Posts Tagged ‘Mexicans’

In many countries worldwide over the last 200 years, people have bordered one another and dueled over disputed lands:  Bessarabia, Kosovo, Danzig, Alsasce Lorraine, Ossetia, Palestine, etc.  Often different names for places, different languages, and a question of cultural supremacy was the root of the conflict.  Spiritual–not material–questions of whose culture, religion, language, heroes, symbols, and people would be dominant were the main issues.

America and Mexico share the largest frontier of a First and Third World country on Earth.  Mexicans in Mexico (and now in American public schools) are taught how America dastardly stole the Southwest.  It is brushed over that Mexico lost a war, signed a treaty, and even sold additional lands to the US some decades later in the form of the Gadsen Purchase.  Nonetheless, for them this is an ancient land, their ancient soil, and they want it.  Quite a few of them live here now, and where they have coalesced in large numbers, they have little respect for American claims over the symbols, culture, and language of their new home.

Once upon a time, perhaps 30-50 years ago, the fewer Mexicans that lived here were more fully assimilated, particularly in smaller towns where they worked in agriculture. They were eager to fit it, not least because their differences were often a source of derision by natives. It was a painful process, but it yielded great dividends for everyone concerned. (Of course, there’s always been some tension, as in the infamous Zoot Suit Riots.)  It’s noteworthy in the video above that one of the young American-flag-wearing students was part Mexican, though he has chosen his American identity.  His type, once more common, is becoming the minority.  The very numerous Mexican-Americans are reinforced every year by huge numbers of native newcomers from Mexico, are cordoned off in Spanish-speaking neighborhoods, enjoy a parallel media and a compliant education system, and see nothing but declining pride and confidence by Americans, as exemplified by this school principal’s idea that it’s “disrespectful” to wear an American flag in America on Cinco de Mayo.

A little cultural pride by immigrants is to be expected, though it’s dangerous for it to be tolerated without parallel displays of loyalty.  But in this instance it’s more fraught with political and social meaning because there is, in effect, a colonization of the American southwest taken place, complete with linguistic, political, economic, and social ascendancy, complete disrespect for our laws and customs, and mass departure by native born Americans.  This is not about having a few margaritas at Chilis and seeing a native dance.  Most Americans enjoy such things.  It’s about whether native born Americans and our country’s sacred symbols will be complete displaced, as the Serbs have been displaced from Kosovo, the Germans from Alsasce Lorraine and Danzig, the Romanians from Bessarabia, and so many others have been pushed off their lands by a more confident, more numerous, and more organized group.   If there’s one thing a video like this should convey, more than anything else, it’s that diversity is anything but our strength when it involves the migration of large numbers of very different people that have no interest in assimilating into their new, chosen land.

There is already a Mexico, and it’s hardly a paradise.  If we don’t want to see the entire Southwest turn into Tampaulipas North, then we need to kick out the illegals and forcibly erase the cultural pride and expressions of those that choose to live here, just as they (and their taskmasters in the media and academia) are trying to erase ours.

Read Full Post »

There is much worry over Arizona’s new law.  We’re told it’s racist and mean and will lead to profiling.  But the law is neutral:  it deals with illegal aliens wherever they’re from.  Opponents implicitly are saying (a) there are a great many illegal Mexican immigrants (which there are, of course) and (b) comparatively few that are white and European (which is also true).  But if there are many illegal Mexican immigrants, and so few others, maybe profiling is not such a bad thing, insofar as it yields a serious advantage to law enforcement. It’s not every crime whose perpetrators conveniently look differently from 90% of the native-born population.  Of course, there is admittedly some burden on native-born and otherwise legal Hispanics.  But the reality is that it should take two seconds for the average cop to distinguish an illegal Mexican immigrant and a legal resident, not least through some combination of paperwork, language skills, and appearance.  Mexican Americans look and act quite differently from illegal Mexican immigrants, believe it or not.

Read Full Post »

Whose Team Are You On?

