In Afghanistan are thousands of Afghans who helped aid the U.S. military and are vulnerable in a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. That’s true. The Biden administration pledged to bring to the United States thousands of Afghans who worked for the US government and military. The goal is to permanently resettle in the United States many thousands of Afghans and their immediate family members who may be at risk due to their US affiliation. For the most part, both Democrats and Republicans and conservative and leftist news commentators encourage this policy. The Afghans who worked for the Americans are considered American allies helping to fight the scourge of the Taliban.
Is
this actually true? According to TOLO
News “the rate of unemployment in Afghanistan is between 25 percent and 30
percent and indicates Afghanistan has the highest number of unemployed work
force in the world.” And certainly working for the U.S. meant having a job that
paid better than most jobs in Afghanistan. And if everything went to hell, as
it has, the workers believed they would be taken to safety in the United State.*
In other words, the motivation of the Afghans who took jobs with the U.S. was financial,
not political or loyalty to America. Most likely they knew better than American
politicians, on left and right, that America’s nation-building mission in
Afghanistan would never succeed. There is no reason to believe that the Afghans
on the American payroll represent the views of the Afghan people generally.
*Where they would live in an Afghan enclave. One example: “The San Francisco Bay area is home to about 60,000 Afghan immigrants, the largest concentration in the cities of Hayward and Fremont, where the climate, the surrounding mountains and a strip of small businesses and Afghan social organizations known as Little Kabul reminds them of their native land” (CNN, “In the largest Afghan enclave in the US, frustration, heartbreak and ‘a sense of mourning’”). Most likely they were expecting thousands more.
Whatever
the motivation of the Afghans who worked for the U.S., resettling them in the
U.S. is a moral dilemma. Thousands of Afghans will be brought to the United
State where they will be fully cared for paid for by American taxpayers, while
Americans struggle with fires and hurricanes. In a sense Americans are being
punished not just financially but socially and culturally for the reckless
stupidity of both Democrat and Republican politicians. Nevertheless, most
Americans support rescuing the thousands of Afghans who worked for the U.S.
What about processing, screening and vetting these people? Applicants must meet certain employment qualifications and provide supporting documents, including proof of employment, a letter of recommendation, and evidence of Afghan nationality. According to the State Department, “expanded eligibility will include Afghans who worked with US-based media organizations or non-governmental organizations or on projects backed by US funding." Really? Or is the Biden-Harris administration simply taking as many Afghans as possible given their open-door immigration policy? The State Department will also let in more Afghans who served as interpreters or in other support roles to forces of the US-led coalition but did not meet earlier requirements on time served. Also, the State Department is designating Afghan refugees with US affiliations under so-called Priority 2, the same level given to persecuted minorities from a number of countries—which I suppose includes all the people south of the American border. Thus, any Afghan who makes it to an American facility will be allowed into the country if Biden’s bungling exit strategy doesn’t leave them behind, which it has. Again that’s how it’s working at the southern border: though there no immigrant will be left behind. This would be another form of payback by the administration, not for crimes committed in Afghanistan but payback against America for being America. That is what the Biden-Harris administration is all about.
Vietnamese
From
Frank Kyle’s Freddy’s Freaky American
Life
“Then another car pulls up and a
couple of chicks wearing tank-tops get out, do some stretches like they were
getting ready for a marathon, and then start running on the path that goes
around the park. Moog and me watch them as they approach us. The one in sweat
pants gives us a who-in-the-fuck-are-those-creeps look. They’re Asian chicks, probably
from the Vietnamese village further up the hill. I’ll tell you the Vietnam War really
worked out for Americans. I expect that after we lose the war in Afghanistan an
Afghan village will replace the white trash village where Dad and me live. Osama
Village they’ll call it, like the Vietnamese neighborhood is called Ho Chi Minh
City.
Mr. Wingnute said the Afghans already kicked the asses of the British and Russians, meaning they’ll kick our ass too, though he didn’t say that directly. Apparently the people running the country don’t know any more about history than I do. And I certainly don’t get it that America imports its enemies. It would be like me inviting Spike and his posse to move in with me and Dad, but like Dad says things can’t get so bad that the government can’t make them worse. So what are you goin to do? Nothin. Both the chicks are hot though, nice faces and Speedo bodies. I give them that. They continue on their way. Moog’s got the gun back into his shirt, thank god. If they had seen the gun I figure they’d cut their run short and start looking for a safer place to jog, like around the police station.”
