vdare--2020-04-18--25 Years Later—Was Brimelow Or Krikorian Right About Facing The Race Issue?

VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow writes : Peter Bradley , in his graceful reminiscence of encountering my just-published book Alien Nation : Common Sense About America ’ s Immigration Disaster as a foot soldier in the Beltway Right 25 years ago , noted that Center For Immigration Studies ’ Mark Krikorian in his otherwise positive noticein his Immigration Review newsletter “ sounded curiously like a hysterical Leftist when the subject turned to race ” and that “ perhaps significantly , Immigration Review subsequently carried a dissent at the insistence of board member Diana Hull , but that review is not online @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and much else , is finally online !
We ’ ve retrieved and digitalized the whole exchange from the Fall 1995 issue of Immigration Review .
I ’ d forgotten how violent the internal reaction to Mark ’ s review must have been .
I ’ m posting it now not to embarrass him—he ’ s recently done the Lord ’ s work in hiring Jason Richwine and has heroically refused to be mau-maued into dropping VDARE.com from CIS ’ s invaluable e-roundup of immigration opinions—but because it addresses a legitimate difference of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Reform movement that continues to this day .
Plus , of course , the dissent was by the late CIS Board Chairman Otis L. Graham , an historian aptly described by Steve Sailer as the “ Last of the nice WASP progressives , ” and hence a document worthy of a larger audience .
I append a further comment at the end .
We ’ ve added hyperlinks .
Editor ’ s Note : Immigration has long been recognized—by politicians , academics , the media and the general public—as a highly controversial issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been so vividly apparent as since the release of Peter Brimelow ’ s book , Alien Nation , last summer .
The book has been reviewed by every major newspaper and magazine in the country ( an important feat , considering that it deals exclusively with an issue most people would prefer to avoid ) , with reviewers expressing everything from abhorrence to admiration .
The Center for Immigration Studies published in the last issue of Immigration Review ( No .
22 , Summer 1995 ) a review of Alien Nation by Mark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this review proved controversial .
We have received a number of letters from readers expressing various opinions of both the book and its relevance to the immigration debate .
Some of these are excerpted below .
In its commitment to a broad national debate on immigration policy , the Center also offers below a second review of Alien Nation from a different perspective .
This review was written by Dr. Otis Graham , Adjunct Professor of History and Business Administration at the University of North Carolina , Wilmington and Chairman of the Board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like that by Mr. Krikorian , expresses the views of the author , not necessarily those of the Center .
Mr. Krikorian ’ s review of Alien Nation is a remarkable denial of reality .
His insistence that the impact of post-1965 immigration is not “ systematically different from anything that had gone before ” is blatantly false .
As a result of the immigration policy pursued since 1965 , annual immigration numbers have been doubled , then trebled .
Legal and illegal immigration between 1981 and 1990 probably matched , and most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first decade of this century .
And the “ Great Wave ” of immigration at the turn of this century was an exception .
Current numbers are consistently high , with no pause in sight .
For the first time ever , the Third World , not Europe , is the primary source of immigration .
Between 1981 and 1990 , the Third World accounted for 90 percent of all legal immigration .
The Third World is also the principal source of illegal immigration .
Between 1989 and 1994 , of the 2.7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ the Immigration Reform and Control Act ] , 98 percent to 99 percent came from the Third World .
While immigration accounted for only 27.8 percent of U.S. population growth between 1900 and 1910 , it was responsible for 32.6 percent of population growth in the 1970s and 37.1 percent in the 1980s .
And [ that share ] is rising .
Also for the first time ever , the [ share ] of the non-Hispanic white population has been reduced , falling from 89 percent of the population in 1960 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current immigration trends continue , non-Hispanic whites are expected to become a numerical minority within the next fifty years .
This is without precedent in U.S. history or that of any democratic state .
Blacks are now outnumbered by other minorities in total for the first time ever .
And they are expected to be displaced as the single largest minority within the next twenty-five years .
( This , despite the fact , ignored by Mr. Krikorian , that the black population is being augmented by increased immigration from Africa and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of all legal immigration . )
The education and skill levels of post-1965 immigrants are less than those of native-born Americans and are declining .
As a result , welfare dependency among post-1965 immigrants is , on average , higher than among native-born Americans ( 9 % v. 7 % ) .
For specific immigrant groups , it is dramatically higher : Cambodians and Laotians—nearly 50 percent ; Dominicans—28 percent ; and Vietnamese—26 percent .
Throughout Alien Nation , Mr. Brimelow repeatedly poses the same fundamental question to our democracy : Legally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population determine the immigration policies which are affecting its demographics ?
Sadly , Mr. Krikorian answers “ No ” and then demands that this question never again be asked .
I was disappointed that Mark Krikorian believes that continuous ethnic transformation is our mission and our fate .
Most Americans reject that notion , taking the conservative position that profound change in the composition and size of our population should be undertaken cautiously , and only after a national consensus on the subject .
The degree of difference between people does count .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but are astonishingly similar when compared to the Ik of Uganda .
A viable nation needs a major theme , strong enough to accommodate some dissonance , but secure enough to decide how much .
There is a difference between the self-serving belief in one ’ s own racial or national superiority and the rational recognition that such differences exist .
Brimelow is always careful to make that distinction .
Your reviewer “ doth protest too much ” about his purity of heart in matters of race and ethnicity , joining the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ taboo sickness , ” that obsessional prohibition Freud claimed was rooted in fear and ambivalence .
Thus , Peter Brimelow has brought down upon himself , once again , the renunciation suffered by those who explore “ forbidden subjects.
” [ In his review of Alien Nation , Mark Krikorian wrote , ] “ Brimelow claims he is not arguing that Asian and Latin American immigration is a racial threat to ( white ) America .
Maybe ; but the plain language of the book would seem to argue otherwise.
” Brimelow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He is arguing that Congress is transforming the predominant ethnic group into a minority by way of immigration policy , without a national debate , without a mandate , and simply without the consent of the Americans .
Brimelow would have no objection to this process if Americans were demanding it .
Asians and Latinos are not the threat .
The threat is transforming America without America ’ s consent .
The difference may be subtle , but consent is important .
[ Mr. Krikorian ] is mistaken when he says , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we as a people have brought upon ourselves and must solve ourselves.
” It is Congress that has perpetrated this problem on a nation unaware of what is going on .
A review of Alien Nation : Common Sense About America ’ s Immigration Disaster , by Peter Brimelow ( New York : Random House , 1995 ) .
Peter Brimelow ’ s Alien Nation is a very important book .
We will not know how important until some time passes and we learn to what degree he has dispelled the taboo against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large-scale immigration to include its cultural and demographic impacts .
The book ’ s originality—and the hinge on which its reception swings—resides in its demographic focus and the resultant harsh light it casts , in Brimelow ’ s handling , on the 1965 Immigration Act .
That law , he argues , launched “ an experiment , ” an “ immense historic gamble.
” Prior to 1965 , immigration to the United States , either by accident or because of policy decisions made between the end of slave importation and the 1920s , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rates in shaping a multiracial , multicultural nation around “ a specific ethnic core ” that was “ white.
” Brimelow calls this “ a plain historical fact.
” I would call it a complicated historical reality qualified by the also-important fact that the white core has constantly accommodated , albeit sometimes begrudgingly , once-excluded non-white peoples and the cultures they brought from other lands .
Once our historic immigration patterns and policies ( pre-1965 ) are understood as central to the maintenance of a Europe-based demographic and cultural core , then the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration that began at the same time can indeed be seen as a “ gamble ” and a “ revolutionary experiment.
” Both policies set in motion streams of immigration from Latin America and Asia , which are steadily producing “ an ethnic and racial transformation in America without precedent in the history of the world.
” It is a gamble because the architects of this new policy to transform America into a much more heavily populated country—which at some point will have no European-derived ethnic and racial majority or “ core ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ path with no precedents and no study of the matter .
Indeed , the authors of the 1965 law denied that this was their intent , or that it would be the effect of their policy reform .
They argued that it was undertaken simply to bring the civil rights revolution to American immigration law and to end discrimination against people from abroad on the basis of their national origins .
When it became clear that a major demographic transformation was indeed the clearest effect of the new system , America ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a taboo against critical scrutiny of immigration flows in general , and the national origins/ethnic/racial composition of them in particular .
The American public , as Brimelow points out repeatedly , was never alerted to the implications of this new policy .
And so the “ revolutionary experiment ” has run on for thirty years before Alien Nation ’ s highly visible debut this summer .
Brimelow might have simply called for lifting the taboo he had dared to flout , allowing a vigorous national debate over whether this demographic transformation is what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decided to go beyond inviting the debate to suggesting what the answer should be .
He expresses a pervasive conviction , throughout Alien Nation , that using immigration to diminish the Euro-white core culture is a vast mistake .
He makes no elaborate prophecies about where current immigration flows are taking the United States , but plainly foresees intensified social conflict and disunion , since Americans “ will no longer share in common ... the mystic chords of memory ” that have held our nation together and defined it .
Reviewers have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have admired Brimelow ’ s ability to discern and convey the heavy costs that post- 1965 immigration has levied on a nation much in need of population stabilization and a labor shortage-ladder for America ’ s low-income population .
He skillfully exposes the “ desperately thin substantive arguments ” that have carried the day in the immigration-expansive decades since 1965 .
But many reviewers , including Mark Krikorian writing in the last issue of Immigration Review , want to slam the taboo lid back on the discussion Brimelow opens about the demographic transformation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s views bring into play not only cultural issues implying varying degrees of ethnic group adaptability to American life , but also skin color—thus authenticating that fearsome word “ white , ” in a category of menace far beyond black , brown or yellow .
They argue that it thus becomes more difficult to discuss other issues that point to the need for immigration reform without running into knee-jerk accusations of racism .
I have two objections to that response to Alien Nation .
Restoring the taboo against the cultural dimensions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The country is in a ferment about national identity , tribalism , language and multiculturalism , as well as about schools , neighborhoods and civic order .
Race-conscious migration , University of Michigan demographer William Frey reports , is evident in recent internal migration trends in the United States , as people leave “ for whiter destinations.
” Government policy drives much of this—immigration , affirmative action , school busing , all steering by color and stirring deep currents of resentment .
Polite silence by our intellectual classes will not stop the spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and discourse .
White backlash is already a reality .
Those who find this ominous might consider lending a hand in removing immigration from its incendiary mission as a rapid transformer of the nation ’ s ethnic , racial and cultural base .
Far lower annual numbers would give immigration less demographic influence , as history has demonstrated .
Restoring the tilt towards the skills-based ( including English-language proficiency ) selection that prevailed before the 1965 shift to family reunification would maintain diversity in the geographic origins of immigrants , promote assimilation and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brimelow appears to be wanting something stronger—a broad public debate over the demography of legal immigration that would reaffirm immigration ’ s role as compatible with the maintenance of the European white core .
This would seem , at first glance , to invite the nation to reenact the debates that led up to the 1921-1924 National Origins system—debates marred by a variety of white-supremacist sentiments , along with claims of the inferiority of non-Caucasians .
These were racist sentiments , there in the sorry record .
But the preference for an immigration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demography can be made without racist overtones ; it was so made in the early 1920s by a handful , and that is Brimelow ’ s argument .
We badly need another word for the essentially pragmatic view that communities , certainly countries , work better when their cultural composition—in the inclusive sense of that term—is either stable or changing only very slowly .
In the early 1990s , Korean landlords in Los Angeles were charged with discrimination when they were found willing to rent only to other Koreans .
“ They just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind , ” was their lawyer ’ s limp excuse , which did not satisfy the law .
But nobody called them racists , possibly because there were no accompanying slurs on non-Koreans .
In immigration debate , it seems a legitimate point of view that what worked in the past was a European-derived core enriched , but not entirely displaced , by an expanding pluralism , and that this system should be allowed to continue to work .
Similarly , it is a legitimate point of view that the American people should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the matter .
A democracy should be able to handle such questions in the open , and will suffer debilitating strains when it does not .
When the dust from that debate settles , my guess is that we will have affirmed that foreigners can be invited to become—and be made into—Americans , whatever their skin color , Americanness being a core set of political beliefs which Gunnar Myrdal tried to summarize fifty years ago , along with a cultural commonality based upon those “ mystic chords of memory ” that Lincoln cherished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be of such a scale as to radically transform the nation in a mere fifty years ( as has already happened in California ) .
If that is the result , it may not be exactly what Peter Brimelow would have chosen—though it would seem acceptable to him as the choice of the American public , rather than a small political elite—but he will have the satisfaction of knowing that his book played an important role in the outcome .
Peter Brimelow concludes : 25 years later , of course , Otis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” compromise of a multiracial immigration inflow on a scale that does not “ radically transform the nation ” has not materialized .
Mark Krikorian ’ s policy of triangulating against VDARE.com and kowtowing to Beltway norms on the discussion of race certainly maintained his Main Stream Media presence longer than mine ( which ended with eerie abruptness when the Southern Poverty Law Center vigilantes named VDARE.com a “ Hate Group ” ) but at a fatal price in what he has been able to say .
In the end , CIS has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyway , and has had to sue the $ PLC , with unclear results .
I would not give much for his MSM presence ( or charitable status ) if and when the Democrats reclaim the Executive Branch .
I am temperamentally inclined towards brutal frankness , and think it was Donald Trump ’ s implicit whiteness , rather than Politically Correct Inside-the-Beltway maneuvering , that gave us at least the chance of stemming the immivasion .
But , hey , as Chairman Mao said , let a hundred flowers bloom—as long as @ @ @

VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow writes: Peter Bradley, in his graceful reminiscence of encountering my just-published book Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster as a foot soldier in the Beltway Right 25 years ago, noted that Center For Immigration Studies’ Mark Krikorian in his otherwise positive noticein his Immigration Review newsletter “sounded curiously like a hysterical Leftist when the subject turned to race” and that “perhaps significantly, Immigration Review subsequently carried a dissent at the insistence of board member Diana Hull, but that review is not online at CIS.”
Well—now that review, and much else, is finally online! We’ve retrieved and digitalized the whole exchange from the Fall 1995 issue of Immigration Review.
I’d forgotten how violent the internal reaction to Mark’s review must have been. I’m posting it now not to embarrass him—he’s recently done the Lord’s work in hiring Jason Richwine and has heroically refused to be mau-maued into dropping VDARE.com from CIS’s invaluable e-roundup of immigration opinions—but because it addresses a legitimate difference of opinion on tactics within the Patriotic Immigration Reform movement that continues to this day. Plus, of course, the dissent was by the late CIS Board Chairman Otis L. Graham, an historian aptly described by Steve Sailer as the “Last of the nice WASP progressives,” and hence a document worthy of a larger audience. I append a further comment at the end. We’ve added hyperlinks.
Immigration Review, No. 23, Fall 1995)
Editor’s Note: Immigration has long been recognized—by politicians, academics, the media and the general public—as a highly controversial issue. However, the controversy has rarely been so vividly apparent as since the release of Peter Brimelow’s book, Alien Nation, last summer. The book has been reviewed by every major newspaper and magazine in the country (an important feat, considering that it deals exclusively with an issue most people would prefer to avoid), with reviewers expressing everything from abhorrence to admiration.
The Center for Immigration Studies published in the last issue of Immigration Review (No. 22, Summer 1995) a review of Alien Nation by Mark Krikorian. Like the book itself, this review proved controversial. We have received a number of letters from readers expressing various opinions of both the book and its relevance to the immigration debate. Some of these are excerpted below.
In its commitment to a broad national debate on immigration policy, the Center also offers below a second review of Alien Nation from a different perspective. This review was written by Dr. Otis Graham, Adjunct Professor of History and Business Administration at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington and Chairman of the Board of the Center. This review, like that by Mr. Krikorian, expresses the views of the author, not necessarily those of the Center.
Letters to the Editor
Joseph E. Fallon, Rye, N.Y., Peter Brimelow’s researcher, writes:
Mr. Krikorian’s review of Alien Nation is a remarkable denial of reality. His insistence that the impact of post-1965 immigration is not “systematically different from anything that had gone before” is blatantly false.
As a result of the immigration policy pursued since 1965, annual immigration numbers have been doubled, then trebled. Legal and illegal immigration between 1981 and 1990 probably matched, and most likely exceeded, immigration levels in the first decade of this century. And the “Great Wave” of immigration at the turn of this century was an exception. Current numbers are consistently high, with no pause in sight.
For the first time ever, the Third World, not Europe, is the primary source of immigration. Between 1981 and 1990, the Third World accounted for 90 percent of all legal immigration. The Third World is also the principal source of illegal immigration. Between 1989 and 1994, of the 2.7 million illegal aliens who received amnesty under [the Immigration Reform and Control Act], 98 percent to 99 percent came from the Third World.
While immigration accounted for only 27.8 percent of U.S. population growth between 1900 and 1910, it was responsible for 32.6 percent of population growth in the 1970s and 37.1 percent in the 1980s. And [that share] is rising.
Also for the first time ever, the [share] of the non-Hispanic white population has been reduced, falling from 89 percent of the population in 1960 to just 75 percent in 1990. If current immigration trends continue, non-Hispanic whites are expected to become a numerical minority within the next fifty years. This is without precedent in U.S. history or that of any democratic state.
Blacks are now outnumbered by other minorities in total for the first time ever. And they are expected to be displaced as the single largest minority within the next twenty-five years. (This, despite the fact, ignored by Mr. Krikorian, that the black population is being augmented by increased immigration from Africa and the Caribbean, which together account for 10 percent of all legal immigration.)
The education and skill levels of post-1965 immigrants are less than those of native-born Americans and are declining. As a result, welfare dependency among post-1965 immigrants is, on average, higher than among native-born Americans (9% v. 7%). For specific immigrant groups, it is dramatically higher: Cambodians and Laotians—nearly 50 percent; Dominicans—28 percent; and Vietnamese—26 percent.
Throughout Alien Nation, Mr. Brimelow repeatedly poses the same fundamental question to our democracy: Legally and morally, should not the American population determine the immigration policies which are affecting its demographics? Sadly, Mr. Krikorian answers “No” and then demands that this question never again be asked.
Dr. Diana Hull, Santa Barbara, Calif, writes:
I was disappointed that Mark Krikorian believes that continuous ethnic transformation is our mission and our fate. Most Americans reject that notion, taking the conservative position that profound change in the composition and size of our population should be undertaken cautiously, and only after a national consensus on the subject.
The degree of difference between people does count. The Swedes are unlike the Danes, but are astonishingly similar when compared to the Ik of Uganda. A viable nation needs a major theme, strong enough to accommodate some dissonance, but secure enough to decide how much. There is a difference between the self-serving belief in one’s own racial or national superiority and the rational recognition that such differences exist. Brimelow is always careful to make that distinction.
Your reviewer “doth protest too much” about his purity of heart in matters of race and ethnicity, joining the majority of reviewers of Alien Nation in his “taboo sickness,” that obsessional prohibition Freud claimed was rooted in fear and ambivalence. Thus, Peter Brimelow has brought down upon himself, once again, the renunciation suffered by those who explore “forbidden subjects.”
Perry Lorenz, Sunnyvale, Calif., writes:
[In his review of Alien Nation, Mark Krikorian wrote,] “Brimelow claims he is not arguing that Asian and Latin American immigration is a racial threat to (white) America. Maybe; but the plain language of the book would seem to argue otherwise.” Brimelow is, in fact, being consistent. He is arguing that Congress is transforming the predominant ethnic group into a minority by way of immigration policy, without a national debate, without a mandate, and simply without the consent of the Americans. Brimelow would have no objection to this process if Americans were demanding it. Asians and Latinos are not the threat. The threat is transforming America without America’s consent. The difference may be subtle, but consent is important.
[Mr. Krikorian] is mistaken when he says, “But it is a problem that we as a people have brought upon ourselves and must solve ourselves.” It is Congress that has perpetrated this problem on a nation unaware of what is going on.
A Second Opinion
by Dr. Otis Graham
A review of Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster, by Peter Brimelow (New York: Random House, 1995).
Peter Brimelow’s Alien Nation is a very important book. We will not know how important until some time passes and we learn to what degree he has dispelled the taboo against broadening the argument over today’s large-scale immigration to include its cultural and demographic impacts.
The book’s originality—and the hinge on which its reception swings—resides in its demographic focus and the resultant harsh light it casts, in Brimelow’s handling, on the 1965 Immigration Act. That law, he argues, launched “an experiment,” an “immense historic gamble.” Prior to 1965, immigration to the United States, either by accident or because of policy decisions made between the end of slave importation and the 1920s, played its part along with domestic birth rates in shaping a multiracial, multicultural nation around “a specific ethnic core” that was “white.” Brimelow calls this “a plain historical fact.” I would call it a complicated historical reality qualified by the also-important fact that the white core has constantly accommodated, albeit sometimes begrudgingly, once-excluded non-white peoples and the cultures they brought from other lands.
