The mainstream media is in an uproar about it.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=gW0&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=arizona%20immigration%20bill&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&tab=wn
Not necessarily the American people, though. I wonder why our elites are so in favor of illegal immigration.
Quote from: -abe- on April 25, 2010, 03:24:15 AM
I wonder why our elites are so in favor of illegal immigration.
Probably because it provides a dirt-cheap workforce that lacks legal protection, which would not be the case if they hired only US citizens.
The question I wonder about is: do American citizens have a right to determine their demographic future or will that be decided for them by elites/mainstream media? Immigration is a good thing, and immigration from non-Hispanic countries seems mostly to be sensible and largely undertaken to benefit the U.S citizen. On the other hand, Mexico is dumping its underclass into the U.S and our elites are saying that any action undertaken to prevent or reverse that is "anti-immigrant" or "nativist."
Quote from: -abe- on April 25, 2010, 04:15:59 AM
The question I wonder about is: do American citizens have a right to determine their demographic future or will that be decided for them by elites/mainstream media?
In theory, they have such right. However, as is usually the case, policies are actually made by elites and small, highly motivated groups (e.g. lobbyists).
On the other hand, once the cheap illegal labor disappears, prices for lots of things will go up, and nannies, gardeners and other types of day laborers will become more expensive and scarce. The influx of poor unprotected Latin Americans benefits middle class people, too.
North America is also known as Anglo America as vs. Latin America. This wave of illegal immigration will eventually turn the entire western hemisphere into Latin America. >:(
Quote from: Velimir on April 25, 2010, 03:32:13 AM
Probably because it provides a dirt-cheap workforce that lacks legal protection, which would not be the case if they hired only US citizens.
Pretty much. And of course, anybody who wishes to resit this uncontrolled wave of
illegal demographic take over is automatically deemed a "racist". After all, Americans stole this land from the Indians, who are they to complain? Never mind the fact that those thieving white Europeans worked like crazy to create the nation of America, it is more then fair that the fruits of their labor ought to be handed over to somebody else.
It sounds unconstitutional to me, something about "unreasonable searches and seizures," Fourth Amendment, and all that jazz. It is too subject to abuse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 25, 2010, 08:48:21 AM
Pretty much. And of course, anybody who wishes to resit this uncontrolled wave of illegal demographic take over is automatically deemed a "racist". After all, Americans stole this land from the Indians, who are they to complain? Never mind the fact that those thieving white Europeans worked like crazy to create the nation of America, it is more then fair that the fruits of their labor ought to be handed over to somebody else.
With advocates like you those "white Europeans" don't need enemies.
Quote from: -abe- on April 25, 2010, 04:15:59 AM
The question I wonder about is: do American citizens have a right to determine their demographic future or will that be decided for them by elites/mainstream media?
American citizens vote - they have the power.
Quote from: Velimir on April 25, 2010, 07:01:28 AM
The influx of poor unprotected Latin Americans benefits middle class people, too.
No, illegal immigration results in a huge
net cost to American
taxpayers. Those of us who pay private property taxes are hit the hardest. Only the business owners who employ cheap, illegal workers realize a
net benefit, via increased profit margins.
Furthermore, if all of those illegal aliens are granted citizenship through an amnesty program, the cost of their labor will, of course, rise dramatically, and quickly.
Would you support legalizing illegal immigrants in an effort to alleviate the tax burden on citizens? You can vote on the matter, here:http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2010/apr/would-legalizing-illegal-immigrants-alleviate-tax-/results/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2010/apr/would-legalizing-illegal-immigrants-alleviate-tax-/results/)
Quote from: Dan on April 25, 2010, 09:54:38 AM
No, illegal immigration results in a huge net cost to American taxpayers. Those of us who pay private property taxes are hit the hardest. Only the business owners who employ cheap, illegal workers realize a net benefit, via increased profit margins.
Furthermore, if all of those illegal aliens are granted citizenship through an amnesty program, the cost of their labor will, of course, rise dramatically, and quickly.