Muslims
Selections
from Frank Kyle’s The Sun Also Rises and
the Post-Narrative Condition
Essentially, The Sun Also Rises and the Post-Narrative Condition is about language and worldview. Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises resides at the center of this discussion. The post-Narrative condition is, simply put, existing on the other side of the imagined Grand Narratives that gave historical structure, purpose, and value to humans’ being-in-the-world that transcended the mundane meanings of everyday existence. The Grand Narratives of the Bible and the Koran, for example, elevate human existence by giving it divine purpose. Grand Narratives present the world as realizing a Big Plan of some sort. For the Abrahamic religions it is God’s plan for the world, for the Idealists it is that of an indwelling Absolute, for Marxism it is the dialectic play of socio-economic conflicts that eventually lead to a proletariat paradise, apparently Marx’s godless version of the terrestrial Paradise described in the Book of Isiah:
“For
behold, I create new heavens
and a new earth,
and
the former things shall not be remembered
or come into mind.
But
be glad and rejoice forever
in that which I create. (65:17-18)
The “I” in
this case would refer to the proletariat vanguard the Communist Party. In his History of Philosophy Frederick
Copleston makes the point that Marx used his theory of history as a weapon
(vol. 7, 331). Like traditional Judaism and its Christian and Muslim offspring,
Marxism was a movement that sought to achieve its messianic vision through
violence.
There are at
least two God-based Grand Narratives in the Bible. That of the Old Testament is
local, tribal, and mundanely oriented. The New Testament introduces a second
god, Christ, whose focus is universal, individual, and otherworldly. In Grand
Narratives such as Hegelianism and Marxism, history, as the deterministic
operating system, replaces God as the cosmic operator. Their perspectives are
mundane like that of the Old Testament and universal like that of the New
Testament. However, salvation is neither tribal nor individual; both the tribe
and the individual are discarded.
These Grand
Narratives are the product of the human imagination. They are programmatic and
interpretative rather than purely descriptive, though they can become
self-fulfilling prophecies once the actions of their followers become
historical determinants. Purely descriptive Grand Narratives would be those
that empirically describe broad patterns in nature and human history and
attempt to identify linking empirical causes. Darwin’s theory of evolution is
one such Grand Narrative of nature. An essential characteristic of empirical
Grand Narratives is that though humanity plays a role in the narratives and can
even be at some point an end-product of the narrative, humanity is not the predestined
goal or purpose of the events described by the narrative.
The Quran is a
spin-off of the Old Testament. As far as I can tell, it’s mainly a catalog of
Allah’s demands and commands communicated
by the prophet Mohammed to believers and disbelievers. Unlike Moses, Mohammed
does not receive revelations directly from God but from angel Gabriel. Recent
current events encouraged me to take an interested in the Quran. With the
recent violent behavior of JudeoIslam, Judaism has emerged from dormancy like a
destructive volcano. There have been a long series of large and small
irruptions of JudeoIslamic terrorism since the 1983 United States embassy
bombing in Beirut. (“List of Islamic terrorist attacks,” Wikipedia.) But with
the emergence of ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) and attack in Paris on
the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo by
terrorists shouting in Arabic “God is great,” JudeoIslam is now perceived by many
as a militaristic religious movement reminiscent of the most aggressive periods
of the three Abrahamic religions and the secular version of Judaism—Marxist
communism. Thus, I decided to pay some attention to the Quran as an influential
Grand Narrative that once again is causing convulsions on a global scale.
It’s difficult to say whether the word is mightier than the sword, but it’s
been clear since the rise of JudeoChristianity that combined they are capable
of throwing the world into bloody turmoil.
There are many parallels between Jesus’ religious revolution
and Marxist’s ideological revolution, but one of the most interesting is the
fervor and enthrallment of their participants, who minds were literally taken
captive by the respective creeds. What I examine is the rhetorical structure
and logical legitimacy of these creeds/scriptures and their influence on the
thinking and behavior of their followers. Let me note here, however, an
important characteristic of science and philosophy: critical thinking, which
is—as made very clear by Rene Descartes—doubting, questioning. It’s a sword
that keep beast of enthrallment at bay. It is a beast, because like Jonah’s
whale it can swallow a person whole, in fact, it can swallow nations whole, and
then return to the murky depths of its revelation-inspired mythology.
