District of Corruption
Buchanan is focused on the wrong border.
“You put 100 million Hispanic folks in the United States and, say, 70 million on the southwest border. That becomes as much as part of Mexico as it is the United States,” Buchanan continued. “If they have a different language, different culture, a different faith — basically you get two peoples. And two peoples eventually become two countries. This is what I see as the future of America — the Balkanization and the disintegration of a country which become one nation back around 1960 when all the immigrants who came from Eastern and Southern Europe, 1890-1920, had been assimilated and American-ized. We all had gone through the Depression together, heard radio together, went through World War II together and American television.”
The only reason we have a problem with the Mexican border is because there isn’t a national border on the Mason-Dixon line. Every single representative from the Northeast voted for the Immigration Act of 1965.
If the Union was dissolved, we could easily secure the Mexican border. Without the federal courts, we could pass stronger laws that would drive out illegal aliens. Without Congress, we wouldn’t even be debating the latest amnesty. Without the White House, we wouldn’t have Holder’s Justice Department suing people like Sheriff Joe Arapaio.
Illegal immigration is a symptom of the existence of the Union. The Northeast wants to flood the South and West with Third World immigrants who vote Democrat in order to shift the balance of power within the Union. It is the same reason that citizenship was given to blacks who could be relied upon to vote for the Northeastern-dominated Republican Party.
Hey Hunter, enjoyed the conference. See you at the next one.
A question I’d like to put to you. Considering the high social costs that illegitimate offspring cause I think there would be a good argument to criminalising bastardy again. It was a criminal offence at one time. If baby daddies won’t support their offspring voluntary then they can be forced to care for them by working in prison for wages. The wages going first for their own care and the remainder going towards the offspring. Effectively this would be an indefinite sentence for many who are low skilled/intelligence. It would extend beyond the primary reproductive years for many. Additionally the unwed mother’s sentence could be enforced sterility for a term of years or permanent depending perhaps on the number of offences. Perhaps there could be an option of posting a bond sufficient that the care of the illegitimate child would be assured. The bond would of course come primarily from family members. Such a bond would suit our purposes in two ways. It would cause family members to exert pressure to limited reproduction and secondly it would also in many instances lead to impoverishment of family members for later illegitimate offspring when the bond was forfeited. Such an event would create pressure or incentives for additional unwanted persons to emigrate out of the South. If those family members lose their assets there are less incentives for them to stay.
If it were criminalised again that would certainly help in the demographics problem. So long as abortion were legal it would certainly increase the abortion rate among those minorities with high illegitimacy. Then again even if it were illegal it would simply cause an increase in illicit abortion. Which again would be a criminal offence leading to lengthy incarceration but this time for the man and woman. That or cause a steady stream of emigration out of an independent South by those least wanted. Of course many would marry but with the end of public assistance there would be immense pressure to reduce the numbers of children to that number that could be supported. Which would be a half victory.
There are certainly solutions to the demographics problem. But we are going to have to have our own country before they can be implemented.
“You put 100 million Hispanic folks in the United States and, say, 70 million on the southwest border. That becomes as much as part of Mexico as it is the United States,” Buchanan continued. “If they have a different language, different culture, a different faith — basically you get two peoples. And two peoples eventually become two countries.
This is where Buchanan is wrong. There will be no ‘Aztlan’ or Mexican annexation of the southwest because a parasite will never willingly leave its host. The parasite being the Hispanic invaders and the host being Anglo-America, or what remains of it.
There is a radical solution, however unlikely, to the ongoing Hispanicization of the US: reverse secession. Basically force independence on the 4 border states, California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, and for good measure throw in Hawaii, Nevada and Florida. Set up these 7 states as independent republics and carry on with a 43 state union.
In one fell swoop this would remove more than 30 million Hispanics (over 60% of the total) from the US. It would also remove a majority (or close to it) of Asians, Pacific Islanders and American Indians from the US. It would leave a rump America of about 220 million with racial demographics similar to when the 50 state US had the same population, about 75% white, 15% black and 10% other.
Now the Mexican border would be someone else’s problem, namely the 4 buffer states separating the two nations. And the creeping bilingualism that poses such a long-term threat to the interests of unilingual Anglo-Americans would be eliminated overnight. Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, etc. should also be set free, leaving the 43 state union that much whiter.