Once our historic immigration patterns and policies (pre-1965) are understood as central to the maintenance of a Europe-based demographic and cultural core, then the 1965 act and the tolerance of illegal immigration that began at the same time can indeed be seen as a “gamble” and a “revolutionary experiment.” Both policies set in motion streams of immigration from Latin America and Asia, which are steadily producing “an ethnic and racial transformation in America without precedent in the history of the world.”
It is a gamble because the architects of this new policy to transform America into a much more heavily populated country—which at some point will have no European-derived ethnic and racial majority or “core”—set the nation on an entirely new path with no precedents and no study of the matter. Indeed, the authors of the 1965 law denied that this was their intent, or that it would be the effect of their policy reform. They argued that it was undertaken simply to bring the civil rights revolution to American immigration law and to end discrimination against people from abroad on the basis of their national origins. When it became clear that a major demographic transformation was indeed the clearest effect of the new system, America’s elites fashioned and entirely submitted themselves to a taboo against critical scrutiny of immigration flows in general, and the national origins/ethnic/racial composition of them in particular. The American public, as Brimelow points out repeatedly, was never alerted to the implications of this new policy. And so the “revolutionary experiment” has run on for thirty years before Alien Nation’s highly visible debut this summer.
Brimelow might have simply called for lifting the taboo he had dared to flout, allowing a vigorous national debate over whether this demographic transformation is what the American public wishes. But he decided to go beyond inviting the debate to suggesting what the answer should be. He expresses a pervasive conviction, throughout Alien Nation, that using immigration to diminish the Euro-white core culture is a vast mistake. He makes no elaborate prophecies about where current immigration flows are taking the United States, but plainly foresees intensified social conflict and disunion, since Americans “will no longer share in common ... the mystic chords of memory” that have held our nation together and defined it.
Reviewers have been sharply of two minds.
Virtually all have admired Brimelow’s ability to discern and convey the heavy costs that post- 1965 immigration has levied on a nation much in need of population stabilization and a labor shortage-ladder for America’s low-income population. He skillfully exposes the “desperately thin substantive arguments” that have carried the day in the immigration-expansive decades since 1965. But many reviewers, including Mark Krikorian writing in the last issue of Immigration Review, want to slam the taboo lid back on the discussion Brimelow opens about the demographic transformation. They seem to believe that Brimelow ’s views bring into play not only cultural issues implying varying degrees of ethnic group adaptability to American life, but also skin color—thus authenticating that fearsome word “white,” in a category of menace far beyond black, brown or yellow. They argue that it thus becomes more difficult to discuss other issues that point to the need for immigration reform without running into knee-jerk accusations of racism.
I have two objections to that response to Alien Nation. Restoring the taboo against the cultural dimensions of immigration policy cannot be done. The country is in a ferment about national identity, tribalism, language and multiculturalism, as well as about schools, neighborhoods and civic order. Race-conscious migration, University of Michigan demographer William Frey reports, is evident in recent internal migration trends in the United States, as people leave “for whiter destinations.” Government policy drives much of this—immigration, affirmative action, school busing, all steering by color and stirring deep currents of resentment. Polite silence by our intellectual classes will not stop the spread of race consciousness in our social interactions and discourse. White backlash is already a reality.
Those who find this ominous might consider lending a hand in removing immigration from its incendiary mission as a rapid transformer of the nation’s ethnic, racial and cultural base. Far lower annual numbers would give immigration less demographic influence, as history has demonstrated. Restoring the tilt towards the skills-based (including English-language proficiency) selection that prevailed before the 1965 shift to family reunification would maintain diversity in the geographic origins of immigrants, promote assimilation and ease concerns over cultural balkanization.
But Brimelow appears to be wanting something stronger—a broad public debate over the demography of legal immigration that would reaffirm immigration’s role as compatible with the maintenance of the European white core. This would seem, at first glance, to invite the nation to reenact the debates that led up to the 1921-1924 National Origins system—debates marred by a variety of white-supremacist sentiments, along with claims of the inferiority of non-Caucasians. These were racist sentiments, there in the sorry record. But the preference for an immigration system that replicates the nation’s demography can be made without racist overtones; it was so made in the early 1920s by a handful, and that is Brimelow’s argument.
We badly need another word for the essentially pragmatic view that communities, certainly countries, work better when their cultural composition—in the inclusive sense of that term—is either stable or changing only very slowly. In the early 1990s, Korean landlords in Los Angeles were charged with discrimination when they were found willing to rent only to other Koreans. “They just like to hang out with their own kind,” was their lawyer’s limp excuse, which did not satisfy the law. But nobody called them racists, possibly because there were no accompanying slurs on non-Koreans. In immigration debate, it seems a legitimate point of view that what worked in the past was a European-derived core enriched, but not entirely displaced, by an expanding pluralism, and that this system should be allowed to continue to work. Similarly, it is a legitimate point of view that the American people should be asked what their preferences are in the matter. A democracy should be able to handle such questions in the open, and will suffer debilitating strains when it does not.
When the dust from that debate settles, my guess is that we will have affirmed that foreigners can be invited to become—and be made into—Americans, whatever their skin color, Americanness being a core set of political beliefs which Gunnar Myrdal tried to summarize fifty years ago, along with a cultural commonality based upon those “mystic chords of memory” that Lincoln cherished. And that the immigration flow should not be of such a scale as to radically transform the nation in a mere fifty years (as has already happened in California). If that is the result, it may not be exactly what Peter Brimelow would have chosen—though it would seem acceptable to him as the choice of the American public, rather than a small political elite—but he will have the satisfaction of knowing that his book played an important role in the outcome.
[Permalink]
Peter Brimelow concludes: 25 years later, of course, Otis Graham’s “nice WASP progressive” compromise of a multiracial immigration inflow on a scale that does not “radically transform the nation” has not materialized. Mark Krikorian’s policy of triangulating against VDARE.com and kowtowing to Beltway norms on the discussion of race certainly maintained his Main Stream Media presence longer than mine (which ended with eerie abruptness when the Southern Poverty Law Center vigilantes named VDARE.com a “Hate Group”) but at a fatal price in what he has been able to say. In the end, CIS has been named a “Hate Group” anyway, and has had to sue the $PLC, with unclear results. I would not give much for his MSM presence (or charitable status) if and when the Democrats reclaim the Executive Branch.
I am temperamentally inclined towards brutal frankness, and think it was Donald Trump’s implicit whiteness, rather than Politically Correct Inside-the-Beltway maneuvering, that gave us at least the chance of stemming the immivasion.
But, hey, as Chairman Mao said, let a hundred flowers bloom—as long as they can.