The recent legislation in Arizona is a good opportunity for American-born and naturalized Hispanics to show if they’re loyal to this country and care about its welfare, or, alternately, if they are what their spokesmen describe:  an insular, self-interested, foreign group with the spirit of a colonizer, resentful, angry, contemptuous of, and alienated from the native-born majority.

Ruben Navarette asks, “This law is a reality check for all Latinos. It’s a helpful reminder that — as hard as we work, as much as we accomplish and progress — we are, by virtue of skin color or accent or Spanish surname, still on probation as far as some people are concerned. And we will be for life.”

Well, yes, that might be partly be true.  Of course, that’s true of any law enforcement measure where one group is disproportionately offending. There’s another dimension to this issue that’s not true for Chinese or British immigrants: we share a very long border with a Third World nation that has no respect for our sovereignty and that has sent literally millions of poor, illegal, and highly visible Mestizos into our majority-white country for the last 40 years. And, worse, many native-born Hispanics identity with, socialize with, marry, harbor, and protect these illegal aliens that do so much harm to our country.  As is typical for our multicultural age, Navarette and other immigrant activists ask for the right of his coethnics to insult us and be disloyal, while complaining about the natural consequences of such behavior for those Hispanics that are loyal and of legal status. By dint merely of living here, they want all the rights of other Americans, even as they show so little willingness to make any sacrifice for the common good.  Their ethnic and tribal good always comes first.  God forbid they say, as some South Asian Americans have with regard to terrorist profiling, “Search me first and leave grandma alone.”

I also think his chicken-little worries are over-stated. Any Hispanic legally in this country can probably get out of any trouble from this law through a few simple steps that nearly all native-born Hispanics can accomplish:  knowing English, having a driver’s license, or having a social security number that matches their name.  If these things are not in order, you cannot expect not to be confused with what you appear to be:  a non-American.  There is a price to living off the radar or not knowing English.  Why shouldn’t this be?  This minor imposition is a far cry from the “papers please!” melodrama invoking the internal passport regime of the former Soviet Union. There is post-arrest due process in America, and there is already a duty under federal law of legal immigrants to have their immigration papers upon them.

Arizona is bringing an issue to a head that is the albatross of the multicultural Democratic party.  It does more to unite diverse American whites than any other issue.  And why?  Because native people at every level of American society know that the recent influx of a huge number of low skill, unassimilated, and excessively proud Hispanics from a neighboring and unsuccessful nation is a formula for significant internal change, decline, and disempowerment. Good for Arizona for doing the obvious in these circumstances.  And good for Arizona for letting the rest of us see how Mexican chauvinism interferes with the ability of these largely recent arrivals to care about the common good.

Read Full Post »

I recently completed Diversity: Invention of a Concept, by Peter Wood. This is the first of several book reviews I’ll be writing of books generously sent to me by my readers.

Diversity has become one of the defining ideals of our age, surpassing in certain respects our earlier commitments to formal equality, liberty, the rule of law, and merit. The diversity concept, unlike more exotic ideas such as multiculturalism, is important because it has spread outside the academy into the world of business and politics. Every mainstream institution from Hollywood and the art world to the education establishment and business trumpets its commitment to diversity. Yet diversity has undergone little criticism. Unlike affirmative action, which was earlier justified as a form of reparations for white injustice to blacks, diversity is a “feel good” idea that purports to benefit everyone, even members of the majority. Minorities advantaged by affirmative action obviously benefit by receiving positions and admissions they would otherwise not receive. But privileged groups also benefit according to diversity’s partisans because they are now exposed beneficially to different perspectives, ideas, and cultures.

Earlier works such as Dinesh D’Souza’s End of Racism (1995) and Alan Bloom’s Closing of the American Mind (1987) dealt with narrower issues: the continuing social problems facing black Americans and the decline of standards in the academy respectively. Both of these works were authored in an age when diversity was less accepted as an aspirational ideal than it is at present. Wood’s contribution is unique. . . .


Read Full Post »