http://www.stanfordreview.org/Archive/V ... ons1.shtml
The Stanford Review - Printer Friendly Page
© V2.0 - CJ Website Design
www.cj-design.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Buchanan on Nationhood

by Chris Seck

Staff Writer




Forward Article to a Friend

Print Article

Discuss in Forum



In high school, I read What’s So Great About America by Dinesh D’Souza, an Indian immigrant who is currently a fellow at the Hoover Institution. In the book, D’Souza invoked the “melting pot” argument in his opinion that immigration benefits this country: People become true Americans by shedding their “old ties to the mother country” and tying their destinies to America’s ideals, including the liberating idea that one should have the freedom to shape one’s destiny.

As a first-generation minority immigrant, I had a warm feeling after reading D’Souza’s cheerful little book. On a personal note, I spent much of my childhood reading about the Constitution, learning about our nation’s history and heroes, and learning about the American ideals of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Having lived in Singapore before and toured nations ranging from China to Thailand to Malaysia, I think that immigrants who come to America are among the luckiest people in the world.

But is it possible for immigrants to be apathetic, or to even hate America? I did not think so—not until I read Pat Buchanan’s State of Emergency: the Third World Invasion and Conquest of America.

To be frank, I admit that State Of Emergency has a rather sensational title. But before I review his book, I think it would be useful to consider Buchanan’s perspective. I think that his unique background, like D’Souza’s, adds to the rich diversity of our national fabric.

Unlike immigrants, who come from distant lands in recent years, Buchanan’s family came from near lands in distant years: he was descended from the early European settlers who came to America. As he noted in his autobiography, Right From The Beginning, the Buchanan family “migrated to North Carolina in the late 1700s, and, from there, moved on to the hill country of the northern Mississippi.” On the internet, I even found a website detailing Buchanan’s ancestry through nine generations. Some of his ancestors even fought in the Civil War.

Therefore, given this romantic past, Buchanan offers us a unique perspective on the meaning of citizenship and patriotism. He disagrees with D’Souza’s (and my) belief that America is a “creedal nation,” united by a set of common ideals. Instead, in State Of Emergency, Buchanan argues that America is united by the “bonds of history and memory, tradition and custom, language and literature, birth and faith, blood and soil.” In other words, Buchanan’s patriotism is derived not from the fact that America is democratic or rich, but that America is “his” country and his culture—his ancestors lived here, he grew up here, he loves America’s history, he celebrates Thanksgiving, and he loves apple pie.

To us, Buchanan’s “blood and soil” patriotism may seem rather simplistic and un-intellectual. But it is nevertheless sensible and natural: Most people love their countries for cultural reasons. For example, even though China is ruled by a Communist dictatorship, the Chinese people love their country because it is the land of their ancestors, they enjoy Chinese food, they admire the Great Wall, and they love to celebrate Chinese festivals.

Immigrants might become disillusioned with America should she betray her values. But I suspect that people like Buchanan would remain proud Americans through thick or thin, even if America becomes poor or autocratic. As Buchanan writes: “Had America succumbed to dictatorship in the Cold War, we would still be Americans, recognizable by far more than the political beliefs we possess.” And there is no reason why we should consider “cultural” patriotism to be any less valid than “creedal” patriotism.

Are there immigrants who hate America? Buchanan gives a shockingly long list, including “Jamaican Colin Ferguson, who shot down twenty-five people in a racist rampage,” “Angel Resendez, the rail-riding rapist-killer of nine American women,” and the “Beltway Sniper John Lee Malvo, who shot a dozen Americans for sport.”

The problem, Buchanan suggests, is that too many immigrants are not required to actually love America before they are granted citizenship. It is one thing to debate the relative merits of the D’Souza brand of patriotism and the Buchanan brand of patriotism. But it is a rather different problem if the immigrant in question is neither: he does not love America at all.

Most of Buchanan’s book centers around the issue of illegal immigration, particularly that from Mexico. He points out, quite rightly, that it would be a bad idea to offer citizenship to the illegal immigrants because this would be unfair to the people who are lining up to apply legally. At the same time, he quotes several of the key costs of illegal immigration, that “Between 1994 and 2003, the mandated cost of caring for illegals forced eighty-four of California’s hospitals to shut down,” and, more notably, President Bush’s admission that of the 4.5 million illegal immigrants apprehended at the border in the past 5 years, there were “more than 350,000 with criminal records.”

Buchanan then quotes more facts and figures concerning illegal immigration. He makes a lot of valid points, although I personally disagree with his assumption that the Republican Party would “lose the Hispanic vote” if it cracks down on illegal immigration. In April this year, the Los Angeles Times stated that ethnic Chinese make up the second-largest group of illegal immigrants. Personally, I am Chinese, but I do not feel that the Republican Party would lose my vote if they deport the illegal Chinese immigrants. Most minority citizens, regardless of race, believe in doing what’s best for America, rather than engaging in raw identity politics.

Then, Buchanan makes a rather stunning prediction. In the distant future, he argues, illegal immigration could potentially cause America to lose the Southwest to Mexico. He states that “at least 6 million Mexicans are here illegally,” and points out that many of these illegal immigrants, being non-Americans, are loyal to Mexico. Buchanan writes that if this illegal immigration continues to the point where the illegal immigrants outnumber Americans, Mexico could one day “reconquer the lost territory in New Mexico, Texas, and Arizona.”

Agree or disagree with that statement, it probably would make for an interesting debate.
All in all, State Of Emergency is an eye-opening read. But if there is one flaw to this book, it would probably be the last chapter, where Buchanan talks about the steps needed to solve America’s immigration problems. Unlike most of the book, which is interesting and well argued, I found most of his suggestions in the final chapter to be uncreative and banal, to the point of being almost clichéd. Let us examine three of them:

Buchanan spent nearly four pages explaining America’s need for a fence on the U.S.-Mexico border. The sheer length of his argument puzzled me. I could not think of a single group of people, aside from illegal immigrants, who could possibly disagree with our need for a wall, let alone a fence. A fence would easily reduce the flow of illegal immigration to a manageable level. Almost anyone living outside America would recognize instantly that we need a fence.

Equally, Buchanan spent even more space arguing our need to abolish dual citizenship, arguing that it is a bad idea to let some Americans “swear allegiance to foreign powers, vote in foreign elections, run for office and accept high appointment in foreign regimes, serve in the armed forces and fight in the wars of foreign nations.” He then adds: “A man can no more give loyalty to two countries than he can give fidelity to two women. One will always be first in his heart.” Most of us would be inclined to agree.

Finally, Buchanan wrote that America should not provide “social welfare” or “free education from preschool through high school” to illegal immigrants. Wouldn’t most taxpaying Americans agree that paying for the free education and healthcare of illegal immigrants is unfair?

I found most of Buchanan’s State Of Emergency to be an interesting read. Although his suggestions in the final chapter struck me as somewhat trite and unoriginal, most of his book was witty, articulate, and to-the-point, particularly the chapters on the meaning of citizenship, patriotism, and nationhood. Overall, this book raises many important issues for meaningful debate.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Printed from: http://www.stanfordreview.org/Archive/V ... ons1.shtml