vdare--2020-04-19--OK, Guatemelan Consul José Barillas Trennert Isn’t The Head Of the Border Patrol, He’s Head Of #ICES

OK, Guatemelan Consul José Barillas Trennert Isn’t The Head Of the Border Patrol, He’s Head Of #ICESVU

Earlier : New Head Of The Border Patrol : Guatemelan Consul José Barillas Trennert The story of Guatemalan illegal alien Gilmer Barrios is getting stranger .
Your correspondent reported that he was deported by the Border Patrol and then readmitted by the Border Patrol—according to reports in the Lugen Presse and by Barrios ’ Treason Bar attorney .
New evidence has come to my attention from both the Lying Press and inside sources detailing an even stranger story .
First , and most important , Barrios was a beneficiary of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty , specifically , the Immigration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proceedings have their cases closed by agreement between the alien and the government or ordered closed by a kritarch on his own action .
Then the alien is allowed to remain in the United States illegally , many with no hope of every legally adjusting status , though the real intent is to have them in the United States for the next amnesty legislation .
Your correspondent , because of the lies of omission and commission by the Lying Press , was incorrect on some conclusions , but correct on others .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reporter for NBC/Telemundo , Damià Bonmatí , was deliberately obfuscating the issue , giving more detail in Spanish language stories , mixed with lies , and lies of omission and commission in English language stories .
First , the Spanish language version of the story translated by Google .
In the early hours of March 27 , the Guatemalan Gilmer Barrios found himself in front of the border wall and in a row with seven other migrants who were being deported .
This is how he remembers the exchange he had with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him : – We are on the border of Tijuana and you are going to be deported .
– No , I can not leave the country , I have my wife and I have two children .
They can not survive alone – he claims to have said .
After more than a decade in the United States , the deportation of the immigrant started a few days before a checkpoint ( checkpoint ) Border Patrol in California where he spent dozens of times in recent years .
He assures that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see any immigration judge or any agent of the immigration service ( ICE ) as it happens in normal conditions .
But , during the COVID-19 national emergency , the Border Patrol plays a new role .
[ “ They Pulled Me Hard ” : The Border Patrol Uses Its Special Powers During The Coronavirus Emergency To Deport A Guatemalan To Mexico , by Damia Bonmati , NBC ?
Telemundo , April 11 , 2020 ] Ignore the above lies that are implied as quotations , but not put in quotation marks .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Illegal aliens , like other criminals , always lie about how they came to be arrested and how they were treated upon arrest .
They always claim they were threatened or tortured , or beaten or assaulted , or abused in some manner as a prelude to their shameless baby-waving .
And then more lies and the sad evidence that he was a beneficiary of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty , immigration court version .
They would have only pulled him hard if he was resisting arrest .
And note his arrogance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he is proud he fooled the Border Patrol Agents at the San Clemente Checkpoint for years .
There we have it , On November 8 , 2016 , just days after Donald J. Trump ’ s election victory , the Obama Regime is in a mad race to hand out more immigration court amnesties .
It may be that Barrios was one of the last beneficiaries of the Immigration Court Amnesty .
His legal situation is not ambiguous .
Barrios is an illegal alien .
The Obama Immigration Court Amnesty did not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did his marriage to an American citizen .
However , this does tell us something .
Barrios has been in the United States over 10 years illegally .
We know that at some point he was arrested and placed in removal proceedings and that those proceedings were closed just before Donald Trump became President , and ended the Immigration Court Amnesty .
In fact , the Trump Administration has started to reopen cases like Barrios ’ aimed at deporting those who won the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty .
What we know now is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was arrested and placed in removal proceedings .
We know that he applied for and received employment authorization .
We know that employment authorization is expired .
It expired , as least as of the day the immigration court closed his case , as he had applied for asylum when first arrested and subsequently was granted employment authorization .
This is a long going scam by illegal aliens , they make a fraudulent claim of asylum , then after 6 months , can apply for employment authorization , then never appear for their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrios did .
Since then , Barrios has gotten married to a U.S. citizen .
Generally , he would be able to adjust status in the United States based on that , if he had entered the U.S. by inspection and admission , and just overstayed his period of admission .
Note that those who enter without inspection may not adjust their status in the United States , so Barrios clearly entered illegally , was either arrested and claimed asylum , or claimed asylum while in the United States illegally , was denied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proceedings .
Now , Barrios is claiming that he was trying to “ regularize ” his situation .
What we learn is that since he has not been able to adjust status based on his marriage , he had entered the United States without inspection and can not adjust status here .
So , there is nothing he can do to “ regularize ” his situation except by a successful asylum application , which we know he can not do , as he made a claim for asylum in the immigration courts when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If he had a strong case for asylum , he would not have agreed to an administrative closure of his case in immigration court .
So , that is more lies from him , his Treason Bar attorney , and the reporter .
Note that the reporter from the Lying Press made no effort to question either Barrios or his attorneys , there are two , one male in the story , and one female who was representing him in his case before the immigration courts in 2016 .
Why , because the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is mass immigration and the replacement of the historic American nation with Third World illegals .
Now , for the inside scoop .
Barrios was arrested by the Border Patrol .
He was not assaulted .
He was given opportunity to call his wife , friends , and his first attorney who represented him in 2016 .
No attorney has filed anything for him since 2016 , so he is not trying to “ regularize ” himself .
He was served with a Notice To Appear ( NTA ) , Form I-862 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ICE custody .
He also claimed fear of being returned to Guatemala , so he perhaps was returned to Mexico by ICE ERO based on the new asylum protocols which mean Wait In Mexico .
Apparently it was ICE ERO that removed him from the United States to Mexico , quite likely under the special China Flu provisions of law that allow illegal aliens arrested in the border area to be removed without review .
So , Barrios and his attorney are lying .
Barrios was removed by ICE ERO to Mexico , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China Pandemic for illegal aliens encountered in the border area , and specifically when encountered at interior checkpoints within 25 miles of the border , to be removed immediately to Mexico regardless of citizenship .
All illegal aliens are presumed to have recently entered illegally when encountered the border area , even if they are long-time illegal aliens , such as Barrios .
Note also that the special authority to prohibit the entry of aliens is not limited by the amount of time an alien has been in the United States .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just crossed the border , was here two days , or two years , or ten years , if arrested , that illegal alien can be removed expeditiously .
Note that your correspondent had concluded , based on Barrios ’ lies that he was removed by the Border Patrol , that he was subject to Expedited Removal ( ER ) .
That may not be correct , as my sources say that Barrios was placed in ICE custody .
We don ’ t at this time know for certain if ICE used ER @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we do know that it was U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Enforcement and Removal Operations ( ICE ERO ) that allowed Barrios back in the United States .
Thankfully at the time of this writing , he is in custody .
However , he should be immediately deported , as we know he failed on his initial asylum claim , as he failed to pursue it and instead accepted the Obama Regime Administrative Immigration Court Amnesty , which left him in the United States as an illegal alien without employment authorization .
Note @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegally employing him as his employment authorization was expired , and likely many other illegal aliens as Barrios was working for a landscaping company .
But now the question is what will happen to this long-time illegal alien .
Ken The Knife Cuccinelli should make certain two things .
First , that whoever authorized Barrios ’ return to the United States should be fired and that the full weight of the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor , ICE ’ s attorneys who prosecute immigration cases in the immigration courts , should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let Ken The Knife know that he should not fold under pressure from the Lying Press and the Treason Bar .
Regarding all this nonsense , you can inquire with ICE ERO Field Office Director Gregory Archambeault about what happened .
Ask him what was the legal basis to bring Barrios back to the United States .
The principal of immigration law is once the alien has left , there is no bringing him back except with a visa , parole , or a waiver .
He can be reached here and at @ @ @ @ @

