Thread: The Thin Line Between Immigration & Invasion

Gabriel Garnica

The Thin Line Between Immigration & Invasion
By Gabriel Garnica
MichNews.com
Mar 5, 2007



Much has been said and written about the explosive issue of illegal immigration. We have seen how this subject has become a battleground for much debate and contention.



Perhaps most disturbing, liberals have performed their usual song and dance habit of wrapping their positions in myths conveniently twisted for their convenience. For a political group so enamored with the Inconvenient Truth, liberals sure are prone to ignore truth when it becomes inconvenient to them.



My recent article on the NYU incident involving a game called “Find The Illegal Immigrant” vividly revealed the hypocrisy and absurdity of the Left’s illegal immigration position. http://newmediajournal.us/staff/garnica ... 012007.htm



The sad fact remains that there is a thin line between immigration and invasion, and that line in the sand is not unlike the one Colonel Travis made within the walls of The Alamo long ago. Given today’s political environment, however, Colonel Travis would likely have been branded as a racist ingrate and his line in the sand kicked into oblivion by protesting groups. Instead of “Remember The Alamo”, we might as well be hearing “Why Didn’t Travis Just Have a Get Together?”



Simply put, the present day liberal and diluted centrist conservative positions on immigration represent the denial of three key realities, three truths that the same political side that comprises Gore’s fawning minions conveniently forget or, in the case of the last one, manipulate to their advantage.



The Ownership/Renter Reality



We have all been told, ad nauseam, that there is no comparison between the attitude of the owner versus that of the renter. The owner feels connected, emotionally tied, loyal and integrated to his or her surroundings. This person grows to love the environment that embraced him and, predictably, to become absorbed by those surroundings. This does not mean, of course, that the owner forgets where he came from. It only means that he respects and accepts the responsibilities, duties and expectations of where he is now and where he intends to go.



Authors like Robert Locke and Peter Brimelow have astutely and brilliantly pointed out the fact that immigrants who do not take possession of their new home, who never Americanize themselves, will never care for, become loyal to or, for that matter, truly serve the land they have entered. They will always be thinking of themselves first, their families second, their culture of origin third, and down the line, with America being somewhere between what socks to buy and whether it is a good idea to have those late night chips.



The renter may live in the same property as the owner, but she never feels connected to that property. Unlike the person paying the mortgage and trying to improve the value of the land, the vast majority of the renter’s actions and thoughts remain personal, selfishly tied to himself and his use of that land. Constructive, healthy, controlled immigration is all about giving renters time to become owners, about allowing the natural process of Americanization, integration and absorption of new populations into a land, a culture and a society.



The Natural/Forced Reality



In Brimelow’s Alien Nation; Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster and in many of Robert Locke’s articles dealing with the history and process of immigration http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Pr ... sp?ID=2770 , we see a powerful and rational analysis of the proper perspective from which immigration must be analyzed.



Liberals love to wave the mantle that America is a nation of immigrants and relish tying the Ellis Island image to present immigration. They bash any attempt to limit or regulate immigration as evidenced by the slew of regulation reforms begun in 1965 which eliminated quotas and expanded the entire scope of immigration into this country.



History, however, tells us that one cannot compare the immigration of 1902 with that of today. A century ago there was a sink or swim immigration reality which, although viewed as harsh by liberals today, actually controlled the rate and numbers of immigration to levels that society could effectively and properly absorb. Locke points out that today’s lavish welfare state, affirmative action legislation, bilingual education and the erosion of America’s own cultural confidence through cultural relativism has destroyed that “survival of the fittest” reality that guaranteed that those who did make it in this new land were those most determined to succeed, integrate and work hard to reach their goals. It is a historical fact that it was not easy to get into this country in those days, and 1/3 of those who did ended up leaving because they could not hack it.



It is amusing that the same liberals who teach our youth about “survival of the fittest” turn around and teach “survival of everybody” when it comes to immigration. One by one, the natural borders of personal determination, willingness of integrate and respect for the new country have been eliminated, one by one, leaving this nation defenseless, vulnerable and largely pathetic.



Locke analyzes the 1921-24 Immigration Acts which, although they certainly had some biased and unpleasant tones, effectively and successfully provided ethnic and cultural stability for this society. The 1921 Quota Act cut down the raw numbers of immigration, allocated annual quotas by country of origin, reduced the poverty rate, rose average wages and per capita product, allowed cities to move toward middle-class status, and allowed new immigrants to Americanize themselves.