The need for life eternal is what makes Christians and Muslims look so pathetic when compared to attitude of the ancient Greeks and Romans who courageously accepted their finitude as part of humanity’s existential condition. Even fearing one’s finitude is brave if one accepts death’s finality rather than cowardly denying it. The Epicureans Epicurus and Lucretius and the Stoics Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius are examples of such men. I will use a quotation from Aurelius to illustrate their brave and serene acceptance of the finality of death:
Of human life the time is a point, and the substance is in a flux, and the perception dull, and the composition of the whole body subject to putrefaction, and the soul a whirl... And to say all in a word, everything which belongs to the body is a stream, and what belongs to the soul is a dream and vapor, and life is a warfare and a stranger’s sojourn, and after-fame is oblivion. (Meditations bk II:17)
In the same
passage Aurelius asks, “What then is that which is able to conduct a man? One
thing and only one, philosophy.” Not fantastic flights of the imagination. And
what stoical philosophy advises is to wait “for death with a cheerful mind, as
being nothing else than a dissolution of the elements of which every living
being is compounded.” There is more wisdom in Aurelius’ Meditations (or Lucretius’ On
the Nature of Things or Epictetus’ Enchiridion)
than there is in the whole of the Quran because I find no wisdom Quran.
Turning from West to East we find the wisdom of Buddha:
live
appreciatively
live
peacefully
live
compassionately
wake
up from delusion
embrace death.
Hispanics
Excerpt
from Frank Kyle’s Gringo Unabridged
“Recall the disgraced Colin Powell’s propaganda
presented to the world justifying the invasion of Iraq, and the propaganda of
the disgraceful George Bush and Karl Rove who are now attempting to put a
happy-face :-) upon the army of illegal aliens who have invaded America, Rove
himself addressing the National Council of La Raza*, the very organization that
is the Hispanic Pentagon planning to reconquer the Southwest and transform
America into a Hispanic Nation. And what are the real reasons for the
propaganda? Financial and political power—money and votes, in other words.
*This organization condemns xenophobia (which it considered racist). But the American Indians were not xenophobic, at least not initially, and look where not being xenophobic got them. Considering the cultures invaded by European nations, being xenophobic seems to make sense. It seems to me that the invasion of strangers is rarely a good thing, and we are talking about invasion and not trickle-in legal immigration. History has proven that strangers are more likely to do you harm than good. A little xenophobia, like an ounce of precaution, can prevent a calamity for which there is no cure. That’s why we tell children not to open doors to strangers.”
* * *
Importation
of Crime Cultures
White America, unaffected by the
nation’s controllers, didn’t morph in a culture of crime. For the most part,
the crime cultures associated with organized crime are imported, such as the
Italian Mafia, Russian Mob, and Hispanic drug Cartels. These are adult criminal
organizations—operated as violent, ruthless corporations. The gang culture is
different, though over time many Hispanic gangs would end up working as foot
soldiers for the drug Cartels. Street gangs are a youth phenomenon, similar to
rock-n-roll. They give young people status and respect simply achieved by
engaging in criminal activity. No college degree or technical training needed.
Gang members only need to be willing to steal, rob, assault, rape or murder to
qualify for membership. The deeds are simple and primitive. The organizations
are tribal—such as the two tribes in Lord
of Flies. Whereas criminal culture never took hold in white society,* it
not only took hold in black society but transformed the culture to such a
degree that gangsterism has become a universal cultural theme in every black
community.** The
combination of gangs, guns, drugs, promiscuous sex, rap music, and crime has
become the core of black values, at least among the youth. The music of blues
and jazz—so romantic and civilized by comparison—has become quaint in a culture
that celebrates the gangster life.
*Certainly there are white
biker gangs, most famously the Hells Angels, but they remained romantic
outsiders whose rowdy culture of violence never caught-on except in the movies.
In the fifties were white car clubs and high school affiliations that sometime
erupted into fights, but the life of crime has little appeal beyond petty
theft. And the music of white rock-n-roll may celebrate rebellion but doesn’t
celebrate criminal activity. White kids who want to listen to such music listen
to black hip hop and gangster rap.
