The right decision, he says, would be to maintain our traditional commitment to assimilation. For two centuries, we turned immigrants into Americans; whatever their family heritage or religious orientation, they became people who spoke English, recited the Pledge of Allegiance, worked hard in school, learned American history, accepted American culture, and joined the American workforce.
As I've said over and over on this forum, there is no such thing as assimilation, only amalgamation, ar least when the numbers exceed a certain low level, and especially when the parts to be amalgamated are radically different. The Europeans who immigrated in the late 19th and early 20th century didn't "turn . . .into Americans", they changed America, generally for the worse. They brought radical politics to these shores and for decades a large percentage, if not the majority, of members of radical political organizations and movements were comprised of these immigrants or their children. (One of the reasons for restricting immigration in the 1920s was a reaction to several decades of political violence that included numerous bombings and the assassination of at least one president.) There is a direct line between that immigration wave and the revolution of the 1960s. If that wave of Europeans brought us the earthquake of the 60s what will this one bring?