Would you support legalizing illegal immigrants in an effort to alleviate the tax burden on citizens? You can vote on the matter, here:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2010/apr/would-legalizing-illegal-immigrants-alleviate-tax-/results/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2010/apr/would-legalizing-illegal-immigrants-alleviate-tax-/results/)
You got that right. The mandatory bilingual education is also sucking down the overall US education system IMO ...
Mexico and other south American Counties also have their "white" European elite class as well. The ones that illegally cross the boarder into the US give the impression of being of an aboriginal underclass. Judging by the risks they take to reach the US, it would appear they are treated worse in their own counties than in the US, despite the claimed racism.
Nevertheless, the numbers in which they come here should be determined by US immigration policy, not by the numbers that human traffickers can smuggle in. And immigration policies should be for the benefit of the US and its citizens. It is frustrating to see extremely well qualified people from different parts of the world struggle to get legal status in the US, despite having PhD's in science, engineering, software development, etc, while the US absorbs vast numbers of from Latin America's underclass.
That said, the Arizona law makes me uncomfortable due to the likelyhood that people who are legitimate American citizens or residents will suffer abuse and humiliation because they fit the stereotype of an illegal.
Quote from: Antoine Marchand on April 25, 2010, 09:41:51 AM
With advocates like you those "white Europeans" don't need enemies.
I'm just giving credit where credit is due. What's your beef with that?
Quote from: Scarpia on April 25, 2010, 10:00:13 AM
That said, the Arizona law makes me uncomfortable due to the likelyhood that people who are legitimate American citizens or residents will suffer abuse and humiliation because they fit the stereotype of an illegal.
Some people will argue those will simply be casualties of war. One might ask of course what, if anything, American citizens can do to prevent the unchecked flood of illegal immigration. I for one would be in favor of withdrawing our forces abroad and line them up across the border, but some would consider this option an "extreme" point of view (bombing foreign countries is apparently not extreme). Or perhaps we could stop trying to accommodate illegal immigrants in every which way possible, which might make some of them reconsider the risks involved with getting here in the first place. But alas, that too is an extreme measure. One wonders whether it is even feasible for Americans to defend themselves from national erosion without subjecting a large amount of people to personal inconvenience.
The costs and benefits of illegal immigration fall on different groups. That's why you can't solve the problem. We have to have these people we don't want. This will become even more clear as the population ages and we need not only the labor but a new tax base (including Social Security and Medicare taxes). In the end we'll find a way to legalize the illegals. They need to be here, sure, but our need keeps them here.
"In principle", we should control our borders, right? But how can you do that if you have other more pressing priorities?
Quote from: drogulus on April 25, 2010, 04:06:54 PM
But how can you do that if you have other more pressing priorities?
What could be more pressing then to defend the very
physical base of our nation? We send our soldiers to die abroad, under the rubric of national defense, while we let our border corrode and our demographic change for the worst. You are insane man.
Quote from: Velimir on April 25, 2010, 03:32:13 AM
Quote from: -abe- on April 25, 2010, 03:24:15 AM
... I wonder why our elites are so in favor of illegal immigration.
Probably because it provides a dirt-cheap workforce that lacks legal protection, which would not be the case if they hired only US citizens.
There is no "probably" about it. Labor you can hire for a low rate, to whom you pay no benefits, who you can blackmail with the threat of deporation, is the entire reason.
The problem of illegal immigration in the U.S. is a "demand" problem, not a "supply" problem. In this regard it is very much like the illegal drug problem.
If the U.S. were serious about reducing illegal immigration, they would make it a
crime to employ a person without validating their eligibility to work in the country. This is not the case now nor is there any talk of making it so. Such is the power of the elite over the U.S. Congress. How sublimely hypocritical of the rulers of the Repulican Party that they suppress any discussion of effective anti-illegal legislation all the while they rant about the burden of the cost of immigrant welfare, healthcare, and education, and stoke the prejudices of their socially conservative followers.
