The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files.
I mentioned earlier my theory that US authorities and politicians on both sides, including the Bush administration, are doing so little to uphold US border controls with Mexico because they have already decided that the border is scheduled for demolition anyway, in favor of a North American Union. I was accused of paranoia by some, but I am increasingly certain that this interpretation is correct after reading about the European Union. Many powerful elitists do in fact view the European bloc as a success, and are adopting similar tactics of gradually abandoning border controls by bureaucratic and administrative decisions, with little or no public debate.
Without effective border controls, there is no national sovereignty, and without national sovereignty there can be no effective democracy. What will be the future of the United States if this open border policy continues? My prediction is that it could mean the end of the USA as a superpower, perhaps the end of the USA as one country.
I read recently that in the Los Angeles region, racial and ethnic segregation is in fact increasing, not decreasing as the Multicultural diversity enthusiasts are claiming. One of my friends from California sent me a link indicating that some of the large Hollywood studios are contemplating moving out of Los Angeles because of the tensions and crime rates caused by massive Mexican immigration. With Latin American immigration, the US is also importing some of the problems of Latin America. The violent gang problem that is so huge in Central America is now being exported to you. So maybe will political corruption.
Will the USA become the Brazil of North America, with massive Third World ghettos, urban violence and a few rich, gated communities in between? Or will the country simply fall apart?
– – – – – – – – – –
From my earlier post at Gates of Vienna:
Are the American elites really as clueless as they seem? There is another, and more disturbing possibility: The US political establishment are in no hurry to stop illegal immigration because they have already de facto decided that the United States as a nation state should be dismantled in favor of a union of North America, perhaps later of all of the Americas. They just forgot to inform their own citizens about this. Does this sound like a crazy conspiracy theory? Well, this is in fact what happened in Europe.
It is striking to notice how the political establishment on both sides of the spectrum are unwilling to do anything to uphold the territorial integrity of the USA.
From Human Events:
North American Union Already Starting to Replace USA
…none of the 30 or so working agendas makes any mention of submitting decisions to the U.S. Congress for review and approval. No new U.S. laws are contemplated for the Bush administration to submit to Congress. Instead, the plan is obviously to knit together the North American Union completely under the radar, through a process of regulations and directives issued by various U.S. government agencies.
…Yet, we can find no single speech in which President Bush has ever openly expressed to the American people his intention to create a North American Union by evolving NAFTA into this NAFTA-Plus as a first, implementing step.
Anyone who has wondered why President Bush has not bothered to secure our borders is advised to spend some time examining the SPP working groups’ agenda. In every area of activity, the SPP agenda stresses free and open movement of people, trade, and capital within the North American Union. Once the SPP agenda is implemented with appropriate departmental regulations, there will be no area of immigration policy, trade rules, environmental regulations, capital flows, public health, plus dozens of other key policy areas countries that the U.S. government will be able to decide alone, or without first consulting with some appropriate North American Union regulatory body. At best, our border with Mexico will become a speed bump, largely erased, with little remaining to restrict the essentially free movement of people, trade, and capital.
What will happen to the sovereignty of the United States? The model is the European Community.
Mexico says it may go to the United Nations to challenge US plans to build hundreds of kilometres of fences on its southern border.
The Foreign Secretary, Luis Ernesto Derbez, said the plan was offensive.
The US President, George Bush, yesterday signed a homeland security funding bill that includes $US1.2 billion ($1.6 billion) for fencing along the US-Mexico border to stop illegal immigrants and criminals sneaking over.
Mr Fox’s spokesman, Ruben Aguilar, said the US Congress was unlikely to approve enough funding to finish the project, despite the $US1.2 billion approved.
“There is no money to build it, so it won’t be built,” he said.
From The New York Sun:
Students stormed the stage at Columbia University’s Roone auditorium yesterday, knocking over chairs and tables and attacking Jim Gilchrist, the founder of the Minutemen…
Having wreaked havoc onstage, the students unrolled a banner that read, in both Arabic and English, “No one is ever illegal.”…
The Minuteman Project, an organization of volunteers founded in 2004 by Mr. Gilchrist, aims to keep illegal immigrants out of America by alerting law enforcement officials when they attempt to cross the border. The group uses fiery language and unorthodox tactics to advance its platform. “Future generations will inherit a tangle of rancorous, unassimilated, squabbling cultures with no common bond to hold them together, and a certain guarantee of the death of this nation as a harmonious ‘melting pot,’” the group’s Web site warns.
