and the immigration debate focusing on granting amnesty and open borders) people will desert them and look for alternatives.

It may take several election cycles (and disgust with the ruling Democrats during that period) but eventually the majority which includes core Republicans and a lot of conservative Democrats who could never ever pull a Republican lever, would find a voice in this new entity.

Let's hope it happens before the other new party, the renamed Democrats in the Partido de Reconquista, take over and rewrite the laws for guaranteeing permanent power like they did in Mexico.

[Fee]

The last twenty years our elites were trying to disassemble nationalism. Look at our colleges, left or right politically all discourage nationalism, patriotism and grooming future leaders/CEO's and society for globalism. A funny thing happen along the road, 9/11. That is why within one week videos of the planes crashing into the towers were pulled from our TV sets. The corporate controlled MSM claim it was done to stop traumatizing the US public, but it was pulled because the images were generating American nationalism, something our elites could not afford.