**Christianity still plays a significant role in black culture, but its moral authority seems to have declined during the past half century as the influence of black pop culture has increased. Sex, cars, sports, clothes, jewelry, and other forms of bling are far more important than Bible study and church attendance.
The Rise of Hispanic Gangs in America
The celebration of the outlaw has a much longer history in Mexican culture than it does in black culture, perhaps because in Mexican history the rebels who fought against government oppression and exploitation were often outlaws. In the U.S. Mexican gangs see themselves as the offspring of Pancho Villa and Emiliano Zapata, and perhaps the most celebrated figure among all Hispanics living in the U.S. is the revolutionary Che Guevara—not George Washington or Thomas Jefferson. In other words, part of the identity of Hispanic gang culture is that of being soldiers serving the Hispanic people against the gringo. Today Hispanic gangs dominate the American scene. There are approximately 30,000 gangs in the U.S. and nearly a million gang members, almost half of which are Hispanic. Gangs have even infiltrated the U.S. military for the purpose of learning combat skills and obtain military weapons, ammunition, and equipment such as body armor. Gang graffiti has even shown up on walls in Iraq. L.A. is known as the gang capital of America, where half the murders are gang related. Every big city in the U.S. now has a gang problem. The drug trade is operated by Hispanic drug lords inside and outside of the country. An entire genre of Mexican music called narcocorridos romanticizes drug traffickers and glorifies the drug trade. The dominant theme of Mexican culture is the outlaw life. Certainly there are law-abiding citizens but they the unknown and uncelebrated.
Crime as Normal
Behavior
It’s interesting how liberals will
make excuses for the criminality of black and Hispanic societies, as if the
criminals and their celebrated values are an aberration. They aren’t. Crime
among blacks and Mexicans has become a culturally accepted way of life. Of
course, there are blacks and Mexicans who condemn criminal behavior (most often
mothers concerned about the safety of their children), but that doesn’t mean
their condemnation of the criminal lifestyle defines the attitudes of the
culture. Black culture examined in the television series The Wire isn’t abnormal but the norm for that microsociety. What is
revealed that is most surprising is that in that culture black lives don’t
matter to drug-selling, gangbanging blacks. Liberals always want to believe
that people who take advantage of other people and enjoy the life of violence
and risk-taking are somehow abnormal. Idealistic liberals need to balance their
Rousseauan views of human nature with a little Hobbesian realism and reading of
history. Violent, aggressive behavior is normal behavior among humans. As Freud
explained, civilized behavior is the aberration and the product of
socialization, in other words, a civilizing process.
In the novel Lord of Flies two cultures are represented—that of civility and
reason, represented by Ralph, and that of barbarism, driven by instinct and
emotion represented by Jack. Jack’s barbarism is appealing and cathartic in the
way boxing is. Ralph’s approach to life is more like baseball, which is not a
game of aggression (the ball receives most of the aggression) but more like athletic
chess, relying totally on skills not involving physical contact. The game is
very civilized in that its design eliminates (or suppresses) rather than
encourages brutish, primitive acts of aggression. To say Jack’s approach to
life is abnormal is simply nonsense. Jack is able to attract followers because
what he offers is instinctually satisfying, at least to males. (It’s exactly
what Mohammad offered his followers.)
How else can one explain the appeal of masculine violence in sports and the glorification of warfare? What Ralph offers is by comparison boring. Perhaps an even better illustration is found in the movie Shane. In that story the farmer represents what Ralph represents in Lord of Flies—reason, order, and civility. But the movie is not named after him but after the gunfighter Shane. Even more compelling is the evil gunfighter Jack Wilson. The appeal of such men is their resistance to settling down, not playing by the rules, and preferring a life of violence and risk to bourgeois comfort and security. And it is a very American stereotype celebrated throughout the world.