I’m not saying that this is the solution to the eclipse of white America, but it’s another option that should be considered.
In 1960, only 28% of the country’s population lived in the Northeast (including Maryland and Delaware). The South, at 29%, had a higher population than the Northeast.
Furthermore, this whole idea that immigrants are flooding into Southern states does not make sense given that Northeastern states such as New York and New Jersey received far more immigrants after 1965 as a percentage of their population than the vast majority of Southern states.
Whita & Confederate’s bond idea sounds pretty good, but like he said, it requires independence.
Jeppo, what’s to prevent those border States from just allowing illegals to flow through, kind of like Gaddafi did to europe?
If those States were being forced out of the union, it seems to me all their welfare recipients would flee before that happened.
The only way to control the border is to put people there to physically stop crossers and that takes money and the will to do it.
I generally like Buchanan, but he is a northerner.
Jeppo, what’s to prevent those border States from just allowing illegals to flow through, kind of like Gaddafi did to europe?
Not much. It would be a policy of retreat and retrenchment, hoping that a less permeable border could established several hundred miles to the north, i.e, build a wall this time. Would it work? Who knows, but it couldn’t be any worse than the situation on the border today.
If those States were being forced out of the union, it seems to me all their welfare recipients would flee before that happened.
Could be. The biggest problem would be trying to strip the non-white residents of those states of their American citizenship so they couldn’t legally flee north. Could it be done? I don’t know, probably not. Like I said, it’s not an ideal solution, just an option that might be worth considering.
I generally like Buchanan, but he is a northerner.
Actually Buchanan is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. His great-grandfather fought for the South. Buchanan was born in south-of-the-Mason-Dixon-line Washington DC in 1938. DC wasn’t desegregated until 1954, meaning Pat spent the first 16 years of his life in the Jim Crow South.
Bob Corker of Tennessee sold out to Obama – Holder and opened the gates of the South & America to S.744 the immigration reform & amnesty bill. His co-sponsor is is a Roman Catholic named John Hoeven from South Dakota.
My guess is Corker sold out to get a federal plea deal for his Tennessee Republican pals the Haslam brothers who are deep into an interstate fraud scandal involving their chain the “Pilot Flying J’s”. So far at least 4 of their top executives have rolled over on them, and they are headed to the federal big house unless…
“The Northeast wants to flood the South and West with Third World immigrants”
Oh really?
Here is a list of N.E. representatives with better NumbersUSA career scores than Eric Cantor of Virginia:
Louis Barletta (PA) A+ (and don’t forget his record as mayor of Hazelton!)
Michael Fitzpatric (PA) A-
Rodney Frelinghuysen (NJ) A-
Scott Garrett (NJ) A-
Christopher Gibson (NY) B+
Mike Kelly (PA) B+
Patrick Meehan (PA) B+
Tom Marino (PA) B+
Tim Murphy (NJ) B+
John Runyan (NJ) B+
Bill Shuster (PA) B+
I was just thinking. If the good guys would have won the WBTS, the territory that is now Arizona and New Mexico probably would have become Confederate states eventually. That means the entire line that is now the USA-Mexico border from Brownsville, Texas to Yuma, Arizona would be the border (a far better controlled border) between the CSA and Mexico. Who knows what California would have done.
So, eleven of that region’s roughly seven dozen representatives have a better Numbers USA score than the liberal non-Southerner Eric Cantor. That proves what, exactly? That the remaining sixty-one or so of those representatives are worse than Cantor? “The Northeast wants to flood the South and West with Third World immigrants,” indeed.
Northeast whites went heavily for Obama. I can understand why people would be gullible enough to vote for Romney. But anyone of European descent who voted Obama is, without exception, an enemy of the South.
Eric Cantor….
How did the Spanish Inquision deal with similar Conversos?
Jeppo, you’re right. For some reason I was thinking Buchanan was from Wisconsin.
It’s not “creeping bilingualism” when thousands of American families fled Florida over the past 40 years, to be with their own co-linguists, and when the revolving door of business and government (which is what fascism really means according to Mussolini who would have known) already made a deal to print everything you see in a foreign language (spoken by people with a foreign religion, to boot).