Immigration and Usurpation
When I aided the foreign relations of presidential candidate and president-elect Vicente Fox back in 1999 and 2000, I met with almost 80 U.S. congressmen and senators during numerous trips and at several events. …American politicians are overwhelmingly pro-immigration, for a variety of reasons, and they do not always admit this to their constituents. Of those 50 legislators, 45 were unambiguously pro-immigration, even asking us at times to “send more.”
Democrats wanted increased immigration because Latin American immigrants tend to vote Democrat once naturalized (we did not meet a single Democrat that was openly against mass immigration); and Republicans like immigration because their sponsors (businesses and churches) do.
I remember few instances when a legislator spoke well of his or her white constituents. One even called them “rednecks,” and apologized to us on their behalf for their incorrect attitude on immigration. Most of them seemed to advocate changing the ethnic composition of the United States as an end in itself.
Some legislators had also mentioned to us (oftentimes laughing) how they had “defanged” or “gutted” anti-immigration bills and measures, by neglecting to fund this program or tabling that provision, or deleting the other measure, etc.
During the 18 months when I aided Fox’s foreign relations, in those meetings with what became the new Mexican elite I do not recall so many discussions about “what can we do to make tough decisions to reform Mexico,” but rather more “how can we get more concessions from the United States.”… Lacking internal or external pressure, the Mexican elites have taken the path of least resistance, which is not the best outcome for the country.
If an organizeable mass of Americans comes to suspect that mass immigration from Latin America is being used by the political class to undermine their democracy and as a tool to liberate the political elites from the Jeffersonian and Madisonian constraints, then indeed we may witness a reaction — but hopefully not against the immigrants themselves, as they are also objects of elite manipulations in more than one country.
From The Conservative Voice:
…there’s increasing disenchantment with President Bush on his handling of illegal immigration and border security… Mexican nationals dressed in military uniforms are coming into the United States while they protect drug and human traffickers and yet our leaders in Washington at best offer lip-service, at worst ignore the problem not wishing to alienate a perceived voting block.
In Los Angeles, 95 percent of the outstanding arrest warrants for homicide are for illegal aliens, with 65 percent of the overall arrest warrants are for illegals.
…How can the President of the United States allow a foreign soldiers on US soil who are carrying automatic firearms? …US police departments are outgunned and outmanned and no one save a few congressmen are displaying any concern.
From my earlier post at Gates of Vienna:
Ethnically homogeneous nations enjoy a “trust bonus” which reduces the amount of conflict. There is little evidence that any theoretical “diversity” bonus from immigration will cancel out the loss of this “trust bonus.” South Korea and Japan are among the world leaders in technology. They are both ethnically homogeneous nations. Even China, which does have significant ethnic minorities, could soon be more ethnically homogeneous than many so-called Western nations. There will be no lack of “diversity” in the 21st century, but there could be a lack of functioning, coherent nation states. Maybe the West will “celebrate diversity” until our countries fall apart, and global leadership will be transferred to East Asia.
…it is not without dangers to “celebrate diversity” in a country as diverse as the US. Americans should try celebrating what binds them together instead, or they may wake up one day and discover that they don’t really have a lot in common. What then for the United States?
From: The Financial Times:
A bleak picture of the corrosive effects of ethnic diversity has been revealed in research by Harvard University’s Robert Putnam, one of the world’s most influential political scientists… “In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us.”
Prof Putnam found trust was lowest in Los Angeles, “the most diverse human habitation in human history”…
When the data were adjusted for class, income and other factors, they showed that the more people of different races lived in the same community, the greater the loss of trust. “They don’t trust the local mayor, they don’t trust the local paper, they don’t trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” said Prof Putnam. “The only thing there’s more of is protest marches and TV watching.”
Between the last official census in 2000 and the one of 2050, non-Hispanic whites will have dwindled from 69 percent to a bare majority of 50.1 percent. The share who are Hispanic will have doubled to 24 percent.
“The fact that today we see young people intermarrying more, interracial dating much more common — all of that I think portends that we’re going to become much more ecumenical in the way we look at things than we were in the past,” says William Frey, a demographer at the University of Michigan and the Brookings Institution. “I think we’ll have much more tolerance for people of other backgrounds, cultures and languages, points of view, and religious and belief systems.”