What a horrible law. Why don't we just handcuff foreigners when they enter the state or inject them with a tracking device.
And it sounds like a racial profiling abuse case just waiting to happen.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 25, 2010, 04:17:10 PM
What could be more pressing then to defend the very physical base of our nation? We send our soldiers to die abroad, under the rubric of national defense, while we let our border corrode and our demographic change for the worst. You are insane man.
I'm tired of hearing about how minorities will one day rule this country thru greater numbers. Here's an idea for whites who own this view - have more babies.
Quote from: Bulldog on April 25, 2010, 06:07:06 PM
I'm tired of hearing about how minorities will one day rule this country thru greater numbers. Here's an idea for whites who own this view - have more babies.
Here's a quicker and more efficient system: secure the goddamn borders. You don't have a country if you don't have borders. Can it possibly be any simpler? As for whites having more babies, feminist propaganda and the attack on the family unit has taken care of that a long time ago. Its a lost cause. We are going the way of the dodo.
Quote from: Bulldog on April 25, 2010, 06:07:06 PM
I'm tired of hearing about how minorities will one day rule this country thru greater numbers. Here's an idea for whites who own this view - have more babies.
Indeed. The day when White Chrisitian defined American are over. Quite soon white Amerians will be a minority. But it won't really be an "us" and "them" thing: your son will marry an oriental Buddist, your daughter an Arab Muslim. Increasingly they will be us.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 25, 2010, 07:08:32 PM
Here's a quicker and more efficient system: secure the goddamn borders. You don't have a country if you don't have borders. Can it possibly be any simpler? As for whites having more babies, feminist propaganda and the attack on the family unit has taken care of that a long time ago. Its a lost cause. We are going the way of the dodo.
Feminist propaganda? Ever hear of the pill?
Attack on the family unit? What you don't know about the traditional family unit would fill volumes. Male dominated families, women the property of the male (hell, that's alluded to in the Ten Commandments, where the wives are listen among the chattels (Ex. 20:17), arranged non-voluntary marriages, the father controlling the extended family, etc. Maybe that's what you want . . .
Two main things brought about the decline of the bad old traditional family. First, the Industrial Revolution and the rise of wage labour. The offspring could earn their own living and so were no longer so dependent upon the father and the family business. Second, the Enlightenment, with ideas about equality and freedom, including the freedom to choose one's spouse.
It took about 150 years to bring about the modern family, and unless you make drastic changes to the economy, we're not going back to the old ways. Try learning something for a change.
Here's a link to an article by someone who has studied the history of marriage, Stephanie Coontz:
http://stephaniecoontz.com/articles/article25.htm
If it's too much trouble to read, you can always listen to an interview with Ms. Coontz:
http://www.onpointradio.org/2005/06/a-history-of-marriage
Face it: marriage has changed a lot over the last 3000 years.
Quote from: Feanor on April 25, 2010, 07:13:39 PM
Indeed. The day when White Chrisitian defined American are over. Quite soon white Amerians will be a minority. But it won't really be an "us" and "them" thing: your son will marry an oriental Buddist, your daughter an Arab Muslim. Increasingly they will be us.
Shall we join up with you in the Klu Klux Klan then?
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 25, 2010, 07:08:32 PM
Here's a quicker and more efficient system: secure the goddamn borders. You don't have a country if you don't have borders. Can it possibly be any simpler? As for whites having more babies, feminist propaganda and the attack on the family unit has taken care of that a long time ago. Its a lost cause. We are going the way of the dodo.
Yes, "whites in charge" will be history. You might as well get used to the idea.
Quote from: Feanor on April 25, 2010, 07:13:39 PM
Indeed. The day when White Chrisitian defined American are over. Quite soon white Amerians will be a minority. But it won't really be an "us" and "them" thing: your son will marry an oriental Buddist, your daughter an Arab Muslim. Increasingly they will be us.