If “private-public partnership” types will simply, de facto, print everything you see in a foreign tongue without a by-your-leave, then why would you assume it would not —as soon as possible— CEASE to print things in what you thought was the mother tongue, and make you (overnight) forced to, not be just bilingual” but speak a language that sounds to you like nails-on-chalkboard, just to survive?
If things are printed in a foreign tongue, stands to reason, the next move is getting rid of your language entirely.
“Northeast whites went heavily for Obama.”
Not really. Pennsylvania whites voted by double digits for Romney, and whites in New Jersey, Maryland, and Delaware voted for Romney by nearly double digit margins. Even in New York, Obama and Romney were basically tied among white voters.
Only in New England did Obama win the white vote. Even there, Obama won the Connecticut and New Hampshire white vote by less than 5 points. Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Maine were the only states in the Northeast where Obama won the white vote by double digits.
It is too bad that the northeast is not completely in the south, already (although it seems that will be accomplished soon). They will be more comfortable in the latin sphere. Maybe the others can move north —just switch places— and make friends with the Asians who now comprise toronto and what is left of the early immigrants to canada, who tend to the be more the same as the more generational americans, ethnically speaking.
Have the rest of the north move south, the south move north, and make the “new integrated” Latino-sphere accommodate all south america and whatever in the u.s. wants to go, but leaving an english, germanic, scottish protestant (early american) core somewhere in the north or something.
One would miss the long growing seasons of the south, and hate to see it turn into miles of more strip malls, but oh well.
Obama won with White women up north. That is the group that kept him in office.
I find the complaints about the “high” Latino population in the South to be interesting. The fact is that other than Texas and Florida, Southern states have Latino populations that are well below the national average. Their Latino population is much lower than that in the Northeast.
Supreme court rulings on affirmative action, voting rights, and gay marriage among other things coming this week.
I like Jeppo’s idea. Having a concentric ‘ring’ of nations safeguarding the Midwest (bread basket) and allowing Southrons to work out their own racial memes, would immediately allow the NE and the Midwest to return to sanity… but only if we shipped all our ‘unwashed’ to the ‘border’ states.
That doesn’t preclude the South seceding, and creating the ‘four quarters’ America. Which might be a good idea, too.
I’ll admit I was a bit vague when I said “northeast.” I meant “New England.”
The main point still stands. New England whites vote for policies that disproportionately affect people in the South and southwest. I have seen large sections of my own home town of Fort Smith turn into Hispanic enclaves, full of people with whom I do not share a common culture, a common history, and, more often than not, a common language. How did this happen? Well, it never would have happened if the Southern states could have determined their own immigration policies.
“Could be. The biggest problem would be trying to strip the non-white residents of those states of their American citizenship so they couldn’t legally flee north. Could it be done? I don’t know, probably not. Like I said, it’s not an ideal solution, just an option that might be worth considering.” – if we could do this, we could impose conditions such that the economic migrants would leave of their own accord.
“Have the rest of the north move south, the south move north…leaving an english, germanic, scottish protestant (early american) core somewhere in the north or something. One would miss the long growing seasons of the south, and hate to see it turn into miles of more strip malls, but oh well.”
The most creative idea I’ve noticed here in a long while. Please take over rural Pennsylvania, where the growing season is long enough. Lancaster is tobacco country and cotton has been grown there successfully.
The combination of air conditioning indoors, where they live, and less snow and ice to hinder their constant travelling is irresistible to the city people who are coming your way from the north.
I know you will stand your ground, though.
“New England whites vote for policies that disproportionately affect people in the South”
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut all have Latino populations that are much higher than that of any Southern state except Texas and Florida. Even New Hampshire has a higher Latino percentage than some Southern states.
Also, if you want to criticize New England whites for voting for Obama, you should also criticize Pacific Northwest whites. Washington and Oregon white voters went for Obama by high single digits, almost as much as the roughly 10-point margin he got among New England whites.
Georgia will be the next southern state to be overrun with wetbacks. Georgia already has a huge problem with its niggers. Soon niggers and mexicans will be openly competing for turf in the inner city areas, like in southern California.
In time mexicans will spread out into rural areas.
I am glad that Sean mentioned Georgia. Based on 2010 data, Georgia has the highest Latino population of any Southern state other than Texas and Florida, at 8.8%. Despite that, its Latino population is only about half the national average of 16.3%, and about half the Latino population of New York or New Jersey. Georgia’s Latino population is also lower than that of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.
