Justify however you want. I don't care. As long as there are minority groups with a higher tendency to vote commie/ democrat than the Mexicans, which there are, then that's not a valid reason to exclude them.
I wasn't talking about Mexicans in particular. I want a reduction of all immigrants because they tend heavily Democrat for at least 2 generations. Some groups tend democrat far longer.
No you're missing the point. A handful of Mexicans on one college campus do not speak for the entire group. and again with their behavior being not unique, and actually excelled in stupidity and anti-American rhetoric by other groups it again is a poor arguement to kick them out.
It isn't just a small group. These troublemakers then rewrite American history as Professors.
I can't look at the crap EU is pulling and say that communism as an international movement is dead. Communism as pushed by the Soviet Union is dead. communism as an international movement went into witness relocation and seems to be alive and well and gaining converts under an assumed name.
Corporatism is soft Fascism, not communism.
Roman citizens never became slaves.
Wrong. Especially around the time of Caesar, poor plebians were selling themselves into slavery as they had no jobs.
People born in Rome, who's lineage was also from Rome for many generations, became slaves IF they had never been citizens. Citizenship in Rome, especially near the end of the Republic and into the Empire, had very little to do with where you were born and quite a lot to do with the citizenship status of your parents.
True. Is it possible that the loss of cultural identity and the change in polity might have helped spark teh rise of the Demagogic Patrician leaders and of Dictators like Caesar?
True Rome expanded too quickly to assimilate the new residents (some of whom were citizens, many not). But that wasn't why they stopped being a Republic. The Senate became useless and the emperors took over "to get something done", always something to keep in mind when current leaders start complaining about gridlock, an ineffectual government isn't always a bad thing.
Teh Republic died teh day Julius Caesar got himself elected Dictator for Life. Why do you think a group of Senators, including his illegitimate sun Brutus had him killed?
Mexico wants to join the US and Canada as a "real" nation in North America. They're making noise to not be ignored. But all this bloviating by the politicians means nothing without the participation of the people. I've seen no behavior from the Mexican immigrants showing that they're taking over the country. Krushev said he'd bury us, that didn't happen either.
1. Claiming the illegitimacy of borders is not congruent with claiming nationhood.
2. New Mexico and California have no ethnic minorities. In 20 years Mexicans will be the biggest group in CA. We are being swamped.
The Tejas example doesn't prove anything about the current situation. At best it shows that it is possible to "invade" a country with immigration. I haven't denied this.
Might it also show that immigration from neighboring countries is different?
Might it also show why revanchism is possible?
More recently the "immigration" of things like Coke and McDonald's into the USSR shows that it can happen well over seas too.
People immigrate. Products are sold. The people of the USSR bought coke. Most Americans do not approve of current immigration numbers.
too. All that sharing a border means is that it's easier. Of course we have a longer border with Canada and it's got even fewer defenses, so why aren't we panic stricken about them?
1. 20 million Canadians, 120 million Mexicans.
2. Canada is a first world country. There is virtually no illegal immigration by Canadians.
3. Canada is sparsely populated. Look at most Mexican cities.
4. We do need to patrol our northern border not from Canadian ikmmigrants but because of the opthers who get through. The real question is what's happening now. And what's happening now is nothing to single out the Mexicans over.