Immigration -- summum bonum.

The following negative aspects of immigration have been identified by one gentleman:^[1]

• Muslim terrorist cells.
• Refugee scams.
• Importation of disease.
• [Non-assimilation, indifference to host country norms, and] cultural dilution.
• Religious antagonism.
• Economic displacement.
• Job losses.
• Inflated welfare and other costs [prisons, gang control, quindecimlingualism].
• Population pressure.
• [Special privileges].

The Framers never in their wildest imaginings could have predicted the steam engine, mass transatlantic steamer travel, massive refugee movements, cheap air travel, and the loss of a sense of cultural cohesion such that the nation's borders would literally and figuratively be undefended.

Should a family choose to leave open the doors to its residence so that any and all might enter and make some claim upon its private property, it would rightly be considered to have taken leave of its senses. For Americans to do the equivalent on a national scale hardly creates a ripple on the political pond.

Nativism is derided by the left as a manifestation of small minds for, lo, the Family of Man, noble and glorious in its every expression, must be free to wander where it will. Unrestricted immigration must proceed for no other reasons than that multiculturalism is a certified Good Thing or that a fortunate ancestor wishes to be reunited with his extended family. Or . . . so help me, "we are a nation of immigrants."

Former military allies and refugees from homicidal regimes should always have a special claim on the sympathies of other countries. But the burden of proof has long since shifted back (if it ever left) to those who claim that "diversity," cheap labor, and mindless ethnic dilution trump all other considerations.

Some immigrants have a great desire to integrate and some make great contributions. The history of the U.S. is a success story many different hands in the making. That success was not impeded by the fact that the source of immigration was overwhelmingly European, even though non-Europeans have made many contributions as well.

Either way, immigration at one time happened at a rate that could be absorbed, came from a broadly homogenous group, and took place according to an expectation (willingly internalized) that there was a new American identity that was the most important identity, but which permitted endless ethnic variation.

In recent decades, however, immigrants have been able to qualify for residence merely by arriving -- thereby completely bypassing even the minimal efforts to condition residency, let alone citizenship, upon some allegiance to our political and social norms. The existence of huge Spanish-speaking enclaves and the phenomenon of gangs in southern California are testimony to the fact that even immigrants from familiar cultures can arrive in too great a number. The political ramifications of this presence of illegal immigrants in California are significant.

The Colonel simply can't imagine why he would not be a fantastic addition to the island culture of Japan. If there is a dearth of Japanese with skills at obfuscation, dissembling, flattery, and verbal misdirection, the Colonel is willing to set sail immediately to make his contribution. However, it is not clear even to the Colonel, just how Japanese society would be benefited by the arrival of 375,000 American accountants, businesspersons, nurses, taxi drivers, fruit pickers, street rod mechanics, short order cooks, bronc busters, bull riders, and chicken pluckers. What exactly would be our claim to admittance? That it would be nice to have a Japanese standard of living? That's its rich culture would surely benefit our children? That we don't like it where we are? That we are oppressed by motorcycle helmet laws?

Yet U.S. policy is mindless -- further immigration from radically disparate cultures at an uncontrolled rate for any personal reason at all is . . . just fine.

The Colonel has contributed very little of enduring value to the greatness of western civilization other than devising creative ways to relieve widows and orphans of their last remaining savings. That doesn't prevent him from recognizing the inherent superiority of that civilization. It is a civilization that is basically inclusive, and even more so is it open to people of talent and industry. The fact that people from non-European backgrounds can do as well as any others is testimony to its strength.

The religious doctrines of Muslims should give us great pause in this area, however, as those doctrines unequivocally mandate a theocracy that is incompatible with our present political and legal order. And they teach that all non-Muslims are filth and should not be associated with.

If Muslims want to avail themselves of the benefits of liberal society they should take positive steps to renounce such precepts and do more to cast out from their own society the advocates of murder and obscurantism.

Until that happens we need, among other measures, to reduce Muslim immigration to zero and demand the absolute cessation of Saudi financing of Wahabi mosques.
______________________
Notes
^[1] "Easter and the Resurrection of the West." By Chilton Williamson Jr., Vdare, March 29, 2002