Asians
and Crime
Asians in America also have their gangs, originating mostly among recent immigrants, which make up about 7 percent of the nation’s total gang population. However, as far as I can tell, Asian mainstream culture does not celebrate criminal gang activity. In Japan, for example, the activities of yakuza gangs are for the most part isolated from mainstream Japanese society. Unlike with black and Hispanic gangs, harming ordinary citizens is forbidden. For that reason theft is not an activity yakuza engage in. In other words, yakuza gangs have retained a traditional respect for their people. Thus, whereas many of the most dangerous cities in America are those plagued by black and Hispanic gangs, Kobe, the home city of the largest yakuza syndicate, is one of the safest cities in Japan. Years ago Anne and I visited a college friend of mine who lives in New York. We visited Little Italy in Lower Manhattan. He told me that because of the Mafia it was one of the safest neighborhoods in the city. I don’t know if that is true. But he also said that because of Chinese immigration the Italian community was being rapidly replaced by an expanding Chinatown. That I know is true.
Immigration
a Historical Perspective
Historically emigration has rarely
been beneficial to the host populations. William Golding’s brilliant novel The Inheritors goes back to the
beginning of human society. The novel tells its story from the point of view of
Neanderthals. What we are concerned with here is the arrival of the new guys on
the primordial block the Homo sapiens. It is clear that the arrival of Homo
sapiens meant the end of the Neanderthals. What one sees at work in immigration
is pure Darwinism, but Americans have been too stupid to pay attention to
Darwin. The Old Testament describes a similar immigration, which is essentially
the Jews’ invasion of Canaan. This is an aggressive form of Darwinian immigration
dressed up in religious mythology that characterizes the invasion as both inevitable
and good. As the Old Testament describes, the invasion meant the destruction of
the Canaanites.
Apostle Paul’s Judeo-Christian
ideology immigrated into Greco-Roman civilization and destroyed that
civilization. Sometimes aliens introduce dangerous ideas into another people’s
homeland that results in the destruction of that homeland. The Jews who
immigrated to the United States brought with them Marxist ideology. It took a
while to take effect but it finally did as we see today with the neo-Marxists now
running the show. Once Judeo-Christianity took control of the heart of Western
civilization, its migrants would spread to other homelands where they would destroy
the natives with swords and guns and destroy their cultures with the Good News,
the fate of the Native Americans being only one example. Muslims would do the
same, destroying one host nation after another in an attempt to do what
Christians have wanted to do—to create a global theological monoculture. Many
of the NGOs in Afghanistan were Christian mercenaries.
Immigration only works when there is no ethnic or ideological conflict between the immigrants and the host population, and certainly when the immigration isn’t an invasion. The difference between the evacuations resulting from the Vietnam War and the Afghanistan War is fundamental.
Afghan Evacuees
Wikipedia says about Islamic terrorist groups,
“These groups all have Salafi or other Sunni beliefs. The annual number of fatalities
from terrorist attacks grew sharply from 2011 to 2014 when it reached a peak of
over 32,000, before declining to less than 14,000 in 2019” (“Islamic terrorism”).
Wikipedia also tells us, “Saudi
Arabia is said to be the world's largest source of funds and promoter of
Salafist jihadism, which forms the ideological basis of terrorist groups such
as al-Qaeda, Taliban, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and others” (“State-sponsored
terrorism”). Saudi Arabia is 90% Sunni Muslim. Of the 19 men involved in the
9-11 attacks fifteen of them were citizens of Saudi Arabia. So, who was
really to blame—the Saudis or the Taliban? The Saudis were left of the hook
because they exported oil to the U.S. and bought tons of very expensive American military equipment.
What is the cause of these attacks? As far as I can tell the cause is mostly ideological. Certainly, America’s unconditional support of Israel is an issue but that conflict also comes down to different ideologies: Judaism versus Islam. In America the two important features of the attacks are (1) a hatred of America and (2) the terrorists were allowed to immigrate into the county. Had the Muslims who flew the planes into American buildings not been allowed to immigrate into the country, the 9-11 attacks would not have occurred nor would the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Those dominoes fell as a result of allowing hostiles into the country. Or better yet chaos theory's butterfly effect: the flap of a butterfly’s wings might ultimately cause a hurricane. Stupid decisions lead to disasters, and American politicians have made many. The important fact is that Islamic ideology is hostile to Western civilization. Of course, Muslims rightly argue that Western colonialists invaded Muslims societies. Yes, but long before Western colonialism Muslims not only invaded but destroyed pagan civilizations. And vetted Afghan evacuees will still be Muslims, thus beholden to an ideology hostile to American values. Ditto that for the Marxists who were allowed into America the first half of the 20th century. Religious and secular ideologies are as dangerous to host nations as are bacterial and viral plagues.
