It made sense in 1887 too.

A QUESTION OF EXPEDIENCY.

Since foreigners who can neither speak nor understand the language of this country, who have no knowledge of its institutions and no sympathy with their spirit or purpose, who come here not for the common benefit, but solely to inflame the public mind, and to promote disorder and crime, are permitted to become citizens and to vote, it may be time to consider whether the principle of restricted immigration which has been applied in its extreme form to the Chinese may not be applied wisely to other nations.

All such questions concern the national right of self-protection. They are questions of expediency, and their decision must depend upon circumstances and the actual situation. Our laws already exclude paupers and criminals, as well as the Chinese and contract laborers, and they require a certain residence before admitting foreigners to citizenship. Meanwhile a vast territory, diversified industries, spare population in large parts of the country, and the necessity of labor to develop the advantages of the country have all invited immigration, and it has been of incalculable advantage.

But it would not have been an advantage if it had been the transfer of hordes of Mongols and Tartars to this continent. Had they arrived by hundreds of thousands and millions, accumulating in an accelerated ratio, this country would have ceased at least to be the home of the free. Popular republican institutions have been successful here because they were the natural expressions of the political traditions and the circumstances under which they were developed. But our institutions would not secure to Patagonians what they secure to us. So those institutions, largely controlled by those whose political convictions, intelligence, traditions, and capacity they do not express, would not produce the benefit to mankind which in the hands of a people mainly of Anglo-Saxon origin they have produced. A man like MOST is an ignorant barbarian, who has no more conception of liberty and civilized society than an orangoutang. He is harmless, and so long as he does not violate the law his talk is unimportant. But it is merely a question of expediency, in the interest of liberty and of the country, whether any and what restrictions should be placed upon the coming and residence of men among us whose purposes are wholly and confessedly criminal and mischievous.

Harper’s Weekly, April 23, 1887

The Chinese and any number of other immigrant groups have proven that plenty of people "get" what the U.S.A. is all about. Assimilation is a real possibility, regardless of one's Patagonian or other background. However, we no longer require it and it is simply not the case that all resident human differences are sweet and wonderful additions to our culture, such of it as remains. Muslim views on the appropriate penalty for apostasy and on the necessary preeminence of the sharia are examples of cultural/political/religious values that are anathema to us and the holders of such views must be excluded and removed forthwith. A tall order for our sappy political culture that weeps over Ellen DeGeneres's dog.

This Harper's Weekly piece is right on the money on the issue of inundation coupled with the issue of disparate culture. It is the issue that our political establishment refuses to resolve.

Oh, wait. They did resolve it. The actual, current, set-in-stone immigration policy of the U.S. is to allow any and all foreigners equal access to citizenship, voting, welfare benefits, and public education. If they can just sneak across the border.

The same policy on a personal level -- to allow any and all to walk into our homes -- would be evidence of a pathetic neurosis. On a national level, our immigration policy is thus pathetically neurotic.

UPDATE

On the "commitment to American values" front, consider this that I ran across at the inestimably fine blog of Lawrence Auster:

This is from the website of the organization As-Sabiqun:

As-Sabiqun is an Islamic movement that believes in the Islamic State of North America no later than 2050. Those who engage in this great effort require a high level of commitment and determination. We are sending out a call to the believers: Join with us in this great struggle to change the world!

As-Sabique (“The Vanguard”) is headed by Imam Abdul Alim Musa, born in Arkansas, converted to Islam in prison, a supporter of Hezbollah. The organization also qualifies as a charitable organization and solicits donations for “its schools so they can “raise children with a strong Islamic identity … so they could be the ones to mold society instead of having society mold them.”

The Imam is a home-grown Muslim, yes, but in what way is his thinking different from the import variety now amongst us en masse?

Muslim organization in U.S. that seeks Islamic state. By Lawrence Auster, View from the Right, 12/4/07.