Earlier: New Head Of The Border Patrol: Guatemelan Consul José Barillas Trennert
The story of Guatemalan illegal alien Gilmer Barrios is getting stranger. Your correspondent reported that he was deported by the Border Patrol and then readmitted by the Border Patrol—according to reports in the Lugen Presse and by Barrios’ Treason Bar attorney. New evidence has come to my attention from both the Lying Press and inside sources detailing an even stranger story.
First, and most important, Barrios was a beneficiary of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty, specifically, the Immigration Court Amnesty where illegal aliens in deportation proceedings have their cases closed by agreement between the alien and the government or ordered closed by a kritarch on his own action. Then the alien is allowed to remain in the United States illegally, many with no hope of ever legally adjusting status, though the real intent is to have them in the United States for the next amnesty legislation.
Your correspondent, because of the lies of omission and commission by the Lying Press, was incorrect on some conclusions, but correct on others. In general, what was confirmed was that the reporter for NBC/Telemundo, Damià Bonmatí, was deliberately obfuscating the issue, giving more detail in Spanish language stories, mixed with lies, and lies of omission and commission in English language stories.
First, the Spanish language version of the story translated by Google.
In the early hours of March 27, the Guatemalan Gilmer Barrios found himself in front of the border wall and in a row with seven other migrants who were being deported. This is how he remembers the exchange he had with the agents who were going to deport him: – We are on the border of Tijuana and you are going to be deported. – No, I cannot leave the country, I have my wife and I have two children. They cannot survive alone – he claims to have said. – I do not care. After more than a decade in the United States, the deportation of the immigrant started a few days before a checkpoint (checkpoint) Border Patrol in California where he spent dozens of times in recent years. He assures that, in his expulsion, he did not see any immigration judge or any agent of the immigration service (ICE) as it happens in normal conditions. But, during the COVID-19 national emergency, the Border Patrol plays a new role. [“They Pulled Me Hard”: The Border Patrol Uses Its Special Powers During The Coronavirus Emergency To Deport A Guatemalan To Mexico, by Damia Bonmati, Noticias Telemundo, April 11, 2020]
Ignore the above lies that are implied as quotations, but not put in quotation marks. Those fake quotes are not true. Illegal aliens, like other criminals, always lie about how they came to be arrested and how they were treated upon arrest. They always claim they were threatened or tortured, or beaten or assaulted, or abused in some manner as a prelude to their shameless baby-waving.
“I have been on this route for four years and nothing has ever happened to me. I even said goodbye to them when I was there, “Barrios explained to Telemundo News. But that Monday the process was complicated after asking for identification. “They pulled me hard, they put me on top of the car, they put handcuffs on me, they swore at me, they tightened my grip and they told me that I was going to be deported,” said the Guatemalan immigrant. He says Border Patrol agents denied a call to his wife, and removed her shirt and shoes.
And then more lies and the sad evidence that he was a beneficiary of the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty, immigration court version. They would have only pulled him hard if he was resisting arrest. And note his arrogance, he is in the United States illegally and he is proud he fooled the Border Patrol Agents at the San Clemente Checkpoint for years.
After more than a decade in the United States, Barrios’ legal situation is ambiguous: his work permit has expired, his immigration case is administratively closed, and he was trying to regularize his situation in the country. His wife and two children, age 2 and 1, are U.S. citizens. "Gilmer does not have a deportation order. The immigration court is the one with the authority to determine if Mr. (Barrios) had to leave the country,” said the Guatemalan legal representative, Emilio Amaya. A document reviewed by Noticias Telemundo shows how immigration judge William David Neumeister of Los Angeles administratively closed the case in November 2016. The automatic immigration court system also contains no deportation order under his alien number. Gilmer, who is his name, appears as ‘Gilmar’ in the documentation of the immigration court.
There we have it, On November 8, 2016, just days after Donald J. Trump’s election victory, the Obama Regime is in a mad race to hand out more immigration court amnesties. It may be that Barrios was one of the last beneficiaries of the Immigration Court Amnesty. His legal situation is not ambiguous. Barrios is an illegal alien. The Obama Immigration Court Amnesty did not give him any legal status, nor did his marriage to an American citizen.
However, this does tell us something. Barrios has been in the United States over 10 years illegally. We know that at some point he was arrested and placed in removal proceedings and that those proceedings were closed just before Donald Trump became President, and ended the Immigration Court Amnesty. In fact, the Trump Administration has started to reopen cases like Barrios’ aimed at deporting those who won the Obama Regime Administrative Amnesty.
What we know now is that Barrios, 10 years ago, was arrested and placed in removal proceedings. We know that he applied for and received employment authorization. We know that employment authorization is expired. It expired, as least as of the day the immigration court closed his case, as he had applied for asylum when first arrested and subsequently was granted employment authorization. This is a long-standing scam by illegal aliens; they make a fraudulent claim of asylum, then after 6 months, can apply for employment authorization, then never appear for their asylum hearings or drop those claims as Barrios did. Since then, Barrios has gotten married to a U.S. citizen. Generally, he would be able to adjust status in the United States based on that, if he had entered the U.S. by inspection and admission, and just overstayed his period of admission. Note that those who enter without inspection may not adjust their status in the United States, so Barrios clearly entered illegally, was either arrested and claimed asylum, or claimed asylum while in the United States illegally, was denied, and then was placed in removal proceedings.
Now, Barrios is claiming that he was trying to “regularize” his situation. What we learn is that since he has not been able to adjust status based on his marriage, he had entered the United States without inspection and cannot adjust status here. So, there is nothing he can do to “regularize” his situation except by a successful asylum application, which we know he cannot do, as he made a claim for asylum in the immigration courts when he was placed in removal proceedings. If he had a strong case for asylum, he would not have agreed to an administrative closure of his case in immigration court. So, that is more lies from him, his Treason Bar attorney, and the reporter. Note that the reporter from the Lying Press made no effort to question either Barrios or his attorneys, there are two, one male in the story, and one female who was representing him in his case before the immigration courts in 2016. Why, because the reporter has an agenda, his agenda is mass immigration and the replacement of the historic American nation with Third World illegals.
Now, for the inside scoop. Barrios was arrested by the Border Patrol. He was not assaulted. He was given opportunity to call his wife, friends, and his first attorney who represented him in 2016. No attorney has filed anything for him since 2016, so he is not trying to “regularize” himself. He was served with a Notice To Appear (NTA), Form I-862, by the Border Patrol and placed in ICE custody. He also claimed fear of being returned to Guatemala, so he perhaps was returned to Mexico by ICE ERO based on the new asylum protocols which mean Wait In Mexico.
Apparently it was ICE ERO that removed him from the United States to Mexico, quite likely under the special China Flu provisions of law that allow illegal aliens arrested in the border area to be removed without review. So, Barrios and his attorney are lying. Barrios was removed by ICE ERO to Mexico, as it is policy now during the China Pandemic for illegal aliens encountered in the border area, and specifically when encountered at interior checkpoints within 25 miles of the border, to be removed immediately to Mexico regardless of citizenship.
All illegal aliens are presumed to have recently entered illegally when encountered in the border area, even if they are long-time illegal aliens, such as Barrios. Note also that the special authority to prohibit the entry of aliens is not limited by the amount of time an alien has been in the United States. This means that whether an illegal alien had just crossed the border, was here two days, or two years, or ten years, if arrested, that illegal alien can be removed expeditiously.
Note that your correspondent had concluded, based on Barrios’ lies, that he was removed by the Border Patrol, that he was subject to Expedited Removal (ER). That may not be correct, as my sources say that Barrios was placed in ICE custody. We don’t at this time know for certain if ICE used ER or the Wuhan Flu authority. However we do know that it was U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE ERO) that allowed Barrios back in the United States.
Thankfully at the time of this writing, he is in custody. However, he should be immediately deported, as we know he failed on his initial asylum claim, as he failed to pursue it and instead accepted the Obama Regime Administrative Immigration Court Amnesty, which left him in the United States as an illegal alien without employment authorization. Note, his employer should be prosecuted for illegally employing him as his employment authorization was expired, and likely many other illegal aliens, as Barrios was working for a landscaping company.
But now the question is what will happen to this long-time illegal alien. Ken The Knife Cuccinelli should make certain two things. First, that whoever authorized Barrios’ return to the United States should be fired and that the full weight of the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, ICE’s attorneys who prosecute immigration cases in the immigration courts, should fight this case to the end. Let Ken The Knife know that he should not fold under pressure from the Lying Press and the Treason Bar.
Regarding all this nonsense, you can inquire with ICE ERO Field Office Director Gregory Archambeault about what happened. Ask him what was the legal basis to bring Barrios back to the United States. The principle of immigration law is once the alien has left, there is no bringing him back except with a visa, parole, or a waiver. He can be reached here and at (619) 436-0410.
Field Office Director Gregory Archambeault


vdare--2020-04-19--An American Engineer Makes The Case The Case For Educational Nationalism

Above , the white , male , American engineers who landed a man on the moon .
John Derbyshire writes : In this weekend 's Radio Derb I ruminated ( at 15m51s here ) on David Goldman 's April 4th column at Asia Times : US-China decoupling : a reality check .
David 's column is about decoupling our manufacturing industry from China .
David is not optimistic .
We just do n't have enough engineers , he says : China graduates far more engineers than we do .
Our own universities , hungry for full-tuition foreign students and blessed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visas ( come and get 'em ! )
do n't help .
As I say in the podcast : That brought an interesting email from an engineer , which I reproduce here , slightly edited , with his permission .
As a 30+ year engineering veteran of the American manufacturing sector , I can tell you that we not only have a numbers problem with engineering talent , we also have a quality problem .
The cause is , like most of the decay we see in the West , political correctness and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ started noticing increased chatter about the lack of women and minorities in STEM fields .
Missionary delegations were sent to high schools to convey the message to black and female students that unless they went to college and obtained a science-based degree they were selling out to the man .
Engineering classrooms began to fill up with these students who either did n't have the intellectual acumen or temperament ( or both ) for engineering .
When it started to become obvious that they could n't hack it , the standards were lowered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diversity is more important than technological advancement .
This dumbing down of the curriculum is a falling tide that lowers all ships .
Even `` traditional '' young white and Asian male engineering students suffered from a less demanding course of study .
The net result is that now we 're graduating an alarming number of young `` engineers '' who do n't have a basic comprehension of engineering fundamentals .
A few years ago I was asked to help out a recently hired young engineeress on a small project she 'd been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calculate the thermal expansion of a machine component in order to determine a critical installation dimension .
As I talked through the problem with her it became clear to me that she did n't understand that metals expanded when heated ; much less was she able to calculate how much an object of a given material and original length expanded when its temperature was increased by a specified amount ( one of the most fundamental calculations you can imagine in mechanical engineering . )
It 's some consolation , I guess , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for China are n't being trained very well .
Still , if we are going to dumb down our engineering education in the name of Diversity , perhaps we should follow China 's example and ship really keen engineering students abroad to study , but to countries not blighted with crazy social ideologies : Japan ?
Hungary ?
Korea ?
The problem may be , of course , that those un-blighted countries probably do n't hand out student visas like Halloween candy .