Vietnamese Evacuees
One doesn’t read about Vietnamese committing terrorist acts in the United States. Why is that? One reason is ideological. The Vietnamese allowed into America were either Christians or Buddhists. There is no ideological incompatibility that would create conflict. Really there is nothing more to be said.
Red Flags
Three categories of immigrants that
should raise red flags. The first flag are immigrants whose ideology is hostile
to the values of the host nation. Islam and the religious ideologies and cultural
values of America are incompatible. The key difference is American individualism
versus Islamic forced collectivism and conformity. Individualism implies
freedom of choice and assumes the Kantian principle of autonomy: not to have
one’s autonomy violated if one does not violate the autonomy of others.
Individualism is rooted in Western philosophy. Oppressive collectivism is
rooted in Jewish ideologies—Judaism, Judeo-Christianity, Judeo-Islam, and
Judeo-Marxism. Americans forget or ignore the fact that Christianity was one of
the most ruthless, suppressive regimes in history, during that period known as
the Dark Ages. But the return of Western values during the Renaissance and Enlightenment
dulled though did not remove the fangs of Judeo-Christianity.
I say dulled because the motivation
for invading Vietnam was ideological—essentially Judeo-Christianity contra
Judeo-Marxism. The concern was not for the Vietnamese people. Disgustingly, the
U.S. government supported the French colonialists’ attempt to retake control of
Vietnam called the First Indochina War. Why when unlike Ho Chi Minh who fought
the Japanese the French collaborated with the Japanese during the war? Because
France was Catholic. Thus it was assumed Vietnam was a Catholic nation. It wasn’t.
It was Buddhist. Catholicism came with the French colonialists. That was another
reason why the Vietnamese people didn’t really matter to American politicians.
Better Catholic under the control of French colonialists than Buddhist or communist.
The result of this ideological conflict was a million plus dead Vietnamese and 58,220
dead American soldiers (drafted into a cruel, senseless war).
And let’s not forget that the Iraq War
occurred because George W. Bush had orders from God: “President Bush said to all of us: ‘I am
driven with a mission from God.’ God would tell me, ‘George go and fight these
terrorists in Afghanistan.’ And I did. And then God would tell me ‘George, go
and end the tyranny in Iraq.’ And I did" (The Guardian, “George Bush: ‘God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq’”). That is exactly what the 9-11 suicide terrorists would have said, though unlike
Bush they put their lives on the line to accomplish their mission. In 2019 Joe
Biden claimed that despite voting to authorize military force against Iraq in
2002 he opposed the Iraq war from “the moment” it began. The words of a true
politician. Post-World War II America has been an era of political stupidity
that has greatly harmed the nation and Americans. The stupidity continues
today.
The second flag are immigrants whose
way of life has been considerably criminalized. In this case, I’m thinking of
the Hispanics flooding across our southern border. Look at what happened to
Albuquerque, New Mexico? Here are the facts: Albuquerque ranks among the top
ten cities for crime in the U.S. Of the 111 Albuquerque gangs, 61 are Hispanic, 31
black, and 19 white. Hispanics makes up 46.7% of Albuquerque’s population,
Anglos about 38%, blacks 15%. Latinos control every aspect of government.
Democrats are in complete control. So why the high crime rate and the low
education performance? Why is Albuquerque the car-theft capital of the U.S.?
Why is New Mexico ranked 49th for crime. New Mexico is ranked 44 among all
states in education (6 from the bottom). Why? Why? Why? Open borders and
criminalized cultures are why. Why are the safest states in the U.S.
predominately white? Culture matters.
The third flag are immigrants who have historical reasons for hating the people of the host nation. From Frank Kyle’s Gringo:
“Well, Mr. Thomas, in here nobody’s goin’ to see you as a teacher, especially the Latino gangbangers. You see, in their eyes you are a grengo, which comes from the color of the uniforms worn by American soldiers during the Mexican-American War. Black and Mexican gang members kill each other in turf wars. It’s deadly business, but local. The war between your people and Mexicans is the real turf war, like the Mexican-American War. And to Mexican gangbangers you represent the enemy not of their gang but the Mexican people. You’ve been caught in a war between the Hispanic Nation and the American Nation, and in the facility the Hispanic Nation rules. So in here you must be very careful. In other words, live like a mouse.”
