Posted on 04/09/2003 7:50:00 AM PDT by madfly
Allan Wall has been writing articles about various aspects of Mexico and Mexican society for the past decade. Some of these articles are about immigration. The trans-cultural experience of an American living in Mexico has helped provide Allan with a different perspective on this topic. As a result, he has arrived to the conclusion that today's mass immigration from Mexico to the United States is not good for either country.
Contact Allan Wall at allan39@prodigy.net.mx.
(Leave The Left Behind) |
||
![]() |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
Fox showed his true colors with his non-support of the US when he took the side of Saddam Hussein. I hope he realizes the costs.
Allan has published a tour de force with this article, which essentially summarizes why the Americans in California, Arizona, Texas and New Mexico are no longer free: because a foreign government now directly influences their elections and the policies and laws of their governments. That's what happens when you let a foreign populace, unnaturalized and uninvited, simply walk in, and assert that they are sovereign.
It's funny to read people on this forumn fulminate about the interference of the federal government in state business and then be utterly silent about the obvious intervention of a foreign and hostile government. When will they realize that laws for Americans are being in written in Mexico City?
_________________________
In English, the Sanchez ads promote common sense conservative values, values of rural Texas, cutting government waste, eliminating unnecessary programs, getting tough on crime, support for the death penalty and holding taxes down. In an ad that could just as easily have been produced by the NRA, Sanchez declared that we dont need more gun laws.
But the Spanish-language ads never utilized the word conservative, never talked about being tough on crime or about Sanchez support for the death penalty. The Spanish ads didnt mention the right to bear arms or cutting government waste or keeping taxes low.
They did, however, contain a number of veiled and not-so-veiled ethnic appeals to Hispanics. I got warmer, folksier, more intimate vibes being expressed through the Spanish ads, which often addressed the listeners as my dear friends or something similar. The Spanish-language ads emphasized that Sanchez no se olvida de sus raíces [hasnt forgotten his roots] and was el amigo del pueblo [the friend of the people]. They often referred to nuestra gente or nuestro pueblo [our people]. Another lamented the fact that nos falta tratamiento (sic, should be trato) con igualdad [we lack equal treatment] and nuestra gente buscan las mismas oportunidades de los demas [our people seek the same opportunities as the others]. Unlike the English ads, inmigrantes and colonias were mentioned in the Spanish Ads. One ad said bluntly that En toda la historia de Tejas nunca hemos tenido un gobernador de nuestro pueblo méxico-americano [In the entire history of Texas we have never had a governor of our people Mexican-American].
When I was in Texas in October, I heard another ad on a Spanish-language radio station which didnt appear on Sanchez campaign website. This ad was a blatant appeal to Hispanic solidarity to frustrate the Republicans, who according to the ad thought that Hispanics are lazy and wont turn out to vote!
In contrast, one of Sanchez English-language ads promoted the virtue of bipartisanship!
This seems to be an emerging trend. Spanish-language political ads are no longer simply translations of English-language ads. They are now designed differently, to appeal to what are perceived as Hispanic interests. A recent California news article points out (read it here) that gubernatorial candidates Davis and Simon both put on a different face in Spanish ads.
Whats the big deal? some readers might ask. Dont all politicians tailor their message to particular interest groups? Even in a monolingual society, pandering is a politicians specialty.
Maybe. But at least in a monolingual society, an informed voter can more easily monitor what a politician is saying to another audience. Americas hapless English-speaking majority, on the other hand, is blissfully ignorant of most of what is being said in the parallel Spanish-language media, whether its politics, journalism or entertainment.
Shootin' high on expectations, huh? "Please don't be mean to us, we're sorry we had a successful country and you didn't. We'll do anything you say now, meek little mice that we are".
Seems to be going that way, doesn't it? Eventually I guess I'll have to ask the Alcalde de Tucson to visit the graves of my family.
You got it. Fox knew there would be no penalty from Bush for not supporting our actions in Iraq. Bush is as much an advocate of Illegal Immigration as Fox is.
heh heh heh. Well on the bright side, when that day comes we won't be hearing much from the neo-con contingent about how great this epic wave of 3rd world immigration is for America. They will be too busy fleeing for the countryside.
BTW, I couldn't help but notice how silent the Neo-Con corner of Loud Mouth, Fire Breathing, Empire Advocating, Chicken Hawks were when the press made it look like our war effort in Iraq was bogging down into another Vietnam quagmire. In fact I often felt down right lonely on many of the war threads for saying that the military plan was working brilliantly and that our guys were wrapping up Saddam's Regime like tin foil.
It really is hard to take this bunch seriously...especially when the chips are down.
Aww, don't worry! As soon as they get out from underneath the desks, they'll be louder than ever before. Which is what worries me the most: now that the war is won, they will be advocating open immigration as the other poster said. So the flow from the south will now become a tidal wave, if we aren't already there. Border enforcement will simply cease to exist and the gates will be thrown open, because Bush is now in hock to them. What fun...hope I'm proved wrong on that, but...I don't think so.
But permit me to point out one other little common sense observation. If -- in daily life -- you encounter someone speaking another language around you, what is it that you think immediately? Right. Are they talking about me? Some people would jump in here and say "that's paranoia!" -- but it's not. It's simple self preservation and reasonable suspicion. Imagine what the hijackers were saying to each other in Arabic prior to their final act. They could be reasonably sure that no one would understand them. So they could conspire in the open. And the PC intimidated American public just merrily walks by, hoping...praying...that their secret fears are untrue. But they were true.
So tolerance of "bilingualism" can in fact be lethal. America knew this not too long ago. It was considered rude to speak in another language in front of people for just this reason. But along with other judicial acts of tyranny, the courts have now essentially ruled that you have no right to demand of co-workers and apparently politicians that they should be polite and be sensitive to the wishes of their fellow citizens. I would say that's because they aren't our fellow citizens -- their loyalty is with Mexico and the other Latin American countries that they wish to live in, but find economically unattractive.
So to me bilingualism is not just a cultural threat, but a physical one.
Gee, no kiddin'? Name one. I have watched as Tamar Jacoby, Bill Kristol and the entire staff of The Weekly Standard and the Cato Institute have worked overtime to try and stave off any reversal of the Immivasion.
Michelle Malkin was correct on immigration before 9-11.
Of course Birchers adn Old-Rightists consider Bill Buckley to be a necon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.