Above, the white, male, American engineers who landed a man on the moon.
John Derbyshire writes: In this weekend's Radio Derb I ruminated (at 15m51s here ) on David Goldman's April 4th column at Asia Times: US-China decoupling: a reality check. David's column is about decoupling our manufacturing industry from China.
David is not optimistic. We just don't have enough engineers, he says: China graduates far more engineers than we do.
Our own universities, hungry for full-tuition foreign students and blessed by our criminally stupid policies on student visas (come and get 'em!) don't help. As I say in the podcast:
Not the least of the problems here, as David points out, is that instead of training up our own citizens in advanced STEM subjects—that's Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math—we have given over our educational resources to training other countries' citizens, notably China's.
That brought an interesting email from an engineer, which I reproduce here, slightly edited, with his permission.
As a 30+ year engineering veteran of the American manufacturing sector, I can tell you that we not only have a numbers problem with engineering talent, we also have a quality problem. The cause is, like most of the decay we see in the West, political correctness and cultural Marxism. Several years ago I started noticing increased chatter about the lack of women and minorities in STEM fields. Missionary delegations were sent to high schools to convey the message to black and female students that unless they went to college and obtained a science-based degree they were selling out to the man. Engineering classrooms began to fill up with these students who either didn't have the intellectual acumen or temperament (or both) for engineering. When it started to become obvious that they couldn't hack it, the standards were lowered because, as we know, vibrant diversity is more important than technological advancement. This dumbing down of the curriculum is a falling tide that lowers all ships. Even "traditional" young white and Asian male engineering students suffered from a less demanding course of study. The net result is that now we're graduating an alarming number of young "engineers" who don't have a basic comprehension of engineering fundamentals. A few years ago I was asked to help out a recently hired young engineeress on a small project she'd been assigned. The basic problem was to calculate the thermal expansion of a machine component in order to determine a critical installation dimension. As I talked through the problem with her it became clear to me that she didn't understand that metals expanded when heated; much less was she able to calculate how much an object of a given material and original length expanded when its temperature was increased by a specified amount (one of the most fundamental calculations you can imagine in mechanical engineering.)
It's some consolation, I guess, to know that the engineers we are training for China aren't being trained very well. Still, if we are going to dumb down our engineering education in the name of Diversity, perhaps we should follow China's example and ship really keen engineering students abroad to study, but to countries not blighted with crazy social ideologies: Japan? Hungary? Korea?
The problem may be, of course, that those un-blighted countries probably don't hand out student visas like Halloween candy.


vdare--2020-04-19--California Giving Money to Illegal Aliens, Mexico's MILENIO Wants to Make Sure They Collect

The State of California , under the leadership of Governor Gavin Newsom , is giving 125 million dollars in coronavirus relief to illegal aliens .
The plan is for 75 million to come from the state budget and 50 million from private donations , with all the money to be distributed by `` regional nonprofits '' .
The Associated Press had an article about it on April 15th , entitled California to give cash payments to immigrants hurt by virus by Adam Beam , April 15 , 2020 .
Do they know about this in Mexico ?
You better believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very same day as the AP article , Mexico 's Milenio published an abridgement/adaptation of the AP article .
[ California dará apoyos a migrantes durante pandemia de coronavirus Milenio , April 15 , 2020 ] Two days later , Milenio directed its article to Mexicans with relatives living illegally in California .
The article was entitled ¿Tienes un familiar indocumentado en California ?
Ofrecen apoyos de USD $ 500 which translates to English as `` Do you have an undocumented relative in California ?
They are offering payments of 500 U.S .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Milenio , April 17 , 2020 .
Readers can remind their relatives in Alta California to make sure and get their coronavirus checks .
They would n't want them to miss out on that .

The State of California, under the leadership of Governor Gavin Newsom, is giving 125 million dollars in coronavirus relief to illegal aliens. The plan is for 75 million to come from the state budget and 50 million from private donations, with all the money to be distributed by "regional nonprofits".
The Associated Press had an article about it on April 15th, entitled California to give cash payments to immigrants hurt by virus
by Adam Beam, April 15, 2020.
Do they know about this in Mexico? You better believe it.
For example, on the very same day as the AP article, Mexico's Milenio published an abridgement/adaptation of the AP article. [California dará apoyos a migrantes durante pandemia de coronavirus Milenio, April 15, 2020]
Two days later, Milenio directed its article to Mexicans with relatives living illegally in California. The article was entitled ¿Tienes un familiar indocumentado en California? Ofrecen apoyos de USD$500 which translates to English as "Do you have an undocumented relative in California? They are offering payments of 500 U.S. Dollars", by Mario A. Arteaga, Milenio, April 17, 2020.
Readers can remind their relatives in Alta California to make sure and get their coronavirus checks. They wouldn't want them to miss out on that.


vdare--2020-04-19--SAID IN SPANISH: U.S. Border Agents Deport 10K Illegals in 19 Days; Mexico Deporting Central America

SAID IN SPANISH: U.S. Border Agents Deport 10K Illegals in 19 Days; Mexico Deporting Central Americans; Border Closure Update (SIX ITEMS)

The virtual closure of national borders from Guatemala to the United States because of the Chinese Virus might end the migration of Central America ’ s poverty-stricken hordes to the United States , but only if the controls stay in place long enough to become settled policy .
Mass apprehensions at the border have dropped by more than half .
Helping , of course , is the knowledge , even among illegal aliens , that one might contract the deadly microbe on the trip north , but the border controls are what counts .
The virus will pass .
Stopping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ depends on President Trump ’ s surviving the social and economic upheaval the Asian pathogen has caused , which means Trump—The Sequel must begin on January 20 .
With that introduction , some encouraging news : From March 21 to April 9 , border agents deported 10,000 illegal aliens , who are now , of course , almost uniformly called “ migrants ” or “ refugees ” [ Trump administration has expelled 10,000 migrants at the border during coronavirus outbreak , leaving less than 100 in CBP custody , by Nick Miroff , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 ] .
“ Those who are undocumented or don ’ t have documents or authorization are turned away , ” explained the acting director of Customs and Border Protection , Mark Morgan .
“ Migrants ” are getting the message : illegal crossings are down 56 percent .
Unsurprisingly , Univision offered the usual sob story about the expulsion policy .
A poor Mexican fellow it called “ Joel Alexander ” jumped the border on April 8 “ looking for work ” [ “ Me montaron en un carro y me tiraron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ en tiempos de covid-19 ( “ ‘ They Put me in a Car and Threw me over to Mexico ’ : Express Deportations in the Times of Covid-19 ” ) , by Jorge Cancino , Univision , April , 12 , 2020 ] .
Poor Joel “ spent two days hidden among scrub thickets protecting himself from the rain ” until a group of border agents detained and handcuffed him.
” Normally , the arrest would result in a drawn-out process that ended in Joel ’ s release into the country and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Not this time .
“ They just put me in a car and threw me over to Mexico , ” Joel lamented .
“ It all lasted less than two hours.
” If that ’ s an “ express deportation , ” I ’ m all for it , as are , in all probability , most Americans !
Not , though , Irineo Mujica , director of the border-busting Pueblo sin Fronteras—People without Borders—who is very perturbed .
“ It is terrible , ” he said .
“ Every day , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people back … this is a chaos , a disaster.
” Yeah , right .
Earth to Irineo : The border was already a disaster , partly thanks to people like you !
Central Americans Being Sent Back To Central America Univision didn ’ t divulge Joel ’ s nationality , and reported that he would “ return to his family in Mexico , ” which means that even if he isn ’ t Mexican , Mexico is accepting the migrants that U.S. border agents are deporting .
And so is Guatemala , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States only to reinstate them on April 12 [ Guatemala to resume deportation flights from US next week , The Associated Press , April 8 , 2020 ] .
The reason ?
President Trump threatened visa sanctions in an executive memorandum published on April 10 , once again proving that dealing with Central Americans requires a stern hand .
Guatemala is none too happy about that given that 50-75 percent of a recent planeload of deportees tested positive for COVID-19 [ Guatemala : US deportations driving up COVID-19 cases , by Sonia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ April 14 , 2020 ] .
Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei said the United States was the Wuhan of the region .
If so , then Central American governments should keep their people at home .
Then again , how does Giammattei know the migrants didn ’ t have the virus before they jumped the U.S. border ?
Speaking of Giammattei , he ’ s joined the tiff between El Salvador and Mexico and complained about the way the latter has handled the virus , particularly its “ open airports.
” He said : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States to Mexico are paying traffickers to return them home !
And he asked “ Guatemalans who live in border communities with Mexico to impede the passage of persons who illegally enter and ‘ oblige them to pass through the legal passages , there we can get them and quarantine them.
’ ” Quarantining deportees would be easier , of course , if they don ’ t hijack the buses that carry them across the border .
The Mexican immigration ministry was transporting a load to Quetzaltenango—about 100 miles from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Mexico , a major site of chaos and conflict during the illegal-alien tsunami—when the miscreants commandeered the vehicle .
Guatemalan authorities bagged 57 , but not before 190 escaped [ Migrantes deportados de México escapan de autobuses en Retalhuleu ( “ Migrants Deported from Mexico Escape from Buses in Retalhuleu ” ) , by Rolando Miranda and Raul Juarez , Prensa Libre , April 4 ] .
I recently reported that 13,000 non-Mexican migrants were stuck in Tamaulipas , which borders Texas from about Laredo to Brownsville , and that the governor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread the Chinese Virus .
They do and are .
They compose 5 percent of the state ’ s Coronavirus carriers [ Registra Tamaulipas migrantes con Covid-19 : Cabeza de Vaca ( “ Migrants in Tamaulipas with Covid-19 : Governor Garcia Cabeza de Vaca ” ) , by Edith Alvarez , Milenio , April 18 , 2020 ] .
That ’ s yet another incentive for Mexico to guard its southern border .
Unhappy as “ Joel Alexander ” and other “ migrants ” might be about their trip back home where they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only country in the Western Hemisphere with tightened border controls .
[ Coronavirus : Travel restrictions , border shutdowns by country , Al Jazeera , April 19 ] .
Though U.S.-Mexico line is open to “ essential ” traffic , borders in the Northern Triangle are pretty much shut down .
• El Salvador : All non-residents barred , all commercial passenger flights banned .
Possible 30-day quarantine for those allowed in .
The rest of the region , except Nicaragua , has done likewise .
• Belize : Most ports of entry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Europe , Iran , China ( including Hong Kong ) , South Korea or Japan in the past month can not enter .
That ’ s great news for us because 70 percent of the illegals who washed across our border with Mexico recently are Central Americans .
American citizen Allan Wall ( email him ) moved back to the U.S.A. in 2008 after many years residing in Mexico .
Allan 's wife is Mexican , and their two sons are bilingual .
In 2005 , Allan served a tour of duty in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His VDARE.COM articles are archived here ; his Mexidata.info articles are archived here ; his News With Views columns are archived here ; and his website is here .