Mr. Thomas is in jail for killing a Mexican illegal immigrant. He is being spoken to by a black guard named Louis. The point here is that the U.S. stole a big chunk of Mexico, and whether or not Americans have forgotten, Mexicans have not forgotten.
From Frank Kyle’s Su Casa Es Mi Casa:
“Then Arsenio told [his son] Lope about the mayor Antonio Villaraigosa who is a very big hero in Mexico to begin to explain to him what he called La Reconquista.
“‘Look at Villaraigosa’ Arsenio said ‘the mayor of L.A. He is the child of immigrants who were probably illegal like us. Like the great Latino Generalisimo César Chávez, who I know you know because all Mexicans know of César Chávez, and like the great general and revolucionario Rodolfo Gonzales, who you do not know but will one day, Villaraigosa, like those men, is a nortemejicano, not an Americano, a leader in the El Movimiento.’
“‘El Movimiento?’ asked Lope.
“‘Yes, about which I have much to tell you but for now I will say to you only that it is the movement to reclaim the homelands the gringo stole from the Mexican people, La Reconquista, and that is what is happening today and Villaraigosa is one of its leaders and L.A. is one of its victories. He calls L.A. the Venice of the 21st century but we all know that he means the Mexico City al Norte of the 21st century. When he was younger Villaraigosa demanded Mexican American studies in high school and fought for Chicano rights in college. And now he leads a Latino city, where seventy-one percent school children are Latino, and their numbers shall increase as the gringo children continue to flee to the suburbs. In the schools you see the future of the city and when you are my age, Lope, I believe the gringo children will be at most five percent and these will be the children of the very rich gringos who live in gated communities, like the fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, and send their children to very expensive private school that will have plenty of security like those for the wealthy in Mexico.’”
From the Washington Times: “La reconquista, a radical movement calling for Mexico to “reconquer” America’s Southwest, has stepped out of the shadows at recent immigration-reform protests nationwide as marchers held signs saying, “Uncle Sam Stole Our Land!” and waved Mexico’s flag” (“Mexican aliens seek to retake ‘stolen’ land”).
And of course the U.S. has a lot of bad history with Islamic nations. A large part of that bad history has to do with the country’s unconditional support of Israel. But a large part had to do with oil. Operation Ajax is an infamous illustration.
From Frank Kyle’s Christine’s Philosophical Journey to San
Diego:
“What occurred is just another
example of powerful Western nations taking control of a smaller, resource rich
nation. The two colonial powers were the U.S. and Great Britain. Both were far
more interested in Iran’s oil reserves than in benefitting the Iranian people.
In 1953 the United States used the CIA to participate in a British plot to
depose of the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mossadegh, who was
very popular with the Iranian people.”
“Was the intrigue the one President
Eisenhower was in on?”
“Yes. Then I already told you what
happened.”
“Not a lot. Only that it was
something you didn’t expect Eisenhower would be involved in—dirty politics, I
guess.”
“It was that.”
“So what happened?”
“It was a coup, the first time the
U.S. openly participated in the overthrow of an elected, civil government. What
followed was a twenty-five-year dictatorship under the Shah, who relied heavily
on U.S.-trained secret police and U.S. supplied weapons. It was basically the
same pattern of colonialism employed by the U.S. during the first half of the
twentieth century—using economic influence, the threat of military action, and subversive
activities to install a puppet government.”
“Okay, I get Iran has oil. Still why
do that? Why not just buy the oil?”
“You see, Mossadegh’s government
wanted to nationalize Iran’s oil production, which was then controlled by Anglo-Persian Oil Company, which was later
renamed British
Petroleum.”
“So America and Britain didn’t want
the Iranian people to have control of the oil that belong to them. They weren’t
satisfied with just buying the oil. They wanted to control the entire
industry—because that way they would make more money.”
“Yes.”
“It was all about taking something that belonged to another people, just as the destruction of the American Indians was all about taking their land. I’m beginning to understand your negative view of America. It’s really disappointing. And isn’t that an example of neocolonialism?”
