It's evening in America, Buchanan says, and immigrants are to blame (Buchanan interview)

Fort Worth Star-Telegram | 1/03/2002 | Jeff Guinn (Books Editor)

[garbanzo]

Employers should be allowed to shop for the lowest prices for labor that they can get. But the laws of market economics dictate how far down they can go.

The "they're-taking-our-jobs" approach strikes me as amazingly socialist in that it assumes that a person is entitled to a particular job at a particular price because he wants it at that price and the government's job is to prop up that price regardless of market conditions.

[Thorin]

No, the assumption isn't "socialist," it's American. Unlike the hyper-libertarians, I believe that nations are real entitities, not artificial constructs that should be pushed aside in favor of world government and corporate power.

I also believe that I have certain obligations to my country and my countrymen, and I do not want to see my countrymen lose work or suffer from declining wages as a result of mass immigration. If you'd examine American history, you would learn that many American statesmen felt the same way.

[WRhine]

Your proposed immigration policy vests complete power in corporate interests, which is contrary to the American tradition of having the American people (through their elected representatives) determine who can come to these shores.

Thorin, you hit the nail on the head once again. That would be the upshot of the kind of immigration policy that Garbanzo advocates. Sad to say that much of this is already in place if not in structure certainly in practice.

[WRhine]

How about the conservatives? Is the Ice-man expressing the what you guys really feel?

As far as I am concerned...you bet. What the Ice-man laid out in his posts is pretty much the way I see what is happening in this country. And he did a great job of explaining the underlying factors and historical background of this immigration invasion and why it spells trouble ahead. I give the Ice-man a lot of credit for having the guts to speak the whole truth in no uncertain terms on this very controversial subject. The truth may hurt but if the truth never sees the light of day due to PC this crisis will only get worse.

[garbanzo]

I guess that's where we disagree - about the "realness" of nations. I think much of the reification of nationality in the modern era, especially in the US - comes from the relative stability of national borders over the last half-century. As the US has never really lost any territory we sometimes come to think of those lines on the maps as being real things rather than as political constructs. Historically, especially in Europe, borders were forever changing - and it's only been since the end of the war that Europe has enjoyed the fiction of well-defined borders - in large part because all of the countries in western Europe embraced democratic capitalism.

From the other side of the coin - many Mexicans believe that the southwest belongs to them because the US stole it from Mexico. And we did take a lot of land from Indians and Mexico and others so the modern idea of protecting "our" borders can plausibly said to be somewhat hypocritical.

[traditionalist]

Because the truth is that a lot of the restrictionits ARE xenophobic and racist. It is not so much that they disdain unfettered immigration but the 'type' of people that are coming over. As i've said before, if people like Pat would restrict their critiques to culture and politics, then they would have a legitimate point. However, the Buchanans of the world seem to show their true colors when they start to talk in terms of racial types. Somehow, the presumption seems to be that America would not really be 'America' if it didn't have a 'white' majority. Never mind that the Colin Powells or Clarence Thomas's of the world show us otherwise.

I am neither xenophobic nor racist, and neither is Pat. However, I believe the West (America and Europe) will cease to be the West if they cease to have a majority of European descent.

The argument does not rest upon racism or xenophobia. It rests upon this question: Does not a society lose its identity if it is suddenly overwhelmed by people who were not born into it and whose ancestors were not a part of it?

The question of whether individuals whose ancestors were not part of a society can adopt it as their own and become full-fledged members is an entirely different question. The answer is that yes, it is possible, but it is difficult and cannot happen overnight. America at the turn of the last century was a Balkinized mess, littered with ethnic ghettos and immigrant-driven political machines. It took 41 years of no immigration (1924-1965) and two world wars to successfully assimilate all the Italian, Irish, German, and Slavic ethnics. Experience shows that the only way to make aliens full-fledged members of a society is to cut them from their roots, immerse them in the new society, and force them to accept the new society's heretage and roots as their own. How can this be done if natives cease to be a majority?

Also, I think that it is a sad day in America when our['hispanic'] patriotism and loyalty is being questioned. Never mind the high number of 'Hispanics' who are currently serving in our military or the millions of proud Americans who would never think of a 'reconquista'. But I guess that we will never be 'real' Americans in a lot of people's eyes.