The virtual closure of national borders from Central America to the United States because of the Chinese Virus might end the migration of Central America’s poverty-stricken hordes to the United States, but only if the controls stay in place long enough to become settled policy. Mass apprehensions at the border have dropped by more than half. Helping, of course, is the knowledge among illegal aliens, that one might contract the deadly microbe on the trip north, but the border controls are what counts. The virus will pass. Stopping a return to the status quo ante depends on President Trump’s surviving the social and economic upheaval the Asian pathogen has caused, which means Trump—The Sequel must begin on January 20.
With that introduction, some encouraging news:
10,000 Expelled
From March 21 to April 9, border agents deported 10,000 illegal aliens, who are now, of course, almost uniformly called “migrants” or “refugees” [Trump administration has expelled 10,000 migrants at the border during coronavirus outbreak, leaving less than 100 in CBP custody, by Nick Miroff, The Washington Post, April 9, 2020].
“Those who are undocumented or don’t have documents or authorization are turned away,” explained the acting director of Customs and Border Protection, Mark Morgan.
“Migrants” are getting the message: illegal crossings are down 56 percent.
Unsurprisingly, Univision offered the usual sob story about the expulsion policy, about a Mexican named Joel Alexander, who jumped the border on April 8 “looking for work” [“Me montaron en un carro y me tiraron para México”: las deportaciones exprés en tiempos de covid-19 (“‘They Put me in a Car and Threw me over to Mexico’: Express Deportations in the Times of Covid-19”), by Jorge Cancino, Univision, April, 12, 2020].
"Me montaron en un carro y me tiraron para México": las deportaciones exprés en tiempos de covid-19. https://t.co/hadE2u3H7E pic.twitter.com/XyPHITm4kZ — Univision (@Univision) April 13, 2020
Poor Joel “spent two days hidden among scrub thickets protecting himself from the rain” until a group of border agents detained and handcuffed him.”
Normally, the arrest would result in a drawn-out process that ended in Joel’s release into the country and his not showing up for an immigration hearing. Not this time.
“They just put me in a car and threw me over to Mexico,” Joel lamented. “It all lasted less than two hours.”
If that’s an “express deportation,” I’m all for it, as are, in all probability, most Americans!
Not, though, Irineo Mujica, director of the border-busting Pueblo sin Fronteras—People without Borders—who is very perturbed.
“It is terrible,” he said. “Every day, every little bit, they are sending people back … this is a chaos, a disaster.”
Yeah, right. Earth to Irineo: The border was already a disaster, partly thanks to people like you!
[Permalink]
Central Americans Being Sent Back To Central America
In Guatemala, 50-75 percent of a March planeload of deportees reportedly tested positive for COVID-19 [Guatemala: US deportations driving up COVID-19 cases, by Sonia Perez D., The Associated Press, April 14, 2020].
The Guatemalan government had suspended deportation flights from the United States only to reinstate them on April 12 [Guatemala to resume deportation flights from US next week, The Associated Press, April 8, 2020]. Then, on April 16, after more coronavirus patients arrived on a plane on the 13th, the Guatemalan government suspended deportation flights again, temporarily, it said.
It's hard to keep up with all this.
But what can help deportations continue to Central American countries? Well, President Trump threatened visa sanctions in an executive memorandum published on April 10, once again proving that dealing with Central Americans requires a stern hand.
[I]f any government of a foreign country denies or unreasonably delays the acceptance of aliens who are citizens, subjects, nationals, or residents of that country after being asked to accept those aliens, and if such denial or delay is impeding operations of the Department of Homeland Security necessary to respond to the ongoing pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 … the Secretary of State shall as expeditiously as possible, but no later than 7 days after receipt, adopt and initiate a plan to impose the visa sanctions provided for in section 243(d) of the INA. Memorandum on Visa Sanctions, WhiteHouse.gov, April 10, 2020
Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei has said the United States is practically the Wuhan of the region.
If so, then Central American governments should keep their people at home. Then again, how does Giammattei know the migrants didn’t have the virus before they jumped the U.S. border?
[Permalink]
Guatemalan President Criticizes Mexico
Speaking of Giammattei, he’s followed the example of the the tiff between El Salvador and Mexico in complaining about the way the latter has handled the virus, particularly its “open airports.” He said:
“People continue flying from the U.S. to Mexico, from Europe to Mexico, from China to Mexico, from Korea to Mexico, from all those infected places, they are going to Mexico.” [ Guatemala critica la poca reacción de México ante la pandemia de coronavirus (“Guatemala criticizes the insufficient reaction of Mexico to the coronavirus pandemic”), Prensa Libre, April 9]
He also complained that Guatemalans deported from the United States to Mexico are paying traffickers to return them home!
And he asked “Guatemalans who live in border communities with Mexico to impede the passage of persons who illegally enter and ‘oblige them to pass through the legal passages, there we can get them and quarantine them.’”
[Permalink]
Deportees Hijack Bus
Quarantining deportees would be easier, of course, if they don’t hijack the buses that carry them across the border.
The Guatemalan press reported the bizarre story of a deportees hijacking a bus convoy carrying Guatemalans (with some Salvadorans and Hondurans) being deported from Mexico.
They were being transported in buses by the INM (Mexican immigration bureaucracy) across the Mexico-Guatemala border into Guatemala, to take them to the city of Quetzaltenango.
So they were on Guatemalan soil but on Mexican government buses, when some of the deportees took control of the buses, with 190 deportees escaping, and 57 being detained by Guatemalan authorities. [Migrantes deportados de México escapan de autobuses en Retalhuleu (“Migrants Deported from Mexico Escape from Buses in Retalhuleu”) by Rolando Miranda y Raul Juarez, Prensa Libre, April 4]
[Permalink]
Coronavirus Spreading Among Stranded Migrants In Mexico
I recently reported that 13,000 non-Mexican migrants were stuck in Tamaulipas, which borders Texas, and that the governor was concerned that migrants might carry and spread the Chinese Virus.
They do and are. They compose 5 percent of the state’s Coronavirus carriers [Registra Tamaulipas migrantes con Covid-19: Cabeza de Vaca (“Migrants in Tamaulipas with Covid-19: Governor Garcia Cabeza de Vaca”), by Edith Alvarez, Milenio, April 18, 2020].
That’s yet another incentive for Mexico to guard its southern border.
[Permalink]
Border Closure Update
The U.S. is hardly the only country in the Western Hemisphere with tightened border controls. [Coronavirus: Travel restrictions, border shutdowns by country, Al Jazeera, April 19].
Though the U.S.-Mexico line is open to “essential” traffic, borders in the Northern Triangle are pretty much shut down.
Guatemala : All non-residents barred, all commercial passenger flights suspended, cruise ships banned.
: All non-residents barred, all commercial passenger flights suspended, cruise ships banned. El Salvador: All non-residents barred, all commercial passenger flights banned. Possible 30-day quarantine for those allowed in.
All non-residents barred, all commercial passenger flights banned. Possible 30-day quarantine for those allowed in. Honduras: Borders Closed.
The rest of the region, except Nicaragua, has done likewise.
Belize: Most ports of entry closed. Non-Belizeans who have traveled to Europe, Iran, China (including Hong Kong), South Korea or Japan in the past month cannot enter.
Most ports of entry closed. Non-Belizeans who have traveled to Europe, Iran, China (including Hong Kong), South Korea or Japan in the past month cannot enter. Nicaragua: Hasn’t taken any border measures.
Hasn’t taken any border measures. Costa Rica: Closed to foreigners.
Closed to foreigners. Panama: No non-residents allowed, no flights.
The coronavirus crisis, in other words, has provided us with an opportunity to really get control of our border. Let's not throw away this opportunity.
[Permalink]
American citizen Allan Wall (email him) moved back to the U.S.A. in 2008 after many years residing in Mexico. Allan's wife is Mexican, and their two sons are bilingual. In 2005, Allan served a tour of duty in Iraq with the Texas Army National Guard. His VDARE.COM articles are archived here; his Mexidata.info articles are archived here; his News With Views columns are archived here; and his website is here.


vdare--2020-04-20--Trump Suggests Protests, MSM Cries "Insurrection"; But When Obama Supported Actual BLM Riots And Mur

Trump Suggests Protests, MSM Cries "Insurrection"; But When Obama Supported Actual BLM Riots And Murders MSM Insisted They Were "Protests"