Except they will not be us. They will most likely be themselves, and
us, meaning western civilization, will lie buried in the heaps of history, dead and forgotten. The America that you know now, with its constitution, and its scientific and social mission is and always has been a cultural extension stemming from the white majority. Once that majority will become a minority, things will change drastically to reflect the new demographic change. What do you think would happen to Europe for instance if Islam were to become the dominant demographic force? Do you think they would preserve our Christian heritage, or our cultural achievements? Or will they destroy it, and replace it with their own cultural artifacts? Imagine a world with no Bach, no Beethoven, no western culture whatsoever. Our history, gone. Our art, gone. Our memory, gone. That is the future we will most likely face. We will not be traveling the stars preaching tolerance and equality like in some sort of Star Trek utopian fantasy. Everything we know and cherish will simply disappear. All thanks to lunatics such as yourself who are helping speeding up the process for the dissolution of western civilization i might add. You ought to be very proud of yourself.
Quote from: Bulldog on April 25, 2010, 08:51:42 PM
Yes, "whites in charge" will be history. You might as well get used to the idea.
Have
you gotten used to the idea yet? Don't forget you and your children are going down with the rest of us.
Quote from: Xenophanes on April 25, 2010, 08:27:58 PM
Feminist propaganda? Ever hear of the pill?
Minorities have the pill as well.
Quote from: Xenophanes on April 25, 2010, 08:27:58 PM
Male dominated families, women the property of the male
As opposed to women being property of the state. I'm sure they are much happier now that they have been "liberated" from the authority of their husbands and fathers. That is why western women are among the most neurotic, hysterical and depressed creatures you'll ever find.
Quote from: Xenophanes on April 25, 2010, 08:27:58 PM
(hell, that's alluded to in the Ten Commandments, where the wives are listen among the chattels (Ex. 20:17), arranged non-voluntary marriages, the father controlling the extended family, etc. Maybe that's what you want . . .
Quit pulling strawmen out of you ass.
Quote from: Xenophanes on April 25, 2010, 08:27:58 PM
Two main things brought about the decline of the bad old traditional family. First, the Industrial Revolution and the rise of wage labour. The offspring could earn their own living and so were no longer so dependent upon the father and the family business. Second, the Enlightenment, with ideas about equality and freedom, including the freedom to choose one's spouse.
And i'm sure you probably believe all this has had a
positive impact upon the quality of life of humanity in general. Nothing like living as a single automaton, bound to serve the state as a wage slave, who's only goal in life is to satisfy the consumerist imperative created by the industrial machine in the first place, when not wasting away in vice and substance abuse. What a wonderful society we have created, how enlightened we are as we waist in the bile on our own decadence. Bravo, bravo indeed.
Quote from: Xenophanes on April 25, 2010, 08:27:58 PM
It took about 150 years to bring about the modern family, and unless you make drastic changes to the economy, we're not going back to the old ways. Try learning something for a change.
There is no modern family. Western culture is moving towards the dissolution of all forms of familiar connections. Fathers have already been completely weeded out of the equation, what with our 50% divorce rate and growing. Single mothers have become pawn of the state, and the government has extended ownership to the children for all intended purposes. The state will provide all the education needed to create the perfect working bee, and entire concept of interpersonal relationship among people will slowly fade out of existence. Men and women will join to copulate, and nothing more, while children will grew up without any form of personal attachment to any particular adult. Its already happening,
get used to it, and try to learn something for a change. The state demands it.
Quote from: Xenophanes on April 25, 2010, 08:27:58 PM
Here's a link to an article by someone who has studied the history of marriage, Stephanie Coontz:
I think i have better things to do then read up Marxist propaganda and historical revisionism. Thank you very much.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 25, 2010, 09:46:26 PM
western women are among the most neurotic, hysterical and depressed creatures you'll ever find.
Oh, this is rich...
This thread is turning/ has turned into one of JdP's hysterical, neurotic and depressed rants again, and is closed.
Q