Conclusion
In 1940 America was 89.5 white and
10% black. From Brookings: In 1980,
white residents comprised almost 80% of the national population, with Black
residents accounting for 11.5%. By 2019 the white population declined nearly
nine more percentage points, to 60.1%.The decline in the country’s white
population means that other racial and ethnic groups are responsible for
generating overall growth. Nationally, the U.S. grew by 19.5 million people
between 2010 and 2019—a growth rate of 6.3%. While the white population
declined by a fraction of a percent, Latino or Hispanic, Asian American, and
Black populations grew by rates of 20%, 29%, and 8.5%, respectively (“The
nation is diversifying even faster than predicted, according to new census data,”
July, 2020). My guess is that America’s future will be that of New York City: “According
to the 2012-2016 ACS, New York City's population was 32% White, 29% Hispanic,
22% Black, and 14% Asian.” As many as 800 languages are spoken in New York City. Perhaps not surprisingly, the city doesn’t even make Insider’s “50
Best Places to Live in America.”
What has been lost in New York City is being
lost throughout the United States: America. New York City is a collection of
ethnicities and nationalities. The population is made of immigrants from Dominican
Republic, China, Jamaica, Guyana, Mexico, Ecuador, Haiti, Trinidad and Tobago,
Colombia, Russia and El Salvador, nations of the Middle East, and Jews who
arrived before Israel, and dozens of other nations. What is the difference between
these people and Americans? Each ethnic group or nationality has a homeland
that is made up their people. The Chinese have China, Jews have Israel,
Mexicans have Mexico and so on. The only people without a homeland are
Americans. New York City is not an American city ethnically or nationally. It
is a refugee camp, a conglomeration of ethnicities and nationalities. Bits and
pieces of different cultures that don’t fit together to create a society that
has coherence and beauty. The neo-Marxist left tells us that the multi-cultural
stew of New York City is what makes New York City a beautiful place to live.
That’s not true. The place each ethnic group finds beautiful is its own enclave
and the people who live in that enclave. I mean really, how much intermingling
takes place among ethnic groups other than in economic venues?
That New York City is made up of so
many ethnic enclaves is evidence of that each ethnic group prefers to intermingle within its own enclave. The Russians and Salvadorians don’t identify with the
hodgepodge but with their fellow Russians and Salvadorians. One might say that
white American have their enclave as well. That’s so sadly true.
Imagine a creature like those of H.
G. Wells’ The Island of Doctor Moreau,
a creature made from different species, sloth, hyena, boar, leopard, ox, wolf, bear, dog, puma,
ocelot, etc. Each creature possesses a beauty that is its own. The beauty of
some creatures is greater than others. The beauty of the puma is greater than
that of the hyena. The beauty of each creature is its own and is found in the
integrity of what it is. I detest the mosquito and the fly but when I see them
close up I marvel at their exquisite design. This beauty would be lost in an artificial composite creature, which is what New York City is and what America is becoming, a
creature patch together from other species. Such a creature would be a monster.
I am not speaking of the physical characteristics
of the different ethnic groups of New York City but of cultural differences, in
the way Wikipedia defines ethnic
groups: “An ethnic group or ethnicity is a grouping of people who identify with
each other on the basis of shared attributes that distinguish them from other
groups such as a common set of traditions, ancestry, language, history,
society, culture, nation, religion, or social treatment within their residing
area.” The monster is not any particular ethnic group but what is now called
America, a societal creature made up of different ethnic groups.
And not surprisingly the immigrants
don’t like America any more than most Americans do. What the immigrants think
about America is clearly expressed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and
Rashida, members of the hate America squad. America has become a nation of
mutually hostile ethnic tribes, like those found in parts of Africa. Americans
represented by the Biden-Harris cult want America destroyed, and American
patriots hate what America has become. So today there is hatred and divisiveness
everywhere. As a result of post-W.W. II unbridled immigration America has
become a nation destined to remain in chronic turmoil. Nothing is being melted
in the American melting pot because the ethnic ingredients do not want to be melted,
do not want to disappear—thus no blending or harmonizing is occurring. Multicultural
America has not become a symphony but a cacophony clashing sounds. Not wanting
to melt into the great whole is perfectly understandable. Americans themselves
don’t want to disappear in the multicultural melting pot. So the pot just keeps
boiling, its ingredients swirling about in a constant state of turbulence, colliding
with one another in the unbearable heat of unrelenting antagonism.