A former Justice Department official accused President Donald Trump of flouting federal laws by inciting insurrection with a series of tweets calling for states to be liberated from stringent `` stay-at-home '' orders amid the coronavirus outbreak .
In a series of tweets on Friday , Trump appeared to call on his supporters to `` liberate '' themselves from strict state policies aimed at keeping residents safe amid the pandemic .
Then , the president called on supporters to `` LIBERATE VIRGINIA and save your great 2nd Amendment , '' warning his followers : `` It is under siege .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , claiming that some state policies are simply `` too tough , '' Mary McCord , a former acting assistant attorney general for national security at the U.S. Department of Justice warned that the messages could violate federal law .
In an interview with Newsweek on Sunday , McCord , who penned an op-ed in The Washington Post accusing trump [ Sic ] of inciting insurrection against duly elected governors , said that while it would likely be difficult to actually convict Trump of such a crime , the president 's tweets were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to be able to prove intent for many crimes , '' McCord , who currently serves as the Legal Director at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University , said .
`` The point of the piece was not necessarily to say he should be prosecuted ; it was to show how our code treats ... incitement as criminal because it 's very dangerous .
I 'd like to ask whether Mary McCord , who was working in government during the Obama years , and involved in the failed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what happened when Barack Hussein Obama took up the cause of Black Lives Matter ?
The answer is nationwide riots and murders , which the President supported and approved of .
Oh , he sort of spoke out against the rioting , as in this quote , but you can see where his heart was : Those of you who are watching tonight understand that there ’ s never an excuse for violence , particularly when there are a lot of people in goodwill out there who are willing to work on these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those who are only interested in focusing on the violence and just want the problem to go away need to recognize that we do have work to do here , and we shouldn ’ t try to paper it over .
Whenever we do that , the anger may momentarily subside , but over time , it builds up and America is n't everything that it could be . ]
And I am confident that if we focus our attention on the problem and we look at what has happened in communities around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make progress not just in Ferguson , but in a lot of other cities and communities around the country .
[ Remarks by the President After Announcement of the Decision by the Grand Jury in Ferguson , Missouri , But when when rioters burned and looted in Ferguson , President Obama sent Federal authorities to attack the Ferguson police department , and when they burned and looted in Baltimore , he sent a black White House aide to attend the funeral of the drug dealer whose accidental death ( after he was arrested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) was the cause of the riots .
Below , one of the famous splitscreens from Obama 's statement above , while blacks were rioting .
The MSM insisted that these were n't riots .
In the Atlantic , in 2016 , Molly Ball wrote that Well , any normal person would call them that , and would see that President at that time , Barack Obama , supported and encouraged them .
Can we prosecute him , Ms. McCord ?

The latest craziness:
Trump's "liberate" tweet incites insurrection, flouting law against overthrow of government: former DOJ official https://t.co/uQ1CMm5vu8 — Newsweek (@Newsweek) April 19, 2020
Here's a sample:
A former Justice Department official accused President Donald Trump of flouting federal laws by inciting insurrection with a series of tweets calling for states to be liberated from stringent "stay-at-home" orders amid the coronavirus outbreak. In a series of tweets on Friday, Trump appeared to call on his supporters to "liberate" themselves from strict state policies aimed at keeping residents safe amid the pandemic. "LIBERATE MINNESOTA!" Trump wrote. "LIBERATE MICHIGAN!" Then, the president called on supporters to "LIBERATE VIRGINIA and save your great 2nd Amendment," warning his followers: "It is under siege." While Trump has defended the tweets, claiming that some state policies are simply "too tough," Mary McCord, a former acting assistant attorney general for national security at the U.S. Department of Justice warned that the messages could violate federal law. In an interview with Newsweek on Sunday, McCord, who penned an op-ed in The Washington Post accusing trump [sic]of inciting insurrection against duly elected governors, said that while it would likely be difficult to actually convict Trump of such a crime, the president's tweets were extremely "dangerous." "You have to be able to prove intent for many crimes," McCord, who currently serves as the Legal Director at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University, said. "The point of the piece was not necessarily to say he should be prosecuted; it was to show how our code treats... incitement as criminal because it's very dangerous.
I'd like to ask whether Mary McCord, who was working in government during the Obama years, and involved in the failed Russian meddling investigation, is familiar with what happened when Barack Hussein Obama took up the cause of Black Lives Matter?
The answer is nationwide riots and murders, which the President supported and approved of.
Oh, he sort of spoke out against the rioting, as in this quote, but you can see where his heart was:
Those of you who are watching tonight understand that there’s never an excuse for violence, particularly when there are a lot of people in goodwill out there who are willing to work on these issues. On the other hand, those who are only interested in focusing on the violence and just want the problem to go away need to recognize that we do have work to do here, and we shouldn’t try to paper it over. Whenever we do that, the anger may momentarily subside, but over time, it builds up and America isn't everything that it could be. November 24, 2014 ] And I am confident that if we focus our attention on the problem and we look at what has happened in communities around the country effectively, then we can make progress not just in Ferguson, but in a lot of other cities and communities around the country. [ Remarks by the President After Announcement of the Decision by the Grand Jury in Ferguson, Missouri,
But when when rioters burned and looted in Ferguson, President Obama sent Federal authorities to attack the Ferguson police department, and when they burned and looted in Baltimore, he sent a black White House aide to attend the funeral of the drug dealer whose accidental death (after he was arrested for being armed with an illegal knife) was the cause of the riots.
Below, one of the famous split screens from Obama's statement above, while blacks were rioting.
The MSM insisted that these weren't riots. In the Atlantic, in 2016, Molly Ball wrote that
Some have argued that Trump's nomination may have come as a white backlash to events like the Ferguson protests, which Trump has called “race riots.”
Well, any normal person would call them that, and would see that the President at that time, Barack Obama, supported and encouraged them. Can we prosecute him, Ms. McCord?


vdare--2020-04-20--Ashley Rae Goldenberg: Tech Totalitarians Are Endangering Lives Under Coronavirus Conditions

Ashley Rae Goldenberg has an article in American Greatness about how what we call Tech Totalitarianism , deplatorming by Facebook , Twitter , Amazon.com , and Uber can actually threaten people 's lives under Coronavirus conditions : Ashley Rae Goldenberg : Perhaps it ’ s time for American companies to uphold the spirit of the First Amendment , especially when lives are at stake .
https : //t.co/SAh64eOzgc https : //t.co/MOalKZOE1c Modern reliance on technology has never been more evident than now .
During the COVID-19 pandemic , modern technological advances have gone from conveniences to life-saving resources .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from tech platforms , the potential emergency resources these platforms provide are out of reach .
Banned from Twitter ?
Reduced access to breaking news .
Banned from Uber Eats ?
Good luck getting food while maintaining social distancing recommendations .
Banned from PayPal , Venmo , or GoFundMe ?
Sending , receiving , and raising money for emergencies becomes a lot harder .
Banned from Facebook ?
Find another way to connect with loved ones during this difficult time .
This is the reality for people whose political speech runs afoul of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by powerful groups for having the “ wrong ” political beliefs .
Groups like the SPLC , Color of Change , SumofUs , and Sleeping Giants gleefully try to get their political opponents banned from social media and cut off from payment processors .
Tech companies are pressured by advocacy organizations and agenda-driven journalists .
When trying to get a “ wrongthinker ” kicked off social media or cut off from funding sources , organizations , journalists , and companies claim they ’ re helping people take a moral stand against bigotry .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the company told Newsweek : “ Our decision and actions are values-based , not political.
” However , the people pushing these bans , and enacting them , have trouble explaining exactly how it is moral to limit some people ’ s access to food because their opinions fall outside the mainstream .
How is it moral to cut people off from their support systems—from their friends , families , and neighbors—because they say things some people find offensive ?
How is it moral to take away peoples ’ ability to pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the fringe of current accepted norms ?

Ashley Rae Goldenberg has an article in American Greatness about how what we call Tech Totalitarianism, deplatorming by Facebook, Twitter, Amazon.com, and Uber can actually threaten people's lives under Coronavirus conditions:
Ashley Rae Goldenberg: Perhaps it’s time for American companies to uphold the spirit of the First Amendment, especially when lives are at stake. https://t.co/SAh64eOzgc https://t.co/MOalKZOE1c
She writes:
Modern reliance on technology has never been more evident than now. During the COVID-19 pandemic, modern technological advances have gone from conveniences to life-saving resources.
But not for everyone.
For people banned from tech platforms, the potential emergency resources these platforms provide are out of reach. Banned from Twitter? Reduced access to breaking news. Banned from Uber Eats? Good luck getting food while maintaining social distancing recommendations. Banned from PayPal, Venmo, or GoFundMe? Sending, receiving, and raising money for emergencies becomes a lot harder. Banned from Facebook? Find another way to connect with loved ones during this difficult time. This is the reality for people whose political speech runs afoul of tech censors or who have been targeted by powerful groups for having the “wrong” political beliefs.
Groups like the SPLC, Color of Change, SumofUs, and Sleeping Giants gleefully try to get their political opponents banned from social media and cut off from payment processors. Tech companies are pressured by advocacy organizations and agenda-driven journalists.
When trying to get a “wrongthinker” kicked off social media or cut off from funding sources, organizations, journalists, and companies claim they’re helping people take a moral stand against bigotry. When Laura Loomer was banned from PayPal, the company told Newsweek: “Our decision and actions are values-based, not political.”
However, the people pushing these bans, and enacting them, have trouble explaining exactly how it is moral to limit some people’s access to food because their opinions fall outside the mainstream. How is it moral to cut people off from their support systems—from their friends, families, and neighbors—because they say things some people find offensive? How is it moral to take away peoples’ ability to pay their bills because their political views are on the fringe of current accepted norms?