Maligned by the Left as extremist and cold-hearted, this legislation still allowed America to take in a city the size of Chicago each decade, and permitted this country to still remain, far and away, the most generous and welcoming immigrant haven in the world.



Today we have rampant, unbalanced, uncontrolled immigration including illegal immigration which, instead of being criticized and discouraged, is raised to noble heights and defended.



At the end of the day, the natural order of immigration demands that a society be allowed to have natural patterns and pauses in immigration to allow it to effectively, constructively and rationally take in populations in a healthy way. Just as it is not healthy to shove food down one’s throat at all hours of the day, a society needs to have time to absorb, time to pause, time to digest and time to accept more. Liberals, centrist conservative sell-outs and all who defend rampant and illegal immigration seek to jam such immigration down America’s throat against the natural order of societal health.



Such unhealthy, unnatural immigration policies do not allow new immigrants to integrate into American society, thus leading to hordes of renters demanding the same rights as owners.



The Historical/Political Reality



I recently read the very profound observation that Native Americans learned the hard way what happens when one does not control immigration. Newcomers came to America for many reasons that have been framed in noble terms today, but historical reality tells us that all of these reasons were selfish and self-serving. While certainly many newcomers may have had noble and unselfish reasons for their efforts, the vast majority came exploit, conquer and impose their way of life on those already here.



Locke has observed that, technically, colonists come to create a nation and immigrants come to integrate into an already existing one. However, even if America was not a nation per se, it was a land with already established inhabitants with their own culture, history and way of life worthy of respect. History tells us that respect was the last thing on the minds of those colonist/immigrants as they shoved, rammed and bullied their way across this land imposing their culture on the way.



The key difference between what happened to Native Americans and what is happening to present Americans is that the Natives were unable to control immigration because of their technological inferiority. In contrast, present natives have no such disadvantages yet they fail to control that immigration nonetheless because of a destructive allegiance or tolerance for radical liberal and distorted conservative philosophies and agendas.



From a political standpoint, Peter Brimelow has powerfully argued that the nature and rate of the present uncontrolled immigration is deadly to conservative beliefs.



Despite any claims to the contrary, the numbers show that immigrants overwhelming vote for pro-choice Democrats and even have higher abortion rates. Liberals are well aware of this reality, and that is why they see unchecked immigration and especially unchecked illegal immigration as a fountain of votes.



Conclusion



The dictionary defines “invasion” as a hostile entry with the intent of conquer, any unchecked and extreme entry and, subsequently, any incoming spread of a harmful reality. Certainly, any unreasonably large entry or illegal entry regardless of scope would be considered a hostile entry. Clearly, the realities of current immigration legislation and political/social attitudes have created an environment not conducive to integration, respect and Americanization. Such entry is akin to a conquering of American society by people with no intent of subordinating themselves to that society. In fact, if anything, these people believe that American society should subordinate itself to them, which has conquest written all over it in my book.



The sheer nature and volume of present immigration especially illegal immigration certainly denotes an unchecked and extreme entry, and all of this adds up to the spread of harm to anyone with two ounces of brains, one ounce of common sense and three ounces of loyalty to this once great nation.



The most immigrant welcoming nation in history has now passed the thin line between immigration and invasion. The past reality of natural and societal selection has been replaced by a lush welfare state and political/social policies that have virtually eroded any semblance of a controlled, regulated, fair and rational immigration reality. Humility, dedication, loyalty, industriousness and respect have been largely replaced by arrogance, insolence, passivity, disloyalty and disrespect.



If Emma Lazarus was writing her legendary call to immigrants today, it would read something like this:



“Give me your selfish, your arrogant, your huddled protestors demanding to be entitled



The wretched refusal to respect this land



Send these, the insolent, the ungrateful, those unwilling to compromise



I lift my borders blindly in utter betrayal of the nation they hold within”



http://www.michnews.com/artman/publi...le_16004.shtml

Thin line? It's one word. Illegal or Legal.

Dixie

I have never heard any illegal immigration advocate say "Please."

Originally Posted by Dixie

Thin line? It's one word. Illegal or Legal.

Dixie

We have a winner It's that simple and plain