Also, Mexican immigrants are no longer “overrunning” anything. The Mexican wave has halted in the wake of the Great Recession. In fact, more Mexicans are returning to Mexico than are coming to America.
Those stats also say illegals only number at around 12 million. In reality, that number is closer to 25 to 30 million. Also the economy is the south is growing, that will bring in more Mexicans that won’t be leaving even if the economy begins to sputter.
And the obvious, Mexicans are reproducing more than the native population, where ever they colonize.
“In reality, that number is closer to 25 to 30 million.”
What is this number based on?
“And the obvious, Mexicans are reproducing more than the native population, where ever they colonize.”
Actually, birth rates among Mexican immigrants are declining very fast, once again driven by the bad economy:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/thenextamerica/demographics/u-s-birth-rate-hits-record-low-20121129
Commonsense and a lot of traveling throughout the US.
And also assuming that any govt. or media poll is usually based on lies and agendas.
Could you describe your methodology in coming up with the 25-30 million figure?
I’d be happy to. Unfortunately I have to run. Let’s continue this conversation tomorrow.
“Based on 2010 data, Georgia has the highest Latino population of any Southern state other than Texas and Florida, at 8.8%. Despite that, its Latino population is only about half the national average of 16.3%, and about half the Latino population of New York or New Jersey. Georgia’s Latino population is also lower than that of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.”
Several observations. First, I would take with several shakers of salt anything the federal government says about the Hispanic population, due to its schizophrenic attitude about who is and who is not a Hispanic. (Anyone who has ever tried to tease out the Hispanic crime rate from that of non-Hispanic whites is aware of this.)
Secondly, as non-Hispanic fertility rates are significantly higher in the South than in New England, citing the proportion of a state’s population that is Hispanic tends to blur the problem of the absolute number of immigrants, which is very important when it comes to individual cities and communities.
Thirdly (and this is the most important point as concerns the South), the fact that the South already has a high proportion of blacks means that a relatively small number of Hispanics can tip the balance of political power away from white Southerners and toward minorities. Hispanics tend to concentrate in urban areas, and their increased presence in Southern cities will only exacerbate “white flight.” White southerners’ abandoning the cultural centers of the South is not a good thing.
“Actually, birth rates among Mexican immigrants are declining very fast, once again driven by the bad economy.”
Steve Sailer, among others, has shown numerous times that Hispanic fertility rates are highest among new immigrants. As the economy improves, we can expect Hispanic fertility to increase as more Hispanics begin coming into the country. (Of course, this will only get worse if the Rubio-Schumer amnesty bill should pass.)
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2012/11/making-america-more-like-mexico-is.html
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2011/11/hispanic-fertility-plummeting.html
Actually, birth rates among Mexican immigrants are declining very fast, once again driven by the bad economy:
Fertility is determined by much more than just the economy. For instance, according to CDC data, the total fertility rate of Mexican Americans declined from 3.05 in 1996 to 2.82 in 1999 – years during which the economy boomed. The longest established hispanic groups have the lowest total fertility rates (Eg Cubans in 2009 only 1.46), so southerners are not wrong to focus attention on Mexicans and Central Americans.
“Could you describe your methodology in coming up with the 25-30 million figure?” – this one is easy enough, the FedGov claimed that only about 1M foreign nationals would get amnesty the 1st time around, it wound up being triple that.
More to the point, what is the source of the fabled ”11 million” figure that the lying media repeat endlessly, decade after decade? They have no proof to back up that number, and considering they’ve been using it for at least a decade and a half, it seems very unconvincing, but the media wouldn’t lie to us, now, would they?
Considering that for some years it’s been estimated by more reliable sources that roughly 3 million were entering every year, give or take, in only a decade we’d have gained another 30 million. How does the number magically stay at ”11 million”? There are easily that many in Texas or California alone.
11 million divided by 50 states — well, those numbers are just way too low. The stuff about illegals heading home and the women having fewer kids — either deliberate obfuscation or wishful thinking.
For the last 4-5 years, more illegal immigrants have been leaving America than have been entering, due to the Great Recession. That’s why the number has stayed static at 11 million or even declined.
EC, it’s obviously in the ruling class’s interests to downplay the number of illegals. That’s reason enough to be suspicious.
No one knows for certain whether more are leaving than arriving. Any methodology that one would care to apply to measure is by nature going to wide open to manipulation.
