I often find libertarian defenses of mass immigration have an air of unreality. Skill sets, the ability to assimilate, the American ideal, the good of the economy, and the like are all very interesting qualities standing alone, but the real impact of mass immigration comes from the numbers.
Lots of immigrants are coming. Even if they were all Europeans, by nature more assimilable, the sheer amount of immigrants would be troubling. But these immigrants are overwhelmingly from the Third World. Their demographics are a deliberate byproduct of the 1965 immigration reform legislation, this a vestige of Mid-Sixties social engineering.
By the sheer force of numbers, these Third World immigrants will change our country into something more like the places they came from. USA Today reminds us that by 2050, if immigration continues unabated, our population will increase from 300mm to 480mm. The article points out that the vast majority of that change will come from Hispanic immigrants and their children; in this short time, the Hispanic population will triple from roughly 13% of the population to 40%.
The famous Numbers USA graph says it all:
Almost anything is bearable in small amounts; however, by overwhelming and displacing the native majority, mass Latin immigration threatens the identity and cultural integrity of the United States. You cannot double your population, reducing the natives to a minority in 50 years, and expect anything other than a profound and unpredictable social change. Judging by the crime explosion and impoverishment of places like East L.A., South Houston, and other meccas of Mexican immigration, the prospects of a favorable outcome are dim. Instead, we can logically expect lots of Latin Americans by their presence to turn the United States into a place more like the Latin American countries: corrupt, weak, unstable, violent, and defined by massive inequality between small numbers of rich people and a large class of resentful proletarians.
Our large middle class and vital institution of civil society have served as buffers that stabilized the limited government and free market traditions of America. They find no parallel in any part of the Third World, and the absence of civil society and a large middle class from Latin America is particularly notable. Yet our immigration policies guarantee the displacement of our inherited way of life and the rise of this Latin culture, an inferior culture inseparable from its people.
Subscribe To This Feed
Latin high culture is superior to ours but of course Mexicans are not a product of that high culture.
Mexican high culture is not too bad, but it’s pretty lazy with an ideal of leisure, but unfortunately has little sense of noblesse oblige. It’s also a lot haughtier than that of rich Americans. Just imagine Vicente Fox quail hunting all day in between three hour lunches and dinners.
Then again, when they eat, they don’t do this little neo-Puritan penance about “this is so bad for me” as has become the annoying custom at home.
But we don’t have to worry too much about peasant rebellions killing us and our priests, so I say we’re probably a bit better off.
It’s also important to note, that if 40% of the total population is Hispanic, then the majority of people under 40 will be Hispanic.
I think this fact, coupled with the age of the elderly social-security-taking population will make social security a race issue by 2050 along the lines of: why should we work hard and get half our money taken away so a bunch of rich white assholes can play golf while we bust our asses cleaning their cars, mowing their lawns, and raising their grandkids?
Very good research on those numbers, looking on from the outside so to speak, is there not a quota system in operation? Like in the U.K we have amended the citizenships so that immigrant are well educated, able to speak English, and have a high skill set as to contribute to the country.