I know there are many Meztizos who are proud, loyal Americans. However you cannot ignore the rhetoric of the leaders of the Meztinzo communities in the US. Mexican polititians openly speak of reconquista, as do leaders of all the major Meztizo organizations. President Fox says that he considers all people of Mexican origin living in the US as his citizens. Is this not a real problem, which is in part due to too much Meztizo immigration?

[traditionalist]

From the above comments, it is obvious that you do not consider people of 'color' being 'real' Americans. Somehow, you need pure whiteness to qualify as a full person and to preserve the ideals of freedom.

Sigh. Go back and read my post. You obviously didn't get past the first sentence. And do try to get past this leftist nonsense that anyone concered with demographics is a racist. It is such a bore.

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with you on that one.

[Regulator]

Boy oh Boy, The PC Poh-Leese gonna come get you for that.....hadn't you heard? There never was an American people. Jus' a motley gang'o'immigrants. Where U git these strange ideas?

Obviously, /sarcasm.

[garbanzo]

Isn't time to shave your head again? How long do you let the stubble grow before it's time to shear it off?

My people is the human race.

[garbanzo]

One more thing - do you really want to align yourself with the likes of Iceberg?

[WRhine]

What the Ice-man laid out in his posts is pretty much the way I see what is happening in this country.

Opps. Sorry, I mean't Iceberg.

[DoughtyOne]

You're refering to Iceberg's post in 451.   In it he defends the "idea" that his race should survive.  You evidently feel that this "idea" is too controversial to be aired.  In fact you try to shame me into refuting that post or even admitting that I could possibly agree with him.  I find nothing objectional in his premise.

I believe you stated that you were of Mexicen ancestry.  If asked if I thought it were a good thing to see your race extinguished, I'd answer with an emphatic no!  In fact I find it distrubing every time an isolated tribe or language ceases to exist.  Those should be sustained, even by artifical means if necessary.  Should they become the dominant cultures outside their normal rhelm?  Of course not.

Let me ask you something.  Do you think we should allow Klydsdale (sp?) horses to become extinct?  Why not, there are many different horses aren't there?  So what if one subset disappears?  What about subsets of birds, fish, cats or any other species?  I would hope that you would agree that to lose a one of them would be a shame.  Yet when it comes to humans, you're right up front with your appearant glee that the caucasian race as a percentage of the world's populace is in decline.  And when confronted with the fact that there may be no nations with a majority white populace within fifty years, you ask, "So what?"

And you think we're racists?

[leftiesareloonie]

There is no such thing as race. Scientifically speaking, it is an utterly empty notion. On another post, Iceberg, you claim to admire science. So you should just drop all this race-consciousness stuff altogether. It has done not one wit of good in the entire history of the world. It has served only those who would enslave or oppress others.

I am for the relatively free (but regulated) movement of capital and of labor everywhere. A global market place is the only thing that will spread freedom and wealth all around the world.

[leftiesareloonie]

I'm with you garbanzo. Thems my people too.

Race consciouness serves only facism of the left or right. you get facism of the left, when victimhood is wielded as a weapon against those who are wrongly, but irrefutably (to the so-called victims) called oppressors. you get facism of the right when race is used illegitimately as a basis of really locking out, victimizing, exterminating, enslaving the "other."

If race consciousness just disappeared both the possibility of left facism and right facism would disappear too -- or at least one of the potential sources of each would be severely diminshed. I'm too much of a pessimist to believe that we wouldn't find other was to step on each other.

[leftiesareloonie]

I'm with you garbanzo. Thems my people too.

Race consciouness serves only facism of the left or right. you get facism of the left, when victimhood is wielded as a weapon against those who are wrongly, but irrefutably (to the so-called victims) called oppressors. you get facism of the right when race is used illegitimately as a basis of really locking out, victimizing, exterminating, enslaving the "other."

If race consciousness just disappeared both the possibility of left facism and right facism would disappear too -- or at least one of the potential sources of each would be severely diminshed. I'm too much of a pessimist to believe that we wouldn't find other was to step on each other.

[leftiesareloonie]

I have to say, Iceberg, I don't know which sort of psuedo-conservative wacko scares me more -- xenophobic racists or intellectually lazy religious zealots. I don't want my good name affiliated with either Pat Roberston or Pat Buchanan. I count both of them as wolves in sheeps clothing.