The methodology is based on extrapolating from Border Patrol apprehensions, which dropped dramatically after the Great Recession started. The only other way to explain this drop is that illegal immigrants suddenly became dramatically more sophisticated in evading Border Patrol, but that is unlikely.
E C says:
…. The Mexican wave has halted in the wake of the Great Recession. In fact, more Mexicans are returning to Mexico than are coming to America.
If the mexicans were returning, wages would go up here in Chicago. Every crap job instead pays minimum wage.
I talked to a kid last week who was doing “recovery” work. He was making $10 per hour do do what ever they do in a single family home to clean up when a pipe bursts on the fourth floor.
White people now have to under bid illegal mexicans to work.
Mexicans should not be blamed for crappy wages. The employers who set the wages should be blamed.
Re: White & Confederate
That makes too much sense for the government to ever try it.
That’s a very good argument for a specific geographical constituency aka good politics.
EC
“Furthermore, this whole idea that immigrants are flooding into Southern states does not make sense given that Northeastern states such as New York and New Jersey received far more immigrants after 1965 as a percentage of their population than the vast majority of Southern states.”
Stage one of replacing the White population is clearing the cities. That stage is mostly complete.
“That’s a very good argument for a specific geographical constituency aka good politics.”
By “that” i meant the opening post.
Mexicans should not be blamed for crappy wages. The employers who set the wages should be blamed.
Lol, yeah, anyway, back in the real world where economic realities, not leftie wishlists, hold sway…
“Mexicans should not be blamed for crappy wages. The employers who set the wages should be blamed.”
The blame lies with the people who wanted the borders opened whether for cheap labor (Republican) or cheap votes (Democrat) or White dispossession (YKW).
Whether they officially conquer the SW or are the majority population, it makes little difference. Given that they can win political seats and still receive White taxpayer money they really have no cause to secede.
The greater problem is securing the South and all other states that aren’t anti-White. Because whether they take the SW or not they’re still going to come to the rest of the states to leech off of Whites in perpetuity for as long as we let them.
I agree.
They have no incentive to secede. Instead, Mexico can dominate the United States by registering a third of its population here as Democrat voters, and then align themselves with Northeastern Yankees and Jews and use “democracy” to redistribute our wealth.
The Mexican border:
“From 1926 to 1930, the House and Senate Immigration Committees held hearings on closing the back door. The usual Grantians (Richards M Bradley, Roy L. Garis, Francis H. Kinnicutt, Demarest Lloyd, James H. Patten, and John B. Trevor) testified, and Harry H. Laughlin submitted another one of his special reports, showing that ”Mexican immigrants are making a reconquest of the Southwest/*99
Naturally, many of the same groups that testified in 1924 against European restriction
also showed up to oppose Mexican restriction, including, as the Immigration Restriction League put it, “racial zealots … of Hebrew origin” whose “racial interests and prejudices warp their judgment as to the general interest.” But unlike in 1924, the Jews were joined this time by a well-organized and well-funded coalition of sugar beet manufacturers, livestock representatives, produce farmers, railroad executives, and mining interests, who put up a formidable fight in Congress. Few of them denied that the Mexicans were racially inferior, but they all testified that further restrictions would result in economic disaster for the Southwest. And besides, they wanted Congress to understand that the Mexicans were “timid” workers who always “knew their place” and were willing to work “all day or night and the next day without ever making a kick.” Certainly the “wetbacks” were less dangerous to society than the Negroes. The head of the American Cattle Raiser’s Association, for instance, told the Senate that he always let his three daughters ride the range with Mexicans, and the girls were “just as safe as if they had been with me…. Do you suppose we would send them out with a bunch of negroes? We would never think of such a thing.” 100
Patrician Racist: The Evolution of Madison Grant
by
Jonathan Peter Spiro
Yes, Hunter, that’s already happening. If you get a chance, go to San Diego and Los Angeles. It is truly mind numbing seeing the millions upon millions of illegal Mexican invaders. They ALL collect one form or another of welfare.
The welfare offices in my city literary have lines extended beyond the front doors ob a daily basis. I’d say 70% of those recipients are Mexican.
And those in that daily line are either new registers of welfare or re registering for benefits.
Just here in Vegas alone